skeptiform5
Scholar
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2009
- Messages
- 58
I would teach both sides if necessary but I would tell the students which one is the most accepted and which one isn't. I would start of the term by explaining in basic terms that 'god did it' and leave it at that. Is that incorrect or unfair? I don't believe I need to go in to deeper detail, for example I won't say 'the universe had to be created by a creator' because when I get to the scientific explanation I would explain that. The rest of th time I would concentrate on the actual science.
But I did say 'if necessary' which it never should be. I also mentioned the words ‘actual science’, science should be able to be disproved with certain evidence. For example if you find a prehistoric bunny, evolution is down the drain but I doubt any evidence would destroy creationism. It also has to be supported or can be proved by experiments, which it isn’t. Every theory must be able to allow change with new discoveries but creationism is meant to never change.
But I did say 'if necessary' which it never should be. I also mentioned the words ‘actual science’, science should be able to be disproved with certain evidence. For example if you find a prehistoric bunny, evolution is down the drain but I doubt any evidence would destroy creationism. It also has to be supported or can be proved by experiments, which it isn’t. Every theory must be able to allow change with new discoveries but creationism is meant to never change.