Another The Evolution Thread

So lying to children when they're intellectually immature and prone to accepting bogus ideas won't have any effect on them down the road? Keep piling these absurd ideas on. While your at it keep using the work 'Neck beard'. Detracts from your already hilarious posts.

What you're saying it utter nonsense. It would be akin to me saying that barring the teaching of religion to kids in the nation wouldn't have any effect on the number of adult believers down the line.

My argument is that it's going to have little to no effect on our development in the biological sciences as a nation. People that push the envelope in the biological sciences are people with degrees in biology. To have a degree in biology, you have to believe in evolution (or at least demonstrate knowledge in it). If you don't listen to what your professors are teaching you (that evolution is fact), you will fail out, end of story. You don't get a degree in biology from an accredited university without believing in evolution. Once again, reread my post before you make yourself look like a neckbeard. Also, as I stated before, THE HIGHEST LEVEL BIOLOGY CLASS IN HIGH SCHOOL TALKS ABOUT THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION EXTENSIVELY.

Also you're assuming that the vast majority of kids will remember what they are taught in middle school and that somehow this will affect them later in life. This is laughable.

Great, I get this. But teaching kids creationism at a young age is going to make it harder for them down the line. Teaching Creationism is a ROADBLOCK to a proper education in biology.

If you can't grasp this concept then I don't know what to tell you.

Well, the highest level biology course available in high school teaches evolution as fact. Roadblock? Sure, but it's going to be a very small roadblock. You're making the assumption that somehow what kids learn in middle school will have drastic implications on their lives in college.

Is it? Is it also a coincidence that people largely identify with the same religion of their parents, their nations, or region on this planet, due to their upbringin? Is that why its also much easier for children to learn and understand language at an early age when compared to adults?

Developing brains are sponges for information. To say that teaching children things at an early age has little to no effect on them down the line is laughable.

Religion and culture is different. Your parent's religion is something that is with you every step of the way in your life. Your parent's religion is present from the womb to the time you are an adult. It is something that is present in everyday life. This is why people largely identify with what their parents believe. Comparing this to a 10 month long middle school biology course is stupid. Language, when taught well to children, is something tangible. It is something that they are exposed to daily in their lives, something they actually experience. Unlike biology taught from a textbook/teacher. Not to mention that humans are naturally predisposed to learn language. There's a reason why pretty much every person in the world speaks a language of some sort. Language acquisition is naturally easier to us than acquisition of scientific knowledge. Once again, another dumb comparison.

"To say that teaching children things at an early age has little to no effect on them down the line is laughable." - No this is not laughable. How early do you want evolution to be taught? Pre school? Kindergarten? The highest level biology course you can take in high school is AP Biology, which clearly teaches evolution as fact. If you don't believe that evolution is fact, too bad, you will fail the nationally administered exam taken at the end of the year.

most people don't remember what they learned in middle school. Many adults still struggle with basic things like algebra. let's be honest, many of us don't even remember the names of our teachers in middle school.

If you teach a kid creationism he more likely to be less suited to doing well in a high school level biology course, and in many cases been taught to dismiss the entire field itself. Its not as if evolution is a some offshoot of biology. The entire field is dependent on it. Now going back to my original post; entertaining the thought of a young Earth also throws various other fields of science out the window. Its not just biology. How is a child supposed take a physics course being taught radio active decay is a lie? Or geology? etc....

It would be similar to teaching chemistry and telling kids the atomic theory is bogus. Would kids be well equipped to do well in chemistry courses if they were taught years on end that the only elements were Earth, Air, Fire, and Water?

Its not an assumption that children are more likely to retain knowledge, beliefs, and values instilled in them at a young age. There are multiple fields of study dedicated to neurological and developmental impact on humans.

So children are predisposed to acquiring and retaining knowledge concerning language and religion but not science now. Do you understand how dumb that sounds?

i can't believe ppl still bring up that argument. lol. educate yourself on what a scientific theory really is and stop embarrassing yourself.

lol why would they teach creationism in class? What next, they will teach hindu reincarnation theories?

Dumb.

Well they do have classes for that kind of thing...

I think those should only be taught in religion class.

Teaching those in science class is like reading Hobbit in History Class.

This makes allot more sense than evolution, we was created as a slave species by an ancient reptilian race known as the anunnaki.

Why we taught BS at our schools instead of the truth.

Want to share this, you have the right to learn the truth about our species, open your mind.

No one is going to watch that bullshit

I agree with nomsayin. Teaching false information in science will not slow down technological development, because kids will have to learn that concept later anyway. After all, forcing kids to dump information they've been learning for a year, and then spending time and resources overriding that with new information they may or may not be receptive to learning is just as efficient and effective as teaching them correct information from the start and revisiting that later.

Furthermore, a student population that has been taught creationism instead of evolution will probably produce the exact same amount and quality of motivated biology and medical students, because what students choose to pursue later in life is determined by their genes and not any intervening factors like what they're exposed to in their youth.

This should apply to other scientific concepts as well. If someone proposes teaching alchemy in schools instead of chemistry, we shouldn't complain about it that much because any student who really wants to do chemistry in university will have taken the time and effort to learn chemistry's fundamentals on the side, by him/herself without any professional academic aid and by spending more money on buying textbooks that directly contradict what his school tells him is the truth.

After all, students have unlimited resources and time and even if they didn't, they wouldn't have other concerns like socializing, chores, maintenance, entertainment, .etc to occupy themselves with. They would spend extra hours studying textbooks in preparation for the course they're genetically predisposed to choose when they become adults, because that's just how middle school kids behave.