Replies

You realize you are about be creamed, right? The flood alone has more scientific evidence AGAINST it than for it.

And so you think it shouldn't be discussed at all, even though whether or not there was a flood is a topic that exists in the world the kids will live in? That just doesn't make any sense!

You're making the same poor guess about my point of view as Coyote did. Not representing the scientific method well at all, you two. ;~)

Not representing the scientific method well at all, you two. ;~)

We are so used to absolute non-scientific and anti-scientific drivel that we sometimes overreact.

Example: The second law of thermal documents disproves evolution (a true classic).

Just as bad: The second law of thermodynamics disproves evolution.

I still don't want to see creationism and ID in high school science classes. To keep with the time frame, those subjects would have to be discussed and dismissed as science in only a few hours.

[And so you think it shouldn't be discussed at all, even though whether or not there was a flood is a topic that exists in the world the kids will live in? That just doesn't make any sense!]

The crucial qualification of whether or not to discuss the religious explanation with kids is the location of the discussion. We're specifically talking about a public school science class and they should be learning science in that classroom, not religious stories.

Properly practiced science is difficult to learn since the type of thinking required for the methodology is nonintuitive. Teaching kids to discipline their minds for this purpose takes a lot of class time, and the proponents of bringing ID or creationism into the classroom are necessarily supporting a practice that says to the students "Okay, all the science that you've learned up until now, and all the critical thinking and adherence to the scientific method you've been taught, we didn't really mean that because now we want you to consider some religious philosophy and we want you to think of it in the same way you think of the scientific method and it has equal scientific validity only it gives different results."

This is not a wise way to teach science.

"And so you think it shouldn't be discussed at all, even though whether or not there was a flood is a topic that exists in the world the kids will live in? That just doesn't make any sense!"

I don't think there is any reluctance to discussing various myths and religions in the appropriate class. The problem arises when classes such as science have enormous very specific amounts of information to present to students within a restricted time frame. There just isn't time to teach as much science as necessary in science class and to add subjects which do not fit within the classification of science.

If those other subjects are to be taught they should be presented in philosophy or comparative religions (or some other appropriate) classes rather than in science class.