Creatonism is banned in state funded schools in UK

#1 Edited by The_Last_Ride (69618 posts) -

Huzzah! Awesome news!

… the requirement on every academy and free school to provide a broad and balanced curriculum, in any case prevents the teaching of creationism as evidence based theory in any academy or free school

Link

#2 Posted by lostrib (32987 posts) -

" But all of that isn’t to say creationism can’t be taught in schools. The clauses don’t prevent the discussion of beliefs about the origins of our planet and living things, just as long as it’s not presented as a valid alternative to established scientific theory. "

#3 Edited by Master_Live (13931 posts) -

And this is why the UK will go to hell.

#4 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69618 posts) -

And this is why the UK will go to hell.

I hope you're sarcastic...

#5 Posted by Master_Live (13931 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

And this is why the UK will go to hell.

I hope you're sarcastic...

Don't heed the word of God and lets see where it takes you.

#6 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69618 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride said:

@Master_Live said:

And this is why the UK will go to hell.

I hope you're sarcastic...

Don't heed the word of God and lets see where it takes you.

Pretty well i might say, i would love to discuss how creatonism has no facts and is based on a book that states the world is 5000 years old and can't explain dinosaurs. Aswell as evolution :). Ignorance isn't the way my friend. Most educated people are non-believers and there's a reason for that

#7 Posted by GamingGod999 (2930 posts) -

Thank god this is true.

#8 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69618 posts) -

@lostrib said:

" But all of that isn’t to say creationism can’t be taught in schools. The clauses don’t prevent the discussion of beliefs about the origins of our planet and living things, just as long as it’s not presented as a valid alternative to established scientific theory. "

Which is fine by me, because creatonism isn't science

#9 Posted by Master_Live (13931 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

@The_Last_Ride said:

@Master_Live said:

And this is why the UK will go to hell.

I hope you're sarcastic...

Don't heed the word of God and lets see where it takes you.

Pretty well i might say, i would love to discuss how creatonism has no facts and is based on a book that states the world is 5000 years old and can't explain dinosaurs.

Dinosaurs were put on Earth by God himself.

#10 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69618 posts) -

@Master_Live: How do you explain that by science they died out 65 million years ago and how do you explain evolution? If homosexuality is not allowed, shouldn't shellfish and having two different kinds of fabric mean the same? According to christians, the earth was also the center of the universe and the world was flat

#11 Edited by Master_Live (13931 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride said:

@Master_Live: How do you explain that by science they died out 65 million years ago and how do you explain evolution?

Why do I have to explain evolution? God created us as presently constituted from the beginning.

@The_Last_Ride said:

@Master_Live: If homosexuality is not allowed, shouldn't shellfish and having two different kinds of fabric mean the same?

Homosexuality is sin. Enough said.

@The_Last_Ride said:

@Master_Live: According to christians, the earth was also the center of the universe and the world was flat

The fact that some HUMAN claims were wrong doesn't negate the greatness of God. Human were wrong, not God.

#12 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69618 posts) -

@Master_Live: Nope! Wrong, according to science aka fact. We evolved from a single celled organism to be the dominate species on earth.

You didn't answer my other two questions

But the bible isn't wrong is it?

#14 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69618 posts) -
#15 Posted by airshocker (28731 posts) -

This is what happens when newbies come to OT. They can't tell who is messing with them and who isn't.

WELCOME TO OT!

#17 Posted by THUMPTABLE (1808 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride said:

@Master_Live said:

@The_Last_Ride said:

@Master_Live said:

And this is why the UK will go to hell.

I hope you're sarcastic...

Don't heed the word of God and lets see where it takes you.

Pretty well i might say, i would love to discuss how creatonism has no facts and is based on a book that states the world is 5000 years old and can't explain dinosaurs.

Dinosaurs were put on Earth by God himself.

Are you taking the piss or just dumb?

#18 Edited by The_Last_Ride (69618 posts) -
#19 Posted by The-Apostle (12141 posts) -

*Puts on flame shield*

This is just stupid. Broad and balanced my ass...

#20 Edited by Master_Live (13931 posts) -

*Puts on flame shield*

This is just stupid. Broad and balanced my ass...

Apostle >_>

#21 Edited by The-Apostle (12141 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

*Puts on flame shield*

This is just stupid. Broad and balanced my ass...

Apostle >_>

What? I was just replying to OP. >_>

#22 Posted by lostrib (32987 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

*Puts on flame shield*

This is just stupid. Broad and balanced my ass...

Apostle >_>

What? I was just replying to OP. >_>

It's just banned from being taught as science. It can still be taught in schools

#23 Posted by The-Apostle (12141 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

*Puts on flame shield*

This is just stupid. Broad and balanced my ass...

Apostle >_>

What? I was just replying to OP. >_>

It's just banned from being taught as science. It can still be taught in schools

I just wish people could get credit for learning about either/or. It's the only way I'm willing to compromise.

#24 Posted by lostrib (32987 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

*Puts on flame shield*

This is just stupid. Broad and balanced my ass...

Apostle >_>

What? I was just replying to OP. >_>

It's just banned from being taught as science. It can still be taught in schools

I just wish people could get credit for learning about either/or. It's the only way I'm willing to compromise.

Well creationism shouldn't be taught as a science, so it shouldn't grant them credit as such.

#25 Edited by MrGeezer (56020 posts) -

@THUMPTABLE: i think he was just trolling

The scary thing is, I've actually known people who were serious about that stuff. When the scientific evidence didn't match the bible, they said that God faked the scientific evidence in order to test our faith. 65 million year old dinosaur fossils? Bullshit. God just made them appear to be 65 million years old in order to find out who doesn't have faith in the Bible.

#26 Edited by The-Apostle (12141 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

*Puts on flame shield*

This is just stupid. Broad and balanced my ass...

Apostle >_>

What? I was just replying to OP. >_>

It's just banned from being taught as science. It can still be taught in schools

I just wish people could get credit for learning about either/or. It's the only way I'm willing to compromise.

Well creationism shouldn't be taught as a science, so it shouldn't grant them credit as such.

I'm not budging on this issue. I hated evolution getting shoved down my throat when I was in college but I did it because I didn't have a choice. It wasn't engaging for me at all. I got a B in the class by writing whatever I knew the instructor wanted to hear (A's on the research papers).

#27 Posted by lostrib (32987 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

I just wish people could get credit for learning about either/or. It's the only way I'm willing to compromise.

Well creationism shouldn't be taught as a science, so it shouldn't grant them credit as such.

I'm not budging on this issue. I hated evolution getting shoved down my throat when I was in college but I did it because I didn't have a choice. It wasn't engaging for me at all. I got a B in the class by writing whatever I knew the instructor wanted to hear (A's on the research papers).

If you have a science requirement, why should a none science course count?

#28 Posted by MrGeezer (56020 posts) -

I'm not budging on this issue. I hated evolution getting shoved down my throat when I was in college but I did it because I didn't have a choice. It wasn't engaging for me at all. I got a B in the class by writing whatever I knew the instructor wanted to hear (A's on the research papers).

Dude, it's college, not a freaking video game. Their job is to educate your ass, not to make sure you're engaged. Creationism will never be science, evolution is scientific fact, so it's their job to teach evolution regardless of how engaging you find it to be.

Also, what you believe isn't their freaking business. If you "knew what the instructor wanted to hear" well enough to get a B, then you've learned enough about evolution to pass the course. You don't have to believe it, you just have to learn it. You're free to believe any asinine thing you want, but that doesn't mean that schools should be obligated to teach it.

#29 Edited by The-Apostle (12141 posts) -
@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

I just wish people could get credit for learning about either/or. It's the only way I'm willing to compromise.

Well creationism shouldn't be taught as a science, so it shouldn't grant them credit as such.

I'm not budging on this issue. I hated evolution getting shoved down my throat when I was in college but I did it because I didn't have a choice. It wasn't engaging for me at all. I got a B in the class by writing whatever I knew the instructor wanted to hear (A's on the research papers).

If you have a science requirement, why should a none science course count?

As an alternative. Those beliefs contradict the Creationist beliefs. Further, both are explanations as to how the universe began/was created.

#30 Posted by br0kenrabbit (12767 posts) -

Further, both are explanations as to how the universe began/was created.

Has nothing to do with evolution.

#31 Posted by lostrib (32987 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

I just wish people could get credit for learning about either/or. It's the only way I'm willing to compromise.

Well creationism shouldn't be taught as a science, so it shouldn't grant them credit as such.

I'm not budging on this issue. I hated evolution getting shoved down my throat when I was in college but I did it because I didn't have a choice. It wasn't engaging for me at all. I got a B in the class by writing whatever I knew the instructor wanted to hear (A's on the research papers).

If you have a science requirement, why should a none science course count?

As an alternative. Those beliefs contradict the Creationist beliefs. Further, both are explanations as to how the universe began/was created.

Well, except one is actually science.

"Further, both are explanations as to how the universe began/was created."

Nope

#32 Edited by The-Apostle (12141 posts) -
@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:
@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

I just wish people could get credit for learning about either/or. It's the only way I'm willing to compromise.

Well creationism shouldn't be taught as a science, so it shouldn't grant them credit as such.

I'm not budging on this issue. I hated evolution getting shoved down my throat when I was in college but I did it because I didn't have a choice. It wasn't engaging for me at all. I got a B in the class by writing whatever I knew the instructor wanted to hear (A's on the research papers).

If you have a science requirement, why should a none science course count?

As an alternative. Those beliefs contradict the Creationist beliefs. Further, both are explanations as to how the universe began/was created.

Well, except one is actually science.

"Further, both are explanations as to how the universe began/was created."

Nope

Yes they are. Creation is the Christian explanation. Evolution is the secular explanation, though technically the secular explanation is that the Big Band began everything. >_>

#33 Posted by lostrib (32987 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:
@lostrib said:

If you have a science requirement, why should a none science course count?

As an alternative. Those beliefs contradict the Creationist beliefs. Further, both are explanations as to how the universe began/was created.

Well, except one is actually science.

"Further, both are explanations as to how the universe began/was created."

Nope

Yes they are. Creation is the Christian explanation. Evolution is the secular explanation.

No, it really isn't.

#35 Posted by The-Apostle (12141 posts) -
@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:
@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:
@lostrib said:

If you have a science requirement, why should a none science course count?

As an alternative. Those beliefs contradict the Creationist beliefs. Further, both are explanations as to how the universe began/was created.

Well, except one is actually science.

"Further, both are explanations as to how the universe began/was created."

Nope

Yes they are. Creation is the Christian explanation. Evolution is the secular explanation.

No, it really isn't.

Yeah, forgot to mention the Big Bang being the secular version, hence editing my last post.

#36 Posted by lamprey263 (22650 posts) -

Someone has to lead the way, glad someone did.

The Nation Center for Science Education, NCSE, has a YouTube channel about their speeches and conventions and other events dealing with teaching science in schools. Part of the problem they show is sometimes teachers aren't prepared to teach the science based curriculum. In other instances, and this is a big one, social pressures such as teachers who teach in small towns with a small conservative Christian community, the teaching of science can lead to the ostracization of teachers from the community, pressuring teachers not to teach science that might be in contention with religious fanatical beliefs. But among the biggest problems facing schools is the battle of sneaking in creationism into the classroom. One of the methods that is commonly being used is the ruse of "critical thinking". The argument from creationists is to let students have access to both sides of the argument, the science side and the creationist side, and thus allow students the opportunity to exercise their critical thinking skills to come to their own conclusion.

#37 Posted by Serraph105 (27704 posts) -

There was a recent study done that pointed to trolls most likely being Satan getting on the internet to mess with God's children.

#38 Posted by wis3boi (31004 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@The-Apostle said:

@Master_Live said:

@The-Apostle said:

*Puts on flame shield*

This is just stupid. Broad and balanced my ass...

Apostle >_>

What? I was just replying to OP. >_>

It's just banned from being taught as science. It can still be taught in schools

I just wish people could get credit for learning about either/or. It's the only way I'm willing to compromise.

no, there is no compromise when one side is factually wrong

#39 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69618 posts) -

@MrGeezer said:

@The_Last_Ride said:

@THUMPTABLE: i think he was just trolling

The scary thing is, I've actually known people who were serious about that stuff. When the scientific evidence didn't match the bible, they said that God faked the scientific evidence in order to test our faith. 65 million year old dinosaur fossils? Bullshit. God just made them appear to be 65 million years old in order to find out who doesn't have faith in the Bible.

There are enough of those people out there, hell look at the Ken Ham vs Bill Nye debate

#40 Posted by Treflis (11418 posts) -

I've always wondered why teaching creationism wasn't solely done in Sunday schools after church sermons. That way there'd be no issues, except maybe some kids being annoyed to spend another 45 minutes in a classroom.

#41 Edited by Makhaidos (1611 posts) -

Good, now they need to bring this policy to the United States. If I was a teacher in a school that allowed this nonsense in science class, I'd use the Hindu myth of creation instead of the Christian one--then the Christians in favor of creationism would rally behind banning it.

Or, hell, I'd create my own religion where the world was created by two (or more!) deities having gay protected sex. That way, I'd at least be able to teach sex education while I was at it.

#42 Posted by Mercuria1_King (276 posts) -

That's very good news!

#43 Posted by GreySeal9 (23975 posts) -

*cringes at The_Apostle's posts in this thread*

#44 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69618 posts) -
#45 Posted by THE_DRUGGIE (24961 posts) -

Pretty fair compromise.

Kinda reminds me of high school when religion wasn't part of science class, but you could take a world religions class as an elective so you could get a broad view of a lot of different religions and their histories.