Should we teach both Evolution and Intelligent Design in science classes?

[the_bob_delusion]

Should we teach both and let the students decide for themselves?

Go

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@tasfleur wrote:

I agree with Mrs. Elephant, but at the same time, creation and evolution are some kind of intelligent design anyway.

Perhaps the questions should be  metaphorical ..... is creation evolution, or is evolution creation, or one and the same?

In my opinion, everything is creative evolution, but the original source is merely a philosophy beyond that of the human mind.

That's most likely why primitive humans felt they had to invent religions.  It's all too big for the mind, so some levelled it down to the lowest denomination of their primal IQ's of the time.  They still do now I suppose .... 

It will always be unanswerable/unproveable in reality.

---

Well, I have been called a lot of names, but 'primal IQ' - that's a first for me. 

[tasfleur]

Not calling you or anyone else primitive/primal Rabbitearbandicoot, I was referring to the very beginnings of thinking humanity as a whole not being able to sort out what anything around them was about .. the sun, the moon, stars, their environment, so they invented religions that have flowed through to today .... 

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

Sorry, I keep mixing up EVOLUTION with ABIOGENESIS. But then, so do most people who say they believe in EVOLUTION.

And of course, Charles Darwin said that the Australian Aboriginals were NOT AS EVOLVED AS WHITES - so does everyone believe that?

---

Understandable. Creationists typically get things ar$e-about!

What? You're disputing that Darwin said that?

[curmu-curmu]

Sadly, this is how most creationists engage their detractors - by shifting the onus onto them. Very deceptive and underhanded tactics, indeed.

Doesn't work with me, Rabbit. I posed the first question, now the onus is on you to answer. Failure to do so effectively, clearly shows the vaccuous nature of the theistic argument.

As many of us will agree, for one to hold to unprovable beliefs is fine - just don't attempt to force them onto others.

[curmu-curmu]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

Sorry, I keep mixing up EVOLUTION with ABIOGENESIS. But then, so do most people who say they believe in EVOLUTION.

And of course, Charles Darwin said that the Australian Aboriginals were NOT AS EVOLVED AS WHITES - so does everyone believe that?

---

Understandable. Creationists typically get things ar$e-about!

What? You're disputing that Darwin said that?

---

Firstly...check the boldened text - that was what I was responding to.

Not disputing Darwin said that at all - but then, I'm not quoting 100 year old authors, either! If that's the best that the creation movement can put forwards, they've already lost!

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

Sadly, this is how most creationists engage their detractors - by shifting the onus onto them. Very deceptive and underhanded tactics, indeed.

Doesn't work with me, Rabbit. I posed the first question, now the onus is on you to answer. Failure to do so effectively, clearly shows the vaccuous nature of the theistic argument.

As many of us will agree, for one to hold to unprovable beliefs is fine - just don't attempt to force them onto others.

---

But, you are trying to force 'life from nothong' on to me. And, we have now decided that to give children an OPTION is too hard - why? Because we don't want them to KNOW THERE IS AN OPTION to LIFE FROM NOTHING.

[curmu-curmu]

---

@rabbitearbandicoot wrote:

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

Sadly, this is how most creationists engage their detractors - by shifting the onus onto them. Very deceptive and underhanded tactics, indeed.

Doesn't work with me, Rabbit. I posed the first question, now the onus is on you to answer. Failure to do so effectively, clearly shows the vaccuous nature of the theistic argument.

As many of us will agree, for one to hold to unprovable beliefs is fine - just don't attempt to force them onto others.

---

But, you are trying to force 'life from nothong' on to me. And, we have now decided that to give children an OPTION is too hard - why? Because we don't want them to KNOW THERE IS AN OPTION to LIFE FROM NOTHING.

---

Yup. A magical skydaddy, breathing life into a lump of clay. THAT'S certainly not life from nothing (no thong)!

[rabbitearbandicoot]

"As many of us will agree, for one to hold to unprovable beliefs is fine -"

So, what you're admitting that  holding to the upprovable theory of evolution is fine. OK.

[curmu-curmu]

Still awaiting that proof, Rabbit. Will it be coming anytime soon?

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

Still awaiting that proof, Rabbit. Will it be coming anytime soon?

---

Nope.  Because there is none, except if you look around you, there is proof of intelligent design everywhere.

The things that you see, and say 'that must have evolved' from xyz through millions of years of accidental gene/chemical/environmenal changes / manipulations, I see another wonder of an Intelligen Designer.