What is you opinion on teaching evolution in school?
Topic: A good hypothesis is based on
June 26, 2019 / By Marianne Question:
My sister n law is 16 years old and she said that her teacher wants to teach them evolution in high school...what are your opinions about this?
I appreciate everyone's opinion on this matter. All of you have made an excellent point in what you were saying. There is no right or wrong answer to this because it is based on opinions and beliefs. As for myself, I do not believe in evolution I believe we were all created out of the image of God. So, I will leave it up to everyone else to choose a best answer. Good Luck to you all and God bless!!
Best Answers: What is you opinion on teaching evolution in school?
Kolleen | 4 days ago
It can be taught as a scientific concept alongside any other scientific concept. It doesn't mean that you have to put aside your beliefs to merely consider this as a hypothesis.
We are all better off for having listened to and learned others' perspectives and opinions. That doesn't mean we have to adopot those perspectives and opinions as our own.
👍 136 | 👎 4
Did you like the answer? What is you opinion on teaching evolution in school?
Share with your friends
We found more questions related to the topic: A good hypothesis is based on
Originally Answered: Advice on School teaching Creation and Evolution?
Why are you so afraid of creation theories? Not everyone believes in evolution you know. I don't agree with teaching evolution as a fact because it's actually a scientific hypotheses and many people don't believe it. There is no reason for evolutionists to be intolerant toward religious belief and I think they should at least mention that there are various creation views and that it's ok not to believe in evolution. That is the only way to be tolerant of other people's beliefs. I mean, is it really going to hurt you to know that your point of view isn't the only one?
As a practicing Catholic I have no problem with this.I feel that evolution should be taught alongside all religions and beliefs because the whole concept of school is Education.
If we only teach our children in what we believe in that is short sighted and is short changing them.It does not give them the opportunity to
Think for themselves
Make decisions based on knowledge but instead of upbringing alone.
At 16 years old we are not in the primary school here.
Are we seriously sending these students on to University with only half a brain and filled with what we think fits nicely??
Cop yourselves on
👍 50 | 👎 3
To me, that's as silly a question as asking if the theory of gravity should be taught in schools. Of course it should! Evolution is part of science, and schools teach science. Public schools in the US do not teach religious education (even though some do offer classes in religion - but there's a difference) so they should not be teaching things like creationism (which is NOT a science, not anywhere close). But they have a responsibility to teach the prevailing theories and laws of science.
By the way, evolution is an observed FACT, not a theory. The theory of natural selection is the theory that explains how evolution happens. Also, you should know that a theory in science is a synthesis of a large body of information that encompasses well-tested hypotheses about certain aspects of the natural world. A scientific theory has been rigorously tested and passed all tests to date. A scientific theory is NOT just a guess, but a well-established explanation. The way a scientist uses the word theory is quite different from the way we use that word in our daily lives.
👍 47 | 👎 2
Evolution is a scientific theory. There's nothing wrong with teaching it as such. In fact, it's part of the curriculum in many districts. The important thing to remember is that the teacher must first make sure students understand the differences between scientific theories and laws. Most high school students are aware of the controversy regarding evolution and creationism and are capable of taking the information at face value. As a Christian and as a teacher, I see nothing wrong with teaching this theory.
👍 44 | 👎 1
We have to teach them evolution. It's the beginning of scientific education. I find it hard to believe there are people who seriously consider omitting the fact that we (and the rest of the world) have evolved over the course of time. If enough silly people start believing this, we might as well go back to the dark ages. Learn about evolution - it's so easy a cave man can do it.
👍 41 | 👎 0
Originally Answered: How Christian students deal between religion teaching and big bag-evolution teaching?
Do you realize that Albert Einstein called Big Bang "the most beautiful and satisfactory EXPLANATION OF CREATION to which I have ever listened."
The theory was originally proposed by a Catholic priest named Georges Lemaitre who studied at Cambridge and M.I.T. It DOES NOT CONFLICT with the Biblical creation account.
Part B... "Big Bang is NOT about the ORIGIN of the universe. It PRESUMES the existence of a "primordial black hole" --> MATTER.
While it SAYS NOTHING about the ORIGIN of that matter, it DOES attempt to explain HOW THAT MATTER CAME TO BE DISTRIBUTED as we now see it. Based on the theory, several things have been hypothesized which were later proven to be true, among them the fact that we live in an expanding universe and the cosmic radiation "echo of the Big Bang." EVERYTHING that has been observed by our "snapshot" of galactic / intergalactic history (our astronomical observations amount to about the same fraction of the lifetime of a galaxy as a photographic exposure is of a human lifetime) fits with Big Bang and many of the facts learned since Lemaitre proposed Big Bang were predicted based on it.
To say Big Bang does not conflict with the Bible's creation story says that this MAY BE an ACCURATE technical/mathematical description of GOD'S creation of the universe. The scant information provided in Genesis is not much different than the snapshot analogy I made earlier. We are given only a few sentences with very vague general descriptions of the events.
To take this snapshot and use it as a basis of an argument against "Big Bang" is to grossly misuse and misinterpret that text... but that has been going on with the Genesis account for thousands of years so why would it surprise us?