Evidence for God from Science

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns? ... news_rss20

Kansas has always been a state that figured strongly into the Creation/Evolution in the Schools debate.

This article, from a scientific journal, so you know where their bias falls, gives the news of recent elections and a move away from creationism.

Any thoughts?

I don't think creationism should be taught in schools. There isn't any solid facts right? Pretty much creationism uses the stuff evolution can't explain as evidence for creationism.

Actually I moved recently and am in Kansas. I had biology last school year but missed the part on evolution or creationism, what's the status now on Kansas's schools? Do they have to teach creationism?

And also if one were to use the “separation of church and state” or whatever it was as an debate, it actually isn't in the constitution. I think back when the constitution was written everyone was Christian anyway. Also what's the main issue on having creationism taught in schools? Is it just that it's a majority religion or is it that it's actually regarded as a science? What's your opinion Can? You just posted the link...

Birdie wrote:I don't think creationism should be taught in schools. There isn't any solid facts right? Pretty much creationism uses the stuff evolution can't explain as evidence for creationism.

Actually I moved recently and am in Kansas. I had biology last school year but missed the part on evolution or creationism, what's the status now on Kansas's schools? Do they have to teach creationism?

And also if one were to use the “separation of church and state” or whatever it was as an debate, it actually isn't in the constitution. I think back when the constitution was written everyone was Christian anyway. Also what's the main issue on having creationism taught in schools? Is it just that it's a majority religion or is it that it's actually regarded as a science? What's your opinion Can? You just posted the link...

You're right. I didn't post my opinion.

My opinion is that Creationism and Intelligent Design are not purely scientific and should be included in terms of philosophy. I also think that there are elements of evolution that can be taught that are not purely scientific and that those should not be placed in a scientific context either.

In High school, I believe evolution in terms of what is scientific and known, which is significant, should be taught.

I guess my take on evolution is that it shouldn't be taught as a fact... I had an anthropology class a few years ago where it was taught as a fact. While I don't believe that creationism should be taught as a fact as well, I think it is ok to mention it as an alternative or even to allude to it. They are both theories...

I have also heard that it is ok to say that an alien or ET started it all (for the ID argument)... Why can't they at least allude creationism to God? Why are they scared about this since the majority of the people on the planet believe in God or in a God?

I think they are mainly scared of alluding to creationism because they believe it will cut into their funding, and stop certain science programs. A smoke screen it seems... In other words, it seems that money is the issue here and not true education.

Just my two cents..

G -

Gman wrote:I guess my take on evolution is that it shouldn't be taught as a fact... I had an anthropology class a few years ago where it was taught as a fact. While I don't believe that creationism should be taught as a fact as well, I think it is ok to mention it as an alternative or even to allude to it. They are both theories...

I have also heard that it is ok to say that an alien or ET started it all (for the ID argument)... Why can't they at least allude creationism to God? Why are they scared about this since the majority of the people on the planet believe in God or in a God?

I think they are mainly scared of alluding to creationism because they believe it will cut into their funding, and stop certain science programs. A smoke screen it seems... In other words, it seems that money is the issue here and not true education.

Just my two cents..

G -

Dedication to philosophical naturalism. That's why. And money is at stake-that's why most Darwinists will not come out and say "hey, yeah, what most of Americans believe and what we're telling you is fact cannot both be true!" Cheap parlor tricks.