Odlov: Glad to see you have joined us
I do grow tired of people changing this subject into a 'it's either God or evolution' battle. Why? Because then people have to heavily fight for evolution since they now believe if they are wrong about that then suddenly they are wrong about there being a God. As stated earlier there are religions that do not refute evolution and view it as an explanation of how we (as humans) got here. Wouldn't it be better to rather look at evolution with the following mindset: 'If the theory is wrong, so what? It's wrong. We need do build a new theory based on facts. It doesn't automatically mean other theories are suddenly correct.'
I watched your video on evolution vs creationism. Nothing new there. Yes creationists bring up problems with the evolution theories. Yes some of the problems have been brought up and repeated for a long time. Again I say so what? Who cares from when or from whom the problems cited come form? Address the problems, not the people who bring them forth. Focus on solving the problems, not discrediting the people who oppose your views. A crude example: Let's say you have done experiments that showed water at sea level will freeze at 0 degrees Celsius and boils at 100 degrees C and the higher above sea level you go the lower the boiling point gets. You then build a theory that states the boiling point of water is dependent on altitude - as altitude is gained the boiling point gets lower. Now let's say I believe aliens put us here and live among us and I dedicate my life to trying to prove I am right. I now say: 'Hang on, I was in Hawaii at the beach and there the water boiled at 95 degrees. I believe (for whatever reason) this is because of the aliens.' Along with this statement I give some evidence. Does discrediting me bring you closer to the truth? No. Does discrediting me mean that what I found isn't true? No. Does this mean that the findings should be disregarded because I believe in something that is nonsense to you? No. Now let's say that you actually do look at the evidence and see that your theory needs a total overhaul and you find that altitude wasn't the reason for the differences in boiling temperature. Does this automatically mean that it was because of aliens? No. Did addressing the PROBLEM and building a new theory help you (and mankind) understand why water boils at different temperatures (pressure differentials)? Yes. If evolution over millions of years is proven to be true not all religions will simply break down. If it's proven wrong it doesn't mean that suddenly the existence of God has been proven.
Now I'll tell you why I see kids being forced to learn darwinism as a problem - it is a theory with quite a few gaps. Now if the kids are brought up to learn this theory as fact many of them will follow this line of thinking. If they pursue a career in biology after being force fed a theory and find some facts or evidence which contrasts the model, they might write it off as an anomaly, try to make those facts or evidence fit with the model or disregard it for whatever reason (pride, insecurity, keeping their job etc) instead of saying 'Hey, this actually causes a problem. Let's try to resolve it by looking for an alternative. Let's not try to make it fit with a standing model(and here I refer to both creationist theories as well as darwinist theories). Let's think outside the box. Let's look at the facts and try to make sense of that.'.
I quote Einstein: 'No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong'.
Again I refer to this link (
http://www.dinosauria.com/jdp/archie/scutes.htm). What happened to this research? I myself have not found much after this, yet the experiment suggests that dinosaurs might have evolved from birds (which seems to contrast what the MAJORITY believes) or that birds and dinosaurs have a common ancestor. If people are too heavily set on proving a theory they will find a way to make it fit or disregard findings. This is not the best way to move forward.
As for the kids I say again: Teach them about the organisms we have today. Teach them about what we see today. Have them understand how and why the organisms we have today function. After they understand these things, they can use that knowledge to look into the past and make sense of what has been found. If one really wants to teach evolution one has to go into many subjects regarding it (genetics, paleontology etc) to give a fair view and understanding of it. This is too vast for the curriculum.
Gormon: It is hard to say whether this world would be a better place without religion. Regardless of whether their beliefs are logical or true, I do believe that religion keeps a lot of people in check and many good deeds are a result of religion. Sadly many atrocities have been committed in the name of a God or for the sake of religion and for that there is no excuse, however one can not say that had there not been religion these atrocities would not have occured. Humans are simply that – human. With that comes our human pride, our human ambitions and our human sense of what is fair and just. I think that even without religion wars would still exist, cruelty would still exist and people would still attack one another simply using another reason. As for science and how it’s been held back – in the past that may certainly be true. In this day and age it might actually help to a degree by causing waves and stating the problems with whatever theories are brought up, so that those problems can be looked at. Calm seas make for poor sailors. Unfortunately politics and pride seem to have too great a role in this field and people are too focused on proving that what they put their faith in is right (and this goes for pro- and anti-evolutionists, atheists and religious people)
MeammeO: I already stated earlier that I think it better for students to study what can be observed in the here and now, so that would include the viruses you mentioned. I didn't say that evolution or adaptation can't be observed in the here and now. I am referring to the darwinist theories (millions of years, gradual evolution). Should it be taught the reasons for the theory AS WELL AS the problems with the theory should be taught. It shouldn't be one sided. This would be too vast for the curriculum.
'And I personally think it's weird, you can't just not teach a generally accepted and proven theory because of some butthurt christians. If you don't even want to hear anything about it you shouldn't go to school.'
Let's take another field - a pilot doesn't learn about early engines or early aircraft to understand why aircraft fly today. They learn about the aircraft we find today. The systems involved today. Why the systems that are used, work today. That's the focus. You do not have to know where it came from to understand why it flies. You can however use the knowledge you acquire to go back and look at how aircraft came to be what they are today by looking at aircraft designs of the past should you CHOOSE to do that. I am not against darwinism being taught in schools because of religion. At this point in my life I do not really care if it is proven right or not. I am against it because it can imprint upon the young minds that that is how it happened, even though quite a bit of conjecture is used. Please read the link I gave above and tell me what you think about it. Darwinism has too many gaps where conjecture is used for it to be taught as how things were. Teaching kids this theory instead of teaching them more about what can actually be observed in the here and now is wasteful. If you think spending time teaching kids this theory with it's gaps and conjecture, rather than broadening their knowledge on living specimens and why and how they function in the present we will have to agree to disagree. A better understanding of the present will aid in better understanding of the past. Give them that understanding of the present so that, in the future when they aren't as prone to being brainwashed, they can help man better understand the past.