Sentences with phrase «creationism does»

Because it requires supernatural explanations of natural phenomena, creationism does not meet these standards.

All creationism does is attempt to use the same lame questions and make it appear that Evolution isn't real without offering any evidence to show that creationism is real.

A large reason for my move to atheism is my occupation within the biological industry, which the fundamentalist view of creationism doesn't hold up.

Creationism does NOT belong in a public school classroom.

Anyone who attempts to legitamize creationism does not deserve to hold public office as they are a danger to society.

The problem is that Creationism doesn't stop at «why»; it claims to answer the «how» and the «when» with religious dogma from a pre-science cosmogonic myth.

But science does not accept an answer without evidence for the comfort of having an answer, like creationism does.

Creationism doesn't.

Christians need to realize that a poetic interpretation of the story of creationism does not mean that God doesn't exist.

Dalahäst To me, creationism does conflict with science and, with roughly 40 % of the USA still falling under this category, that's a significantly larger number than your Doctor is implying.

Teaching evolution and ridiculing creationism does not test the limits of academic freedom in public or private institutions.

I wonder then why Mr. Nye is wasting so much oxygen complaining about the great «harm» the teaching of Creationism does to children... though I may not personally agree with the tenets of Creationism, I do believe in the right of parents to pass their personal religious beliefs on to their children - whether those beliefs are Christian, Hindu, Muslim, etc....

Creationism does nothing but teach ignorance of science and fact.

No, creationism doesn't hold back science.

I agree with you David, that creationism doesn't belong in the science classroom.

@ Ken, just because one doesn't believe in creationism does not mean one lacks human decency where they become immoral.

My point is that creationism does not belong to the science classroom, because it is NOT science and us not based on scientific evidences.

Creationism does no such thing, it does not rationally explain anything AT ALL.

Have we ever thought that maybe the Creationism does have evidence, but our science has not «evolved» enough to identify it?

creationism doesn't even have a seat at the same table.

2) Creationism does not «hold its ground today».

We can make a prediction and see if the available evidence confirms or rejects the prediction; evolution passes that test, creationism does not.

It just goes to show you, I guess, that even Christian scientists who believe in creationism don't know everything.

Not exact matches

Bottom line is this, keep it out of the public square; learn to respect others beliefs / disbeliefs; stop trying to tell LGBT they are wrong; stop trying to tell women what they can and can't do with their bodies; stop trying to push bogus creationism crap (backed with zero evidence) on innocent children in the public school system; just stop pushing it outside your home or church.

Do I have belief in a God of long ago being the Originator of Creationism..?

If you do Creationism you have to go through other faith's take on the creation of the universe as well and that wont give our kids the much needed brain power they need to get us out this funk!

@Topher It seems that before Ken Ham started his own project over there at AIG, he worked for the Insti / tute for Creation Research, which basically does the same thing as the Discovery Insti / tute — namely, try to create a «sciencey» veneer for Young Earth Creationism.

Biblical creationism just does not hold up to this scrutiny.

The problem with creationism is that it does NOT allow for new learning.

I agree with you but would advise caution with the statement «I don't think Christians do themselves any favors...» since many would interpret that to mean that believing in creationism is part of Christianity.

Mr. Ham is something of an extremist in his views, and advocating a form of creationism that, if true, would seem to mean that God has deceived us by creating a universe that doesn't align with at least some of the causal relationships science has identified.

I don't belive in creationism, but I do think ID has true merit.

Nye wasn't there to debate whether or not people should be allowed to believe in Creationism... he was simply there to challenge, as has always had to be done, the idea that beliefs should be taught right alongside science as though the two were not mutually exclusive.

We don't like seeing creationism being described as having the same scientific validity as evolution, when in fact it has no scientific validity at all.

Creationism is not technically theory because the evidence doesn't back it up.

However, this does not imply some of the more ridiculous tenets of creationism (such as man walking with dinosaurs or the world being 6000 years old) should be objectively viewed as truth when all evidence points to evolution as fact.

DEMFL... actually, I don't believe in creationism.

It takes just as much faith to believe in evolution as it does to believe in Creationism because of one simple fact not one of you were there so who is right!

If he had asked the question you're posing, then yes, I would agree that «creationism» should be taught under Religious Education or Religious Studies as it obviously does not fall under Science.

I want everyone who acts as if this type of thinking is inconsequential to consider this: To accept creationism requires a complete disregard for carefully and elegantly researched scientific evidence, and 40 + % of people in America do so.

You don't seem to realize that Ham's Creationism involves a Universe that is less than 10,000 years ago and a human race that is entirely descended from 3 breeding pairs of humans 4,000 years ago wherein all the males were 1st order relatives.

Please point to a single scholarly paper on scientific creationism published in a reputable scientific journal that successfully concludes with «some god did it.»

That doesn't make creationism wrong, but let's not confuse a scientific theory with an extraordinary claim that by definition can not be disproved.

And I guess you «don't care» about teaching Creationism in public schools because you aren't in public school anymore.

Creationism has nothing to do with science.

Ohhh, is that what you were doing in the Dove school district when Christians tried to force creationism into the public school science curricula?

Then mankind does learn what atoms, the very seeds of all Creationism are!

God doesn't force us to believe, why should you force others to believe in Creationism or deny Evolution?

When Muslims become 80 % of the population, try and push creationism and other myths into our science classes, force their god on our currency, take over our government as you Christians do then they'll be in the bulls eye.

I do so love the ideologies around the principalities of godliness but I can admit that I hate the God who established all of celestial creationism (s).