Why cant we teach creationism alongside evolution

Question

Professors who support evolution seem most reluctant to debate evolution with their counterparts who support creation

Answer 1

There's an equal treatment in accordance with the weight of evidence supporting both views.  That's why 'creationism' doesn't got taught.

<<Professors who support evolution seem most reluctant to debate evolution with their counterparts who support creation>>

I'm not surprised.  Streams of misrepresentations, doctored quotations, and empty argumentation based on a very insecure grasp of any facts are boring things to listen to.

Answer 2

which creationism

lots and lots and lots of religions have their own personal idea of how their god/ goddess/ gods made the world

why should we choose your version to corrupt young minds with?

(or alternatively, why should we give them all equal time in an increasingly complex teaching environment?)

Answer 3

I agree with most of the above answers that science does not deal in the supernatural...creationism is not science...etc. But there is also one other aspect most "creationists" forget.

If creationism was taught in public schools...whose creation story would you teach?

The Biblical story of God's creation in 6 days?

The creation story of the Koran...told to mohammed by the angel Gabriel?

The Bhuddist story of creation?

The 4 creations of the Hopi Indians?

The Norse story of Odin and Ymir?

Hindu? Shinto? Pastafarian?

The Constitution states that the government cannot promote one religion above others...so...if you want creationism taught you have to teach all of the creation stories of all religions...

Face it ... the minute you teach one religions creation story...other religions would sue to have their version taught as well. After all, this is a multicultural nation of many beliefs.

kinda leaves no time for teaching real science.......

Answer 4

We CAN teach Creationism - but it is not a suitable subject for a science class (Religious studies, or philosophy perhaps).

Despite what you might have been told, the vast majority of scientists (95% across all disciplines, and 99.5% of biologists) accept evolution and reject creationism. This means that creationism is NOT part of the current scientific paradigm, and should not be taught in science classes (any more than astrology or alchemy should be taught).

In fact, "Creation Science" cannot be considered a science AT ALL, as it fails on the three important criteria for a scientific hypothesis: it is not parsimonious, it is not predictive, and it is not falsifiable.

And scientists are not reluctant to debate evolution with creationists. The problem is that creationists will ONLY agree to debate their subject in front of a religious audience - never a scientific one (as they would be laughed out of the room).

Answer 5

Because the two are contradictory to each other.

Answer 6

Creationism is not science and is not supported by any scientific evidence.  It can certainly be taught, but not in a science class.  It can be taught in a religion class, a bible class, a philosophy class, just not a science class.  You don't learn Spanish in your math class, right?

Answer 7

Dont talk wet man,

Answer 8

We don't teach creationsm alongside evolution because they deal in two different subjects.  Evolution involves scientific facts and theories.  It is a science because testable hypotheses are developed, facts are gathered, theories are refined and revised, and it is all used to help explain observations using natural phenomena.  Creationism invokes a supernatural being.  If a god exists, you cannot, by definition, make predictions about that god and what it would do.  You can't measure it.  It is not part of science.

If you want to teach about creationism in schools, do it in a class that deals with issues of religion and the supernatural.

As a professor who supports and teaches evolution, the reason why we don't spend time debating with creationists is because creationists, for the most part, have no interest in understanding science, only making false claims to try to support their religious ideas.  It's a waste of my time to try to have that kind of discussion with them.  For example:  One of the common arguments in the past was that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics.  It's a load of bull.  Creationists who espouse that either a. have no understanding of what the second law of thermodynamics really says, b, have no understanding that we live in an open system (with regards to energy) and therefore have energy input from the sun, or c. intentionally try to misrepresent reality to people to gain ignorant favor for their ideas.

Answer 9

Why can't we teach about the flying ability of Santa's reindeer alongside teaching gravitation?

Answer 10

Creationism is mostly perceived as religion working its way into scientific classes and field.

It can be thought , but not in the life science classes, such as biology or evolution, until they have enough scientific evidence based on scientific methods and standards to make their case.

I hope that both sides  respect and understand each other peacefully.

Answer 11

Because creationism is religion and doesn't belong in science class because it's not science.  End of story.

Creationists are by NO MEASURE the equals, colleagues or even counterparts of any published scientist anywhere.  Scientists are reluctant to debate it, because it's not changed since the 18th century and it's so easily shot down, it's embarassing for them to be even seen picking on these whelps.

A Scientist vs creationist who didn't simply worm around like a politician, shifting the dialogue onto non-issues would be like watching a professional wrestler beat down on a quadruplegic dwarf.

Answer 12

Because schools arent allowed to teach religion.

everyone has there own beliefs and the school systems respect that.

besides, i know i wouldnt like it.

i dont believe in religion and i know i wouldnt want to sit through class listening to some bullshit story that someone came up with about how we got here.

sorry dont mean to offend anyone

Answer 13

Because creationism isn't science.  You can't test your hypothesis with experiments.  I don't have any problem if people want to debate creationism in a philosophy class.  But until you come up with a fossil record, a huge gene bank of many organisms showing homology and a working theory that makes sense for all of the evidence....keep it out of the science classroom.

Answer 14

because science needs fact and religion needs dogma and never the twain can meet!

Science requires evidence and religion is a concept dressed up as fact and therefore the two don't sit comfortably side by side.

Once we start getting into this kind of debate aren't we leaving the biology labs and heading into the room marked 'philosophy'?

Answer 15

They can teach creationism in Sunday school, alongside evolution. They can not teach creationism as science. What can they say besides God created everything? Can they explain why Noah put the Panda back to China?

Answer 16

because the fanatically religious don't go to school... God forbade that when he enslaved your worthless ilk

Answer 17

>"Professors who support evolution seem most reluctant to debate evolution with their counterparts who support creation"

Counterparts?  Like who?

Answer 18

Because there isn't a scientific debate. I personally don't know any scientists who are creationists (at least not of the literal-interpretation-of-the-bible variety).  There's no scientific theory of creationism to teach.  You can teach creationism in church and teach evolution in science class.  You can spend four hours a week on Sunday ruining your kids' minds and call that equal time.