What is so dangerous about Creationism? [W:346, 410]

[head of joaquin]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

Stop misusing my religion.... see how that works?

I see you don't like to be called on the carpet, yes. Kind of stings doesn't it

Doesn't bother me. I'm used to the intolerance and false message of the creationists. But I can see it bothers you.

But he who has ears let him hear. Your attack on science and common sense and reason is displayed on this thread, as creationists always let their ideology be known by its fruit. So as long as the real message of the gospel goes out alongside the creationist message, it's a good thing by way of contrast. Christians aren't afraid of reality, reason and truth. The fact that creationism must propagate junk science and bizarre interpretations of the gospel, and continually repeat debunked claims, let's the hearer hear.

 

[StillBallin75]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

Good point.

Couldn't it extend to the history classroom as well?

As a student of history I have to say that is a bad idea. I guess in a history classroom you could teach Creationism as it relates to the mythology/theology of Christian belief and its impacts on history, but not teach Creationism as fact.

 

[Knowledge=power]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

Stop misusing my religion.... see how that works?

I am curious; what exactly is the goal behind pushing creationism and Christianity as a whole for that matter?

Does it make you feel better if more people believe?

Respectfully, just curious.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

I am curious; what exactly is the goal behind pushing creationism and Christianity as a whole for that matter?

Does it make you feel better if more people believe?

Respectfully, just curious.

No, I want people to know the truth.

 

[afr0byte]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

No, I want people to know the truth.

Oh, you mean evolution? Cool.

 

[Knowledge=power]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

No, I want people to know the truth.

So, do you not agree that people who believe otherwise also want the truth known?

I think the issue people feel here is, that the 'truth' must be objective.

Scientific data / research is objective because of it's nature. It is done without bias. It serves to improve itself with new technology and discoveries. It does not dwell in the past or in impossible stories. The scientific community is not divided in the same sense that religions are divided. Scientists may disagree, but are in pursuit of the same goal.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

So, do you not agree that people who believe otherwise also want the truth known?

I think the issue people feel here is, that the 'truth' must be objective.

Scientific data / research is objective because of it's nature. It is done without bias. It serves to improve itself with new technology and discoveries. It does not dwell in the past or in impossible stories. The scientific community is not divided in the same sense that religions are divided. Scientists may disagree, but are in pursuit of the same goal.

I would hardly say all science is done without bias. Scientists a lot of times go into an experemint with the pretense that there is no God, no supernatural, and that skews the data.

 

[afr0byte]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

I would hardly say all science is done without bias. Scientists a lot of times go into an experemint with the pretense that there is no God, no supernatural, and that skews the data.

That's because science and the supernatural don't mix.

 

[Knowledge=power]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

I would hardly say all science is done without bias. Scientists a lot of times go into an experemint with the pretense that there is no God, no supernatural, and that skews the data.

Could you please explain what you mean by supernatural things that could skew data?

I am trying to get a clearer picture of what you mean.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

That's because science and the supernatural don't mix.

In your opinion.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

Could you please explain what you mean by supernatural things that could skew data?

I am trying to get a clearer picture of what you mean.

God, the Creator

 

[Adagio]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

I know pseudoscience can be dangerous when it boils down to things like climate change denialism and medical conspiracy theories, but I am confused as to what harm Creationism is capable of causing. Now, I don't support the teaching of Creationism and I do not accept it, but I also don't get what great harm it is capable of causing.

What I'm asking is, what makes the teaching of Creationism such a big issue?

Technically, there's nothing "wrong" with it, if you want to teach that as some kind of religion course in a private school. However, it's not science. And furthermore, religious types don't get to define what science is. Science defines itself. Science is ALWAYS falsifiable. No theory is every proven, but every theory must be falsifiable. It must at least have the possibility of being disproven. Every theory is open to challenge. Creationism ultimately ends with a Creator or God, and there is no way to challenge that as empirically true. It can't be proven or disproven, which makes it metaphysical. Science deals with the physical universe. On that basis alone, it doesn't qualify as science. How do you falsify God?

The danger comes in diluting our science to the point of making the metaphysical beliefs of some people appear as factually relevant as what we can empirically test. So, we must include absurd theories such as the earth being 6,000 years old and give them the same weight as the physical science that shows the earth being 4.5 Billion years old. All in the name of being "fair and balanced". There are NOT always two sides to every argument. Sometimes one of the sides is completely irrational and not worthy of being discussed in the same light as those things that we can determine as real.

 

[Adagio]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

So, you're saying that this is more of an issue of the separation of Church and State?

Scientifically speaking, what problems does the teaching of creationism cause? Aren't there bigger issues within the classroom (poor sex education programs, poorly performing students, environmental science not being taught well, etc.)

Actually it's more basic than that. Creationism isn't science. It's religion and shouldn't be passed off as something it's not.

 

[Knowledge=power]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

God, the Creator

Let me try to articulate this better.

Say a scientist looked at a string of genetic material and noticed that in homosexuals, there was a distinct difference from heterosexuals.

What supernatural skew would there be in that observation? and, if it is supernatural, how could we observe it?

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

I would hardly say all science is done without bias. Scientists a lot of times go into an experemint with the pretense that there is no God, no supernatural, and that skews the data.

I think you got lost. Here ya go, just click the following link. Conspiracy Theories

 

[afr0byte]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

In your opinion.

Science deals in evidence. That excludes religion from the field.

 

[Adagio]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

I get what you're saying. To teach something that has no factual basis just to appease a group of people is definitely not conducive to the science classroom. I can see how that could affect students, especially those heading into science related fields.

But, I'm confused about why some people choose to make this their issue. I don't understand why it evokes a passionate response from a portion of the population while more pressing issues don't.

Well...it's pretty simple really. The issue is an issue because those that want creationism to be taught in a science class are making it an issue. It's not science. We don't teach English or Algebra in a Science class, and there's no reason to teach religion in a science class either. The passionate response is actually coming from those that want this in a science class. It's being rejected for purely logical and rational reasons which some people just don't want to listen to. Some people make it an issue because they would like to promote their religious beliefs, or at least have them taught as an alternative to real science. Others reject that just as passionately because it has no place in a Science class and recognize it for what it is. The promotion of religion at the expense of science which is always going to be dealing with those things that can be tested and are falsifiable. God isn't part of that empirical study.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

I think you got lost. Here ya go, just click the following link. Conspiracy Theories

Not sure why you insist on being so rude. :shrug:

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

Science deals in evidence. That excludes religion from the field.

Then you come back with faulty results because you leave out big pieces of the reality puzzle.

 

[afr0byte]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

Then you come back with faulty results because you leave out big pieces of the reality puzzle.

I come back with faulty results because I require evidence? OK.

 

[Zyphlin]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

Moderator's Warning:

I know anything dealing with religion becomes a touchy subject. Lets try to keep it focused on dicussing the topic and not attacking each other and baiting

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

Not sure why you insist on being so rude. :shrug:

Not sure why you insist on fallaciously and falsely slandering a side to further your argument. :shrug:

 

[Adagio]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

Good point.

Couldn't it extend to the history classroom as well?

It could if Historical Revisionists had their way. Historians; at least those with serious credentials, are pretty firm on facts but that doesn't mean that pseudo-historians that want to promote a revised account aren't in abundance. David Barton for instance is a self styled Historical Revisionist that likes to play with the facts to promote a different version of events.

 

[Adagio]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

Well, I've met two types of people who are exceptionally passionate in their hatred of creationism:

1. The scientist - This is usually someone who studies evolution in some form or another and considers creationism a threat to the research and education that they advocate for. For this person, evolution and related topics are personal to them and so those who question their beliefs and knowledge inspire strong emotions.

2. The militant atheist - This is usually someone who takes religion very personally and therefore, despises it. They usually look down upon all religious people, but particularly those who take the Bible or other religious texts literally and espouse "evangelical" or extremely conservative beliefs. I suspect that they are passionately against religion because of the personal hatred they have from it that developed out of their own experiences.

In other words, the most passionate against creationism are the ones with the most personal relationship to it and its opposition.

I think you may have a slightly biased view of scientists. None are married to any theory, even evolution. Creationism is not considered a threat to any of them. All Science is based on theories that must be capable of being disproved. That's what Scientists do all day. They look to find why a theory won't hold up. They're all falsifiable. No scientist attempts to prove a theory. You can't, and they already know that. To do so requires Inductive reasoning and they all know that you can't use that to prove anything. They use deductive reasoning to look at ways' to disprove a theory. Science is never ending. So far Evolution has stood the test of severe criticism and met every challenge. Creationism has and end to it. That end is God. But God cannot be examined empirically. It's taken on faith. Science doesn't rely on faith. They may accept a theory for now, but hold open the idea of it's being successfully challenged some other day.

I suspect that they are passionately against religion because of the personal hatred they have from it that developed out of their own experiences.

Again I think you're overboard on this. Perhaps if you were an atheist you might be able to speak to that from a personal view. But I don't think that's the case. Atheists have no interest in religion and what you find from the more militant atheist is a solid resistance to legislating belief systems. It takes a true believer to fly a jet into a building. No skeptic would ever do something like that.

 

[Adagio]

Re: What is so dangerous about Creationism?

Just because some parts can be repeated doesn't prove the theory. You act as if I don't know anything, but the idea that some pieces support a theory doesn't prove the theory to be correct.

Actually you're right. Nothing ever proves a theory is correct. However it only takes one thing to prove the theory is false. So theories stand until they are falsified. A Scientist doesn't look for things to support a theory. That still wouldn't prove it because you can never exhaust the number of attempts that would finally say, this is True. He looks for things that would disprove it. If he can disprove it, generally it's replaced by another theory which accounts for that falsehood and leads us in another direction that clarifies our reality.