64% in US think creationism should be taught in school.

[Maniacal]

If you want to learn about creationism, then go to a church or someone who is religiuos, and it's taught in church or if your parents aren't religiuos enough to teach it to their childrun, they will learn about ti anyways. Like say, from the simpsons (well, that might lead to them asking questions). I don't want to hear a bunch of bible stuff in my science class, maybe if a student believed in creationism they could mention it and maybe the teacher could do a comparison, but the student or tacher or anyone else shouldn't force their religiuos views on anyone else or put them in a test, unless the class is about religion or a private school that's religiuos.

 

[Kayak]

I would have put in a crying face but this is more how I feel

The day that is instituted in a signifigant number of school districts is the day I pack up my family and leave the US. Anybody with good sugestions as to where? Im serious.

 

[Japanrocks12]

Now 64% of Americans are automatically rendered ignorant.

 

[King Alexander]

If you people want to learn creationism so much, then why just not do it in religion classes(if you haven't any already)? Just add an hour/week in your school schedule for a religion class, but face it once and for all: scientific classes are incompatible with creationism.

 

[Mark1031]

I think it's less that we're running a good marketing campaign and more that we're right. No, seriously, it's not all that hard when the scientists refuse to come to debate the issue. You guys are portraying yourselves as closeminded, we're just sitting back and laughing. If you want some advice, then I would suggest never turning down a debate like what happened in Kansas again, it hurts you badly publicly.

But then, you'll lose those debates, so you can't really win. And I don't want you to win anyway, so I'm not quite sure why I'm giving you advice....I'm too nice.

And maybe scientist should come to debates on the existence of UFOs. Maybe we should debate the number of Angels that can dance on the head of a pin. Sorry but pretending that there is a scientific debate when there is not is not good PR policy as it lends credence to the other side. Perhaps we should debate George Bush's mental stability, the most scientifically debatable issue mentioned so far. Would it be good PR for the White House to send Karl Rove to that debate or have George himself show up to undergo psychological testing. The U.S. is a religious country and while postsecondary education is excellent, primary and secondary education is poor, particularly in science, most people have probably never been exposed to the scientific arguments for evolution in a manner that they could understand. I doubt that the recent push for intelligent design has significantly altered the percentage of people that believe in evolution or creationism. What it may have done is increase number of people who say well OK let them debate it in class. Sounds reasonable and open minded but it is really a degradation to an already poor science curriculum.

 

[farting bob]

64 of americans dont realise that sunday school and church are for creationism. Science classes should study science, and leave all the religion bull**** to religous classes.

 

[Kayak]

If you people want to learn creationism so much, then why just not do it in religion classes(if you haven't any already)? Just add an hour/week in your school schedule for a religion class, but face it once and for all: scientific classes are incompatible with creationism.

Indeed. It mytifies me as to what could be "taught" about it anyway. "Today, class, we will be studying intelligent design". Teacher open book. "Life was created by somthing ouside the universe". Closes book "I'll see you all tomorrow when we study evolution". Teacher walks out.
I mean really

 

[farting bob]

Teacher open book. "Life was created by somthing ouside the universe". Closes book

Dont you mean bible? Read the first page or 2, then thats about it.
Its hard to think that science terachers will agree with this though. I dont think any science teacher will willingly want to teach this is a viable theory. And the good thing is without the teacher accepting it, they will just skim it, then move onto real work, and hopefully wont get noticed too much.

 

[Kayak]

Dont you mean bible? Read the first page or 2, then thats about it.
Its hard to think that science terachers will agree with this though. I dont think any science teacher will willingly want to teach this is a viable theory. And the good thing is without the teacher accepting it, they will just skim it, then move onto real work, and hopefully wont get noticed too much.

There will be a couple of self appointed parents who make sure that isn't so.

 

[GenMarshall]

I beleve that Creationism should not be taught in science classes.

 

[newfangle]

The only words that come to me as I read this thread are douche bag.

 

[vbraun]

New theory time!! Intellectual Polling! WHooHoo!

 

[Colonel]

It seems that the extremely inteligent people are dwindling in number. 64% Jez how come people cant just you know leave science as it is, what is this pay back for us getting rid of the inqusition and burning smart people at the stake.

 

[Ramius75]

although i will say go ahead but im worrying about the army of religion fanatics im going to have conversation with in the future which is no good.

 

[Elrohir]

And significantly slowed European scientific progress for ~700 years. Yes, that *was* an achievement.

Oh yes, that's why they later took over the whole world with their advanced technology. Oh, wait, that was the Britians. Nevermind.

I'd rather live in the Stone Age and be able to be a Christian than have the technology of a society 2000 years in the future and be a Muslim.

And maybe scientist should come to debates on the existence of UFOs. Maybe we should debate the number of Angels that can dance on the head of a pin. Sorry but pretending that there is a scientific debate when there is not is not good PR policy as it lends credence to the other side. Perhaps we should debate George Bush's mental stability, the most scientifically debatable issue mentioned so far. Would it be good PR for the White House to send Karl Rove to that debate or have George himself show up to undergo psychological testing. The U.S. is a religious country and while postsecondary education is excellent, primary and secondary education is poor, particularly in science, most people have probably never been exposed to the scientific arguments for evolution in a manner that they could understand. I doubt that the recent push for intelligent design has significantly altered the percentage of people that believe in evolution or creationism. What it may have done is increase number of people who say well OK let them debate it in class. Sounds reasonable and open minded but it is really a degradation to an already poor science curriculum.

They should comment on why UFO's do or do not exist according to their opinions and findings. Why not?

How many angels can dance on the head of a pen is kinda a stupid topic though. First because it doesn't really matter, and second because there is no way of testing how many you think it is, as angels prefere singing to dancing. And then they dance in the sky, not on penheads.

Hey, I think you're right though, scientists shouldn't debate Intelligent Design or Creationism - that way, Creationism will win the hearts of the people, and we'll change all the laws. Have fun being a ridiculed minority because you were too scared to debate.

It seems that the extremely inteligent people are dwindling in number. 64% Jez how come people cant just you know leave science as it is, what is this pay back for us getting rid of the inqusition and burning smart people at the stake.

I wish people would stop whining about the Inquisition. Roughly 3000 people died in several decades during the inquisition; while that's 3000 too many that's about five years worth of lightning strike deaths. Vastly more people were killed at a single day at Auschwitz or are killed each week in Sudan than were killed in the Inquisition.

 

[Ramius75]

I wish people would stop whining about the Inquisition. Roughly 3000 people died in several decades during the inquisition; while that's 3000 too many that's about five years worth of lightning strike deaths. Vastly more people were killed at a single day at Auschwitz or are killed each week in Sudan than were killed in the Inquisition.

Still i wont want to have my rectum and intenstine pulled out of me just becoz im more intelligent or someone eyeing my wife and property.

how many american indian suffered during the so called "conversion" then ?


Btw, Polygamy is a good idea thou.

 

[Warman17]

D. Should not be taught in science classes

 

[newfangle]

Oh yes, that's why they later took over the whole world with their advanced technology. Oh, wait, that was the Britians. Nevermind.

Thank the Lord the Enlightenment came so man could once again be emancipated from the cruel shackles of faith.

I'd rather live in the Stone Age and be able to be a Christian than have the technology of a society 2000 years in the future and be a Muslim.

Like it matters which violent-natured, irrational, altruism-preaching, man-enslaving, groveling, whining monotheistic faith one worships. You say po-ta-to, I say re-tard-ed.

They should comment on why UFO's do or do not exist according to their opinions and findings. Why not?

That seems like a well-suited response from someone completely incapable of understanding the scientific method.

How many angels can dance on the head of a pen is kinda a stupid topic though. First because it doesn't really matter, and second because there is no way of testing how many you think it is...

I refer you to the Evolutionary Position of Pixies among the Tetrapods by Meyer and Zardoya.

Hey, I think you're right though, scientists shouldn't debate Intelligent Design or Creationism - that way, Creationism will win the hearts of the people, and we'll change all the laws. Have fun being a ridiculed minority because you were too scared to debate.

Winning the hearts. lfmao. The only reason creationism potential has more supporters than actual science is because of the complete unwillingness for people to explore ideas. Its much easier to simply remember back to when you were a kid and how the mean old nun told you that the thought that humans came from apes is preposterous.

It DOES NOT matter how many people subscribe to an idea. The idea is still certainly wrong. (and no you can't spin that back towards evolution because evolution is built upon a century and a half foundation of evidence, where as ID and all other forms of retardidism is faith-based illogic).

Furthermore, if the US takes any steps in promoting ID in schools (which it certainly would not because it would essentially alienate all the people in the US that actually contribute to research and consequently induce a massive brain drain), it would fall so rapidly behind in research in all areas no one would care. Add to that an already slumping economy due to ******** tax and spend policy and ridiculous 'economic protection' and you sir have a recipe for the complete dickwadication of the US economy.


Yes yes I understand most of your post was in jest, but sometimes when people completely alienate logic and reasoning in favour of douchism, I can only react in kind.

 

[Comraddict]

My girlfirend claims that in her home town everybody thinks that ALL foreigns are Muslims.
Anyway problem here is that religious minds don't understand term "scientific method"

 

[Bluemofia]

64%... I want to shoot 64% of something now... The US did not spend decades combating creationism, only to turn around in a single year. This is (in my constitution) unconstitutional! Science in science only! Religion in religion only! No mixing of the 2. We spent a full week in school about this, and now people want to turn this around?!? Science is testable, non-science isn't. Evolution is testable (and has been done before), Creationism isn't.