brasilmagic.wordpress.com
The definition of culture from my Biological Anthropology (human evolution) class: Behavioral aspects of human adaptation, including technology, traditions, language, religion, marriage patterns, and social roles. Culture is a set of learned behaviors transmitted from one generation to the next by nonbiological (i.e., nongenetic) means.
Ew, how unromantic.
"Proponents of creation science are called 'creationists' because they explain the existence of the universe as the result of a sudden creation event, directed by an omnipotent, supernatural being, occurring over the source of six 24-hour days as described in the book of Genesis. The premise of creation science is that the biblical account of the earth's origins and the Noah flood can be supported by scientific evidence.
Creationists have insisted that what they used to call 'creation science' and now call 'intelligent design' (ID) is as much a scientific endeavor as is evolution, and that there's scientific evidence to support creationist views. They've argued that in the interest of fairness, a balanced view should be offered: If evolution is taught as science., then creationism should also be taught as science. Sounds fair, doesn't it? But 'creation science' or ID isn't science at all, for the simple reason that creationists insist that their view is absolute and infallible. Therefore, creationism isn't a hypothesis that can be tested, nor is it amenable to falsification. And, because hypothesis testing is the basis of all science, creationism, by its very nature, cannot be considered science." Introduction to Physical Anthropology
In my Biology class at my Christian high school, I had learned that Evolution was theory and not science for the same reason - it could not be tested because evolution and transmutation (the change of one species to another) happened over such long periods of time. It seems kind of silly to dismiss either point of view on such simple grounds.
I remember when I was little in our house in England we used to have a big book (I guess a biology textbook?) on our shelf with this picture of evolving man on the cover. I don't think it's the exact same one, but this version looks a lot like it. It used to fascinate me.
ReplyDeleteWell, primarily the problem is that nothing about Creation can be proved, and scientists have proved elements, or "links", in the evolutionary process.
ReplyDeleteCreationism started from reading the Bible and claims it can stand without an iota of proof - making it unscientific. It existed before science - in many religious variations and in many cultures.
Evolutionary Science started when scientists actually looked at the universe, at fossils, at biological patterns, at DNA and realized that things were not as Creationists had always claimed.
You can believe Creationism without knowing a thing about biology - you can't very well understand Evolution without also understanding biology.
They're just not even in the same category and shouldn't be taught as alternates of the other.
Just my take on the matter.