Results from nationwide poll (Overwhelming support for teaching both sides of Evolution debate)

Zogby International ^ | February 3, 2009

[ColdWater]

I don't follow? In what way does what I said imply teaching that God may be dead?

You said you wanted to teach ID. You do realize that one of the basic tenents of ID is that God may be dead since there exists no evidence that he has been alive in the last few hundred million years?

[whattajoke]

I’m not opposed to destroying the flimsy myth of evolution, first, if that’s where you want to start.

You and 17 other FReepers. Have at it. Give us your one single best brightest undisputable evidence to destroy the "flimsy myth of evolution."

[ColdWater]

the main creation science teachings

As far as I understand, the 'main creation science' is as written in the Bible in Genesis. That doesn't classify as science class material.

[Marie2]

No, since the Bible does not declare alchemy nor flat earth notions to be true.

Find the missing link yet?

[allmendream]

Those chemists are shaking in their boots knowing that their fanciful “periodic table” is crumbling, the evidence for alchemy is overwhelming!

If not for a “Temple of Chemistry” zealots keeping out our important work and marginalizing and discrediting out spokesmen, we would have long ago superseded Chemistry as the primary science-like theory of matter.

[tacticalogic]

You just put the burden on them. If you’re not willing to do any of the work, what entitles you to have any say in the matter?

[Marie2]

The description of God’s miraculous creation of the earth is indeed found in Genesis. So is the account of the world wide flood.

Creation science presupposes these incidents to be true. So, Biology, Chemistry, Geology etc. are taught from these presuppositions.

For example in Geology we learn the principle of superposition, creation/formation of various strata, petrification and so forth, and in Biology we learn about cells, plant life, reproduction, DNA, micro (as opposed to macro) evolution, all without the imposition of evolutionary thought.

[Cedric]

Give us your one single best brightest undisputable evidence

You go first.

Never mind, we don't feel like giving you another 150 years to spew more of your gibberish.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

I didn't know that.

I also said (quoting myself):

“Please note, the above concerns pedagogy only — it isn’t meant to be a comment on the substantive issues (between evolution, and ID, etc.).”

You just have to look back at all the TOE/ID/Creationism threads on Freerepublic to realize that the “controversy” makes the subject far, far, more interesting than simply presenting the orthodox view. Do you expect students (teenagers at that!!) to just take teacher's word for things — or would you rather equip them to be able to think for themselves?

[firebrand]

Probably not correct to brand all Christians as anti-evolutionary, if that’s what you meant.

[Cinnamon Girl]

The United Church of Darwin does not allow any disagreement.

[Cedric]

They barfed up the inane theory.

[whattajoke]

No, since the Bible does not declare alchemy nor flat earth notions to be true.

We must have read different bibles.

Find the missing link yet?

Sure! Tens of thousands actually. Here are ten to get you started, written in a very simple layman style.

My particular favorite "missing link" is the tiktaalik - because it was predicted and then discovered exactly where it was predicted to be found in the strata. I'm still waiting for the creationist take on tiktaalik.

And by the way, to play your "missing link" game is foolish. For every one discovered, two more "missing links" are created.

[tacticalogic]

They barfed up the inane theory.

It takes more than insults and righeous indgnation to prove it.

[Marie2]

“We must have read different bibles. “

Indeed. Can you tell me about any verses on alchemy or flat earth?

Those aren’t missing links, sorry, try again. I’d like to see the link species between one species and the next. Most especially, I’d like to see the one between apes and man.

[Cedric]

Or how ‘bout living cells spontaneously forming on the backs of crystals or life on earth seeded by aliens (Dawkins).

[ColdWater]

or would you rather equip them to be able to think for themselves?

I am sure that you would be the first to call the principal's office if your child came home saying that the science teacher was teaching that God may be dead.

[whattajoke]

You write:

I’m not opposed to destroying the flimsy myth of evolution, first, if that’s where you want to start.

So I give you the easiest way to get started: "Pick one - your best shot, your best evidence, etc" And then I get:

You go first.

Um. Did you give up so quickly?

[Marie2]

It is interesting. Ultimately, evolutionists see matter as eternal. Creationists see God as eternal.

[Cedric]

Okay, have someone read this to you very slowly: It is incumbent upon the proponents of a theory to prove it.