Show of Hands

Teach it in history or mythology class, but not science class.

No, creationism isn't science.

Who's creation "theory" gets taught?

We have our third winner in the "don't know the scientific meaning of theory" category.

1) I'm a Lutheran, and I urge all fundamentalist Biblical literalists to realize there are millions of Christians who accept evolution.

2) The reason evolution is taught in schools is because there's evidence for it. What evidence is there for...

... creationism? You're free to home school your child or tell them what they learn in class is wrong (good luck explaining why...), but to force creationism into a classroom is just ... unAmerican.

Creationism is nowhere near science.

Someone doesn't know the scientific meaning of theory.

LOL. Strongly disagree.

The only one with actual tangible evidence is evolution. Creationism is not even remotely close to a science and it should never enter the science classrooms.

Creation isn't a theory. It is barely speculation.

Both are theories, both have credible evidence, only Democrats object to fair and balanced.

Why not not?

So what about the vast amount of physical and DNA evidence that supports evolution?

Yes, if you want to be semantical, it is a theory of creation. But you and I both know that the question was referring to religious creation.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

Some highlights: "Well substantiated"

"repeatedly confirmed"

"testable"

" Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge."

Absolutely 100% not. I would not trust my child's religious education to an elementary school teacher who hasn't gone to seminary, and for all I know, had never stepped in a church.

How so Jurassic?

Maybe a special class for creation, but not in science. That's not science

Someone else doesn't know the scientific definition of theory.

No one ever seems to grasp that they're not competing or even mutually exclusive theories. We all know that babies grow and change. That's not an explanation of how they're created.

Evolution does not contain an explanation for *existence*

Theory is NOT fact. The first statement was an autocorrect mistake.

Theory is just that ... non-fact. Theory is a supposition that can not be proven.

Knowledge if it's growth DOESNT explain it's birth. If you only knew it was growing and changing, how would you learn it had a mother?

Dude, in 2014 anti-science people only exist in your imagination.

I have a progressive look at creationism and evolution. There is no way the Big Bang theory works without God in the picture because that implies life formed from inanimate objects... which as we all know is impossible. So I look at the biblical...

3gun, did you check out the link? It explains the creation of life.

I bought the movie but I think you can find it on youtube.

story as an analogy. It gives a correct order to his things would have started. when God spoke of creationism the people would not have understood evolution. That said, God sparked life. there is no way there was life in the energy initially...

Soup ... you have missed the point. In your religious zeal for evolution, you missed the point that scientific theory is NOT fact.

You simply can't answer the question of what caused the set actions that resulted in life.

given off from the big bang. That was God's doing. He made life. God follows the laws he made. He made science. Science and religion ARE ONE IN THE SAME. Rant over.

Of course. They are the 2 most accepted theories.

And none that supports any creationist claims?

Soup ... again, I ask ... are you 12? You obviously didn't read the articles you sited as the latest includes a disclaimer!

"There has been a recent wave of skepticism concerning Miller's experiment ..."

Grow up!

... a theory is NOT fact ...

LOL, no they're not. Not even close.

So now, who doesn't know what a theory is?

Soup ... I'm guessing you wouldn't have a clue what is a fact and what is a theory.

Sure, one is taught in a core science class, an the other is taught in a myth and folklore elective.

I can't. But seeing there is no evidence to suggest a deity, I wouldn't assume that is the cause.

True. An open mind is good, but overwhelming evidence is better. ;)

Goalie, I find your train of knowledge very interesting. You are saying that both theories can coexist together.

There is a documentary made by the History Channel produced by James Cameron called EXODUS DECODED. It tries to explain thru science the story of Moses.

You will love it

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment

Evolution and abiogenesis are different that's true. But that would be like pointing to a growing baby and claiming out knowledge of its growth doesn't explain its birth.

Well jackie, why don't you tell me what you think is missing, and I'll tell you why you're wrong. ;)

Do you teach all creation stories or just the Christian one?

3gun, how would teaching that it was magical space elves was the first cause, be any different than teaching a god did it? The god "theory" and the space elves hold the same amount of evidence. Thus IMO god theories fall flat and shouldn't be taught.

If any science, you hold credibly. Cells are another theory. Do you think that perhaps we are not made of cells? Now, you may ask "but why is evolution more like cell theory and less like the big bang theory". It is because the big bang theory is an

The Miller urey experiment? I already linked it above. No religion there. And for think, because above is the wiki:

people.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/Exobiology/miller.html

www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Miller-Urey_experiment.html

ncse.com/files/pub/.../gishlick_icons1.pdf

Educated guess at an event that we cannot see and that happens billions of years ago. Evolution is something we can actually see, albeit very slowly. Science has answered so much that at one time was unanswerable. I am confident that at some point it

Will. Answer what is now unanswerable.