Posted on 10/05/2007 6:26:08 AM PDT by SubGeniusX
The teaching of evolution is becoming increasingly difficult in UK schools because of the rise of creationism, a leading scientist is warning. Head of science at London's Institute of Education Professor Michael Reiss says some teachers, fearful of entering the debate, avoid the subject totally.
This could leave pupils with gaps in their scientific knowledge, he says.
Prof Reiss says the rise of creationism is partly down to the large increase in Muslim pupils in UK schools.
He said: "The number of Muslim students has grown considerably in the last 10 to 20 years and a higher proportion of Muslim families do not accept evolutionary theory compared with Christian families.
"That's one reason why it's more of an issue in schools."
Prof Reiss estimates that one in 10 people in the UK now believes in literal interpretations of religious creation stories - whether they are based on the Bible or the Koran.
Many more teachers he met at scientific meetings were telling him they encountered more pupils with creationist views, he said.
"The days have long gone when science teachers could ignore creationism when teaching about origins."
Instead, teachers should tackle the issue head-on, whilst trying not to alienate students, he argues in a new book.
'Not equally valid'
"By not dismissing their beliefs, we can ensure that these students learn what evolutionary theory really says - and give everyone the understanding to respect the views of others," he added.
His book; Teaching about Scientific Origins: Taking Account of Creationism, gives science teachers advice on how to deal with the "dilemma".
He supports new government guidelines which say creationism should not be discussed in science classes unless it is raised by pupils.
But Prof Reiss argues that there is an educational value in comparing creationist ideas with scientific theories like Darwin's theory of evolution because they demonstrate how science, unlike religious beliefs, can be tested.
The scientist, who is also a Church of England priest, adds that any teaching should not give the impression that creationism and the theory of evolution are equally valid scientifically.
Dr Hilary Leevers, of the Campaign for Science and Engineering, said science teachers would be teaching evolution not creationism and so should not need a book to tell them how to "delicately handle controversy between a scientific theory and a belief".
"The author suggests that science teachers cannot ignore creationism when teaching origins, but the opposite is true," she said.
Teachers could discuss how creationism differed from scientific theory if a student brought up the subject, but any further discussion should occur in religious education lessons, she said.
A Department for Children, Schools and Families spokesman said it had recently published guidelines to teachers on the issue.
"Creationism and intelligent design are not scientific theories nor testable as scientific fact - and have no place in the science curriculum. "But we advise science teachers that when questions about creationism come up in lessons, it provides an opportunity to explain or explore what makes a scientific theory."
To apply any science correctly requires real time laboratory, clinical and on-site testing and trials that can be observed and measured now. What a Darwinianist conjectures may have happened 40 billion years ago is irrelavant.
There have always been creationist Christians in places like MIT, NASA, and the Mayo Clinic. Creationism doesn’t hinder their work, not does what they discover in a laboratory offend their Christianity.
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Talk/talk.origins/2005-09/msg06431.html
http://www.stickyminds.com/sitewide.asp?Function=edetail&ObjectType=ART&ObjectId=8965
Not true. To falsify it you have to prove a negative.
It is delicious to watch the ID/AntiScience - fantasy Zealots admit just how much idealogy they have in common with their Muslim brothers in faith....
FIFY
Incorrect. To falsify ID one need merely show that there is no bias in the system in question.
Are you saying that Roman Catholics are not Christians? In spite of the myths propagated by the left, the Catholic Church has always supported the advancement of science as a means of better understanding God’s creation.
While that may be truer in this day and age, It was actually Muslim/Islamic Scientists that were responsable for what led to what are now known as the European Renaissance and Scientific Revolution in Europe and the West.
You’re like a broken record, insisting that we take your word that teaching evolutionary theory requires “published specific peer-reviewed falsification criteria” unlike all other scientific theories. You’ve given no evidence of that, just your opinion.
I suggested an simple falsification criteria in my first post, just find a creature out of place with evolutionary theory.
Here’s a succinct description of what makes a good scientific theory, and there’s no suggestion of “published specific peer-reviewed falsification criteria” Criteria for Scientific Status
Now find a criteria for a good scientific theory accepted by the community that demands “published specific peer-reviewed falsification criteria” for all scientific theory or stop wasting my time.
You’d hardly believe by reading the article that out of every 100 pupils in UK schools, less than three are muslim.
As are Muslim contributions ... if not more so, they actually predated and inspired most European/Christian contributions
This could leave pupils with gaps in their scientific knowledge, he says.
How could NOT learning Evolution create a gap in Scientific learning?
they are better off, not worse off.
You’d have to disprove God
Falsification criteria gives you a test (or tests). If the test verifies the hypothesis, then we assume that we can accept the theory as being empirically justified.
However, theories that have no such published falsification criteria are generally considered to *NOT* be empirically justified.
Creationism is the term commonly used for the Biblical literalist belief that the entire universe was created a few thousand years ago in its current form. ID accepts the fact that the process of creation took a lot longer but that is was a deliberate process set up by a creator.
My own take is that Genesis was not a cookbook- it tells us that God created everything but says nothing about how He did so. I have a real problem with the proponents of ID, though, for two reasons: First, science can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a creator, and second, they are misstating the theory of evolution and arguing against a theory that does not exist. The most common claim made by anti-evolutionists is that the theory of evolution proposes that all changes in a species were random, which is not true; the theory merely states that changes took place and describes some of the processes.
God said “let there be light”. Scientists talk about the Big Bang.
The Bible says God created man from dirt. Biologists say we were created from dirt.
The Bible says that man was created ~10,000 years ago. Archaeologists say that human civilization as we know it began ~10,000 years ago.
Muslim Creationist Ping. See how science threatens us ALL???? LOL
I never knew that the Catholic Church denied the existence of a Creator- when did this happen?
"A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific. Irrefutability is not a virtue of a theory (as people often think) but a vice."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.