Science is based on known facts. Scientific are theories that use facts to either prove or disaprove. Creationism is based on tale. Creationism belongs in Sunday school. Not a classroom.
johno - 12 years ago
The "science" you mentioned, yes.
They are ALL theories.
Why can't all theories be discussed, or none of them?
D Bunker Monquis - 12 years ago
Tennessee wants to enhance science understanding. Those demanding the evillusionism critics be ignored are the politically-motivated science censors. They know their argument can't stand up to the first logical question. If Darwinism explains how we got here, life from nonlife and then transmutaion of existing species into novel kinds, then where did the complex information found in living cells come from. In all real fields of science, information content considerations is a respected characteristic of our universe. It's called apparent, a mirage only in efoolusionary biology class, and such a feared concept they will sue the pants off anyone daring to open their mouth about it. Students see through the blather and want to know how such an unscientific, free-lunch teaching ever got started. Observed effects still need sufficient explanations--that's real science today as in the beginning.
Rick - 12 years ago
How can even two people believe that teachers can ignore science and teach fairy tales to the students. I sure don't want them to teach the supernatural to my kids.
Science is based on known facts. Scientific are theories that use facts to either prove or disaprove. Creationism is based on tale. Creationism belongs in Sunday school. Not a classroom.
The "science" you mentioned, yes.
They are ALL theories.
Why can't all theories be discussed, or none of them?
Tennessee wants to enhance science understanding. Those demanding the evillusionism critics be ignored are the politically-motivated science censors. They know their argument can't stand up to the first logical question. If Darwinism explains how we got here, life from nonlife and then transmutaion of existing species into novel kinds, then where did the complex information found in living cells come from. In all real fields of science, information content considerations is a respected characteristic of our universe. It's called apparent, a mirage only in efoolusionary biology class, and such a feared concept they will sue the pants off anyone daring to open their mouth about it. Students see through the blather and want to know how such an unscientific, free-lunch teaching ever got started. Observed effects still need sufficient explanations--that's real science today as in the beginning.
How can even two people believe that teachers can ignore science and teach fairy tales to the students. I sure don't want them to teach the supernatural to my kids.