It goes well beyond creationism v. evolution. If we throw out evolution, we're setting a dangerous precedent of getting rid of proven scientific fact out of fear of stepping on some toes.
Well, I wasn't confused until I read this post. I was talking about public policy. I don't know how your post relates at all.
People did not came from monkeys. I will let someone who is more familiar with biology answer the question how relevant is evolution to biology.
so why shouldnt something like public policy be regulated or guided by science? Like global warming for instance? Or allowing abortion or decriminalizing mar1juana based on finding and studies? What else would you base decisions off of?
I'm not saying throw anything out. Just to allow people to believe what they want. And if and when their beliefs begin to prohibit them from functioning just as well as others in society, they’ll change. Though I don’t believe that evolution will ever fall into that category.
I may not have expressed myself well. I'm talking about the phenomenon of particular scientists complaining that they were not personally involved when others --usually governments -- make decisions. I know a lot of people in academic sciences and they mostly seem to think that they personally are better-suited to make decisions in other disciplines than the professionals in those disciplines. So, if a legislator asks 100 qualified scientists about global warming before passing global-warming-related legislation, the 101st scientist will still complain that nobody asked him. I noticed it first among my friends, and now it pops out at me whenever I see it in an article. Public policy should be informed by science. It shouldn't be dictated by scientists. It should be dictated by the politicians that are popularly elected to be representatives of the people who can listen to the concerns of the scientists and all other stakeholders before making a decision. Scientists don't give a **** about the other stakeholders, which is why they often complain about the decisions made, and why they aren't qualified to make them by themselves.
Remind me what's the point of school if it is not to teach facts as well as ways of living? Especially in the sciences?
Actually it does and for practical purposes Evolution theory is more applicable than General Relativity. For example understanding natural selection and adaption is critical for understanding the spread of diseases and how to combat them. Evolution underpins developmental biology to understanding how cells differentiate and specialize.
Creationism. Something that is deemed "truth" by circular reasoning in a fictional fairy-tale book. That's totally a valid theory. Religion would be so much better if everyone just kept to themselves.
I totally agree. But let's be honest, the argument doesn't revolve around what I bolded above. It's simply one groups religious beliefs vs another's science. In particular, the part about where the first human came from. The people who embrace evolution, study it, and apply it will continue to contribute to science and medicine. All while not harming anyone. The people who choose to believe their religion and Creationism will continue to serve their purpose in their families and religious communities. And in general, still contribute positively to society. All while not hurting anyone. At least that's how it should be, IMO. EVOLUTION SHOULD BE TAUGHT IN SCHOOLS, because it’s based in science and it was developed by some of the smartest minds the Earth has ever seen. Creationism should as well, however not as a science, but as history lesson in culture and a contemporary example of today’s society and the varied beliefs within it. There's no reason why both shouldn't be able to coexist in America's modern society. I believe there’s no bigger insult than to belittle who an individual is and what they believe. (As long as their beliefs don't involve hate against others.)
