Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
No. My point has always been that the people who rise to the bait of calling people who believe in creationism idiots, themselves typically are just buying into evolution based upon FAITH, and no more.
What is different between laying out in school 1 the primordial ooze theory, which is untestable and really just hindsight reconstruction to explain something non-creationists want explained and 2 maybe God started stuff and it evolved from there and he came back occasionally to prod (i.e. Organ systems start).
They are both non-testable and both solely faith based. Why should one be taught but not the other?
|
I don't know the "primordial ooze theory". Can you provide a cite?
You can teach "maybe God started stuff and it evolved from there and he came back occasionally to prod (i.e. Organ systems start)" all you want - in religion class. Again, it does not belong in science class.
You are going to come back with, Well, how does evolution belong in science class then? Depending on your definition of "primordial ooze theory", I am guessing I would say either you are mischaracterizing evolution or you are wrong - it is testable, but I await the cite.
