Stephanie,
I believe that in teaching science one goal should be for the student to
understand not just what scientists believe but why. Rather than being
dogmatic, presuppositions should be admitted and unanswered questions
mentioned. The student can decide for himself whether he agrees with the
presuppositions and follows the reasoning.
Scientific creationism (flood geology) might better be covered in a course
in history. I don't want it taught anywhere because people assume that it
must come from the Bible, and when they see that it is not true, they
assume that the Bible is not true. Flood geology was developed by George
McCready Price, a Seventh Day Adventist, whose ideas can be traced to the
writings of Ellen White, and its main thesis cannot be reconciled with the
Bible in any credible way.
Gordon Brown
Department of Mathematics
University of Colorado
Boulder, CO 80309-0395
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Stephanie Burke wrote:
> I am interested in soliciting opinions from ASA membership regarding the
> teaching of evolution vs. creation science/creationism in American public
> schools. Some questions to consider...
>
> As "scientists teaching in the Christian perspective" how do you personally
> handle teaching evolution, which most view as being in direct opposition to
> the origins of life as outlined by the Bible?
>
> What SHOULD be taught in public schools? Creationism? Evolution? Or a
> combination of both?
>
> Is there a way to present creationism in a non-biased, non-partisan way which
> will not be misinterpreted by public school administration as forcing certain
> religious views upon students?
>
> Is it a violation of the First Amendment to teach creationism in
> governmentally funded public schools? Do you view this as an issue of the
> "separation of church and state?"
>
> Any feedback would be greatly appreciated... thanks...
>
>
Received on Tue Mar 15 18:49:22 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 15 2005 - 18:49:22 EST