should creationism be on the science syllabus

[zippitippitoes]

\link{http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2078747,00.html\ Interesting article}

It seems sensible to bring in elements of philosophy/ethics into science teaching. This is an important issue in America and it's good to give children an unbiased view of the issues so that they can understand creationism, and understand why it is wrong.

mp at the end of the day i don't really understand how you can say it's 'wrong' - go back far enough & it seems to me that nobody can ever really know how the universe happened. so in a sense isn't creationism as valid as anything else, cos no-one knows for sure?

I watched the channel 4 programme on this a couple of days ago

no I don't think it should be on the science syllabus

yes I think they should talk about all theories of creation.
they can explain why they believe evolution over creationism... but to just ignore it or say it is wrong is not the way to go

But Roosmum, much of science isn't about saying 'we absolutely know everything for certain' but 'this is the best explanation in accordance with the evidence as we have it today.' The difference is that Darwinian evolution does fit with the evidence, creationism/ID doesn't.
The fact that science doesn't always offer certainty doesn't mean it has nothing more to offer than any other body of ideas.

i take you point kathy, but that just doesn't cover it for me, sorry.
so - you HAVE to believe this because, well, we dunno what it's all about but this is the best we can come up with?
not enough to be presented as 'the truth' imo.

So Roosmum, don't you believe any of science?

kathy, i'm a literature postgrad!

dh is a physicist tho.

i can barely count, let alone do high level science! gimme a poem, tho, & i'm ok.

Ooh, you're like us Roosmum - I'm arts but my dh is a mathematical physicist
My parents are scientists tho so I've been brought up with that approach (and my dh is scarily like my dad, who is a physicist too, LOL)

bill hicks was funny about this

“You believe the world's 12 thousand years old? "That's right." Okay I got one word to ask you, a one word question, ready? "Uh huh." Dinosaurs. You know the world's 12 thousand years old and dinosaurs existed, they existed in that time, you'd think it would have been mentioned in the ing Bible at some point. "And lo Jesus and the disciples walked to Nazareth. But the trail was blocked by a giant brontosaurus...with a splinter in his paw. And O the disciples did run a shriekin': 'What a big lizard, Lord!' But Jesus was unafraid and he took the splinter from the brontosaurus's paw and the big lizard became his friend.”

Bill Hicks is right.
Creationism is an interesting theory that belongs in RE/philosophy lessons, not in science as taught in the UK.
Are we going to have the humours and Galen and the flat-earth theories taught too? And I say that as a committed Christian.

Coming back to the original post though, I do think science in schools has to include some element of history and philosophy of science, because it's important that we understand the nature of science and how it progresses - that it's about a 'best fit' rather than absolute truth.
But it's not obvious how much of the syllabus should be about HPS and how much should be straight science - the more you learn about what people used to believe the less time you've got to learn what we think today, and the latter is arguably a heck of a lot more useful (eg germ theory of disease is rather more use than theory of the four humours!)
Also, poorly taught philosophy of science has left a lot of people with the feeling 'science isn't true so why should be take any notice of it at all' which misses the point, and the problem with teaching creationism as a more or less equal theory to evolution is that it tends to mislead people about how good the evidence is for evolution - there are still questions over certain elements but they are certainly not good enough to justify chucking out the whole theory.

Came onto this thread to mention Bill Hicks - but has been done already!

LOVE the idea the God was fucking with the creationists - "I'm just gonna bury me some brontysoorus heads".

And terrified that a man who believes this lunacy is in the White House.

Agree with Marina, Enid and Bill Hicks....

It should definitely not be on the science syllabus. Should either be in religious education, or perhaps another subject called "What loons believe" could be added to the syllabus?

hunker - loons is a bit harsh & judgemental imo.

am not loony, honest!! i really do believe that you can never know for sure that there's not a creator-god tho. i've never heard anything that persuades me otherwise on that, & i've only become a christian as an adult - from an atheist family. so i reckon i'm fairly open-minded really...

Roosmum - so how do you explain the fossils...?

on dinosaurs, i think there's some odd passage in the bible that mentions 'behemoth' or something like that - which could refer to dinos.

kathy, fossils i don't understand entirely, i'll be honest. i think they're sometimes explained in terms of the flood tho, iirc. something to do with massive environmental changes, shifts of landmass etc.
see, i look silly now don't i?!

man, i shoulda just parped this!

sorry!

basically, yes, they should be on the syllabus at least as part of the options.

fossils=evidence of the Flood - - whoever thought that up was a genius!

Not sure it works though

No. Hence, one of the many reasons I no longer live or will ever live in America again.

Parp!

I feel that it is lunacy to believe the Bible word for word. I'm sorry if that's upsetting.

No because it's not science!

I have the logic on this down pat too - have agrued it many times but could always have another go if there are any comers