Creationism Isn't Science but Belongs in Schools Essay

I. Acceptance of Creation is growing in spite of overwhelming evidence proving Evolution There is no easy resolution for whats true and evolution or creationism. It is a complex topic with profound scientific, religious, educational, and criticism. How can a student or parent come to grips with this issue? Evolution vs. Creationism provides a badly needed, comprehensive, and balanced introduction to the many facets of the current debates about what should be taught in a classroom or in reality itself. Evolution relies on scientific facts while creationism clings on biblical beliefs. But the legal and

Evolution has been taught in all public schools for as long as many can recall. Though the process of evolution is not the only theory, schools have been teaching it as if it is the complete truth, ignoring other aspects and only focusing and targeting on Darwin's theory of Evolution. However, there are still many other ideas that the students should be informed of as well because all are theories, all are hypothetic. Teaching of the evolution theory have yet to be proven reliable and confirmed by all scientists, thus it should not be taught in schools and should be left for students to wonder and discover by themselves.

One twin creates good and the other creates evil. In the first story, the better natured twin creates anything good. For example, animals for humans to eat and digest. His brother created all natural predators, so that the humans would need to develop skills to feed themselves. “Whatever the good natured twin would do, his brother would scheme some way of altering it.” But in this story, good and evil balance each other like yin-yang. Compared to the Christian story, they don’t. In the Judeo-Christian story, the twins are named Cain and Abel, children of Adam and Eve. Abel kept flocks and Cain worked the soil. One day, Cain offered God some of his fruits from his soil, and Abel offered God fat portions from some of his flock. In Genesis 4, it says, “The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast.” After that, Cain told his brother Abel to go out to the field. While they were in the field, Cain attacked Abel and killed him. So in this story, the twins really do nothing for Earth and instead one kills the other brother out of anger. Cain got punished from God for killing his brother, which is a

Since the beginning of the human race there has been a lingering question as to the origins of man and how all living things acquired their characteristics. The two main theories that arose over time were Creationism and Evolution, both of which provided very distinct answers to this question. Creationism based its answer on the idea of a supernatural power or being that created the entire universe, man and the numerous other organisms that live within it. While, Evolution theorizes that all living things have the potential to change and grow over time into something new and different. So in other words, one theory suggests that humans and all the organisms on Earth are the result of divine design, while the other indicates that they

Before they are even born their differences begin to emerge. One boy is born with a dark mind full of evil and destruction, while the other has a mind for creation and goodness and light. The Good Twin creates the world similar to how the God of the Bible does when it speaks in Genesis of how He created the universe in a period of seven days. The Evil Twin is said to make injurious reptiles to try to hurt the humans that his brother created, and therefore can be compared to Satan who appears as a serpent and destroys the peace of mankind. Good and evil twins are commonly found in several myths of other American Indian tribes as well.

The riddle of the origin of man has been subject to many ponderings and theories for thousands of years. In America, two theories concerning this timeless question have driven a spike through the general populace. These two beliefs, Evolution and Christianity, have driven a riff through the American populace and fueled several debates and conflicts over which is the truer theory. Incidents such as the decision of the Kansas school board to ban schools from including the Evolution Theory from their curriculum are becoming a tragically frequent and threaten to escalate if not checked soon. However, there is a growing belief in America today in the possibility of believing that evolution is an inescapable fact while still

The problem in scientific creationism, and what I see as a reason for its exclusion from the science classroom in public schools, is the fact that it looks as if, from the outside, the whole theory that it rest on is simply a contortion of the traditional version of creation described in Genesis, custom-made to fit in with Darwin’s theory of evolution. R. M. Hare would probably say that scientific creationism is simply a modification of the story of creation in Genesis, to fit into the ÒblikÓ of the religious fundamentalist. A blik, as Hare describes it, is a pre-set worldview held by all people, in which they draw from when forming certain opinions on any particular subject. In the case of religious fundamentalist, whose faith in the validity of the Book of Genesis is an essential part of their blik, it becomes necessary for them to contort their literal view of the Book of Genesis into a form that is scientifically acceptable. For this reason, creation science still does not have a place in the science classroom of public schools.

For as long as mankind has had the curiosity to gaze at the stars, we have been constantly questioning our origin and place in the universe. From simple, yet elegant solutions (like our world being on the back of a large tortoise) to the more complex pantheons of gods and heavens, humanity’s dedication to classifying and comprehending our universe has enabled us to weave rich and complex mythologies and beliefs. However, in America today there are two prominent paradigms that are shaping how we see the world—Christian creationism and scientific evolution. These two schools of thought, like many other conflicting models of the universe and its creation, have fueled passions and incited spirited rivalries among its most ardent followers and fanatics, but, again like many other opposing beliefs, at the same time it is easy to see how they can be reconciled both within and without oneself. However, many scientists and theologians believe that one of the two is blasphemous and the other is gospel (or textbook) truth. For example, in Scott D Sampson’s essay Evoliteracy, (2006) Sampson denounces Christianity and pushes for everyone to learn the theory of Evolution instead of creationism. While he is correct in wanting a more educated populace, Christianity is not an inherently wrong construct. Similarly, many of those pushing for intelligent design have similarly decried the evolutionary theory as

However, to truly grasp the essence of the controversy, one must understand the terminology of what school boards consensus as guiding definitions for science, the theory of evolution, and intelligent design. The common generalization shared by most Americans about science is that it’s a systematic and logical approach to discovering how things work in the natural world. This is correct, however, it is worth mentioning that this is based on fact – not on opinion or preference – and all research is held accountable to the scientific method; a rigorous process that begins with a hypothesis (an educated guess), followed by the formulation of an experiment to test the relationship of the variables in question, and ultimately an analysis, conclusion and critique of what the results yield. Darwin’s theory of evolution describes the biological processes of the

Despite great efforts to convince the opposing side, a battle still brews amongst creationists and evolutionists over the beginning of life and the universe, but neither opinions’ palpability can be firmly upheld through scientific manners. Since science can only prove hypotheses that are testable and based on current observations, neither creation nor evolutionary concepts can be proven with irrefutable evidence. However, regardless of the inability to prove either concept, most public school systems promote evolution as a scientific fact. Many students who lack firm beliefs about the origin of life believe what they are taught without giving any personal thought to the matter. Instead of robotically absorbing biased information,

Biology professor Kenneth Miller’s central argument is that science should not undermine one’s faith in God. “Science itself does not contradict the hypothesis of God.” He makes this argument by stating that science explains the things that God has made and in doing so, trying to prove the existence of God through natural or scientific means does not make sense. Once the supernatural is introduced, there is no way to use nature, thus science, to prove or disprove its existence. Miller argues that science gives us the window to the dynamic and creative universe that increases our appreciation of God’s work. The central point of his argument is evolution. Creationists, of the intelligent design movement, argue that nature has irreducible complex systems that could have only arisen from a creature or designer. This theory is widely supported among devout believers in the Bible and God. Miller argues that if they truly believe this, completely ignoring hard facts and theories, then they are seeking their God in the darkness. Miller, a Christian himself, believes that this “flow of logic is depressing”; to fear the acquisition of knowledge and suggest that the creator dwells in the shadows of science and understanding is taking us back to the Middle Ages, where people used God as an explanation for something they have yet to or want

In an article published in the New York times, by Laurie Goodstein, she revealed that a poll conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, revealed that 64 percent said they were open to the idea of teaching creationism in addition to evolution, while 38 percent favored replacing evolution with creationism. It is important to note by this poll that the idea of teaching our children other theories of how this world was created was supported by more than half of the polled population. It needs to be understood that when these teachings are given the opportunity to be introduced in the public school settings, teachers must maintain a very bias approach as to not sway their students into believing one side or the other but, rather let them decide for themselves through research and study what they will believe in.

Creationism is a religious metaphysical theory about the origin of the universe. It is not a scientific theory. Technically, creationism is not necessarily connected to any particular religion. It simply requires a belief in a Creator. Millions of Christians and non-Christians believe there is a Creator of the universe and that scientific theories such as the the theory of evolution do not conflict with belief in a Creator. However, fundamentalist Christians such as Ronald Reagan and Jerry Falwell, have co-opted the term 'creationism' and it is now difficult to refer to creationism without being understood as referring to fundamentalist Christians who (a) take the stories in Genesis as accurate accounts of the origin of the universe and

Creationism being taught in public schools is not right because there are many beliefs about how the earth was created. Many science teachers have different beliefs on this particular subject. Some believe it should not be taught in public schools but on one’s own time at home, church, or another place. Other science teachers think students should be taught all the believable theories about evolution and creationism. Some science teachers have gotten in trouble with the law by not obeying other laws regarding evolution and creationism. This has lead to a lot of controversy in the science world. Even though many students have different views on creationism, not all of them are very accurate in the ways they portray the teachings of

In 1859, Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species, introducing the theory of evolution. One hundred and fifty-six years later, scientists still accept this senseless philosophy. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay states, “Our school systems teach the children that they are nothing but glorified apes who are evolutionized out of some primordial soup” (Snyder). Schools worldwide have presented exactly this to the young, impressionable minds of your future doctors, engineers, scientists, and presidents. They assure us that if we give a small amount of mud enough time it can, by itself, bring about the art of da Vinci, the plays of Shakespeare, the music of Mozart, and the brilliant mind of Einstein.