Creationist Wikipedia
iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius
I don't know. I have never seen that issue analyzed.
However, my prediction would be that people who are homeschooled would be more likely to be creationists than the general population. I base that on the fact that a sizable percentage of parents who homeschool their children are fundamentalist (or sometimes conservative evangelical) Christians.
Probably so, but then they can go to college and get reverse indoctrinated too.
Concerning education level of homeschoolers: http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp
that much of God’s creation was designed for human
enjoyment and for God’s own enjoyment, as He declared
it ‘good’ several times before man was created. A field of
dandelions is a thing of beauty that is famous the world
over (and thus a favourite of photographers everywhere).
Evolutionists never have explained how and why so many
structures could exist in humans (like the complex
structures that enable music, song, and dance) that confirm
no survival advantage yet delight millions. Only Creation
can explain this observation.
I'm actually familiar with answers in genesis, though I am not satisfied with this answer as it is not scientific. I just read one article, however, and I plan to read more. Thank you for finding it for me.
No. Science class is for science. However, if you're going to teach the Christian concept of creationism, you have to teach them all since they are all equally valid.
A grad student from India wandered by and looked in to see what was going on - he had an engineering bachelors degree. I explained that this was to model erosion. He said he didn't believe in erosion. I looked at him in an incredulous way, and asked him how the Earth's landscapes got the way they are today. He said "The Gods" and walked off. That's why I said faith is the biggest opposition to science, not education.
That raises another question: Should we teach all theories of evolution in the classroom? Hindu creationism, Native American Creation beliefs, West African/Voudou ideas on the origins of the Earth? Or just stick to the science??
In science classes, just science.
In other kind of classes, creationism would fit better, i.e. philosophy, history, sociology, etc, not science.
_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?
richardbenson
Xfractor Card #351
Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,553
Location: Leave only a footprint behind
this is hilarious, so did man walk with dinosaurs?
does the bible talk about dinosaurs? i dont think so, but apparently man walked with them
http://www.creationmuseum.org/
and dont tell me the leviathin in the book of job is a dinosuar. thats BS
_________________
Winds of clarity. a universal understanding come and go, I've seen though the Darkness to understand the bounty of Light
does the bible talk about dinosaurs? i dont think so, but apparently man walked with them
http://www.creationmuseum.org/
and dont tell me the leviathin in the book of job is a dinosuar. thats BS
It is curious to see that, apparently, most don't deny the existence of dinosaurs now, instead, they give explanations that won't contradict the Bible, so there is the question of why no longer stating that dinasours didn't exist?
_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?
nominalist
Supporting Member
Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,740
Location: Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (born in NYC)
Sheesh. And this guy was a graduate student?
The data suggest that both biblical (and qur'ánic) literalism and education are involved. For instance, evangelical/fundamentalist Christians and religious Muslims with college degrees are more likely to reject creationism than those who only graduated high school (or didn't graduate high school).
There would not be enough time. You simply named a few of them. There are many, many more.
Personally, I have no problem with presenting views on origins in a comparative religions class or in a social problems class. As a college professor, I myself sometimes raise the issue in my social problems classes. I do, however, take issue with teaching religious views on human origins in biology or natural science classes.
High school or middle school students taking a biology class in the U.S. should, IMO, only be given information which is substantiated by mainstream, peer-reviewed scientific research. It is not the job of students to decided [edit:decide) between different models, especially when only one of them is scientific.
_________________
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. (retired tenured sociology professor)
36 domains/24 books: http://www.markfoster.net
Emancipated Autism: http://www.neurelitism.com
Institute for Dialectical metaRealism: http://dmr.institute
Last edited by nominalist on 11 Jan 2008, 6:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
In other kind of classes, creationism would fit better, i.e. philosophy, history, sociology, etc, not science.
Although that applies to secular education, now christian-religious schools are a different thing I guess, I suppose they could teach both, evolution, because it would be really necessary to study it in some cases I suppose.
_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?
richardbenson
Xfractor Card #351
Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,553
Location: Leave only a footprint behind
_________________
Winds of clarity. a universal understanding come and go, I've seen though the Darkness to understand the bounty of Light
nominalist
Supporting Member
Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,740
Location: Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (born in NYC)
The Christian creationists do not agree among themselves on creationism. There are numerous versions. There are young-earth, old-earth, gap, intelligent design, progressive, and day-age creationists. There are even creationists who believe that the earth is flat (seriously) and creationists who believe in geocentrism (in this case, that the earth is the center of the entire universe).
With respect to that last version, there was a guy on Paltalk who used to post this website all the time which tried to scientifically demonstrate that the earth was the center of the universe. It was quite entertaining. Here it is:
http://www.geocentricity.com/
And this one is also weird:
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/geocentr.htm
_________________
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. (retired tenured sociology professor)
36 domains/24 books: http://www.markfoster.net
Emancipated Autism: http://www.neurelitism.com
Institute for Dialectical metaRealism: http://dmr.institute
Anubis
Veteran
Joined: 6 Sep 2006
Age: 135
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,911
Location: Mount Herculaneum/England
http://www.geocentricity.com/
The Church Was Right
http://theflatearthsociety.org/
Its very surprising what you can find on the internet.
_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?
nominalist
Supporting Member
Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,740
Location: Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas (born in NYC)
There is more than one such society on the Internet. That one is more free-form. However, there are some "flat earth societies" which are explicitly Christian fundamentalist.
_________________
Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. (retired tenured sociology professor)
36 domains/24 books: http://www.markfoster.net
Emancipated Autism: http://www.neurelitism.com
Institute for Dialectical metaRealism: http://dmr.institute
With ref to "galileowaswrong.com";
The popular french science magazine "Science et Avenir", carried an article about a year ago exploring just such an issue,( tho' not the religious version, ) of recent scientific doubts being cast on galileos theories, specifically that element which states all laws stay same in all directions everywhere.
A couple of, maybe a few, ( vaguely remember 3 or 4 names) scientists , aswell as a research team somewhere ( i can't remember names, and don't have the copy cos was from library), have developed a new theory that as move away from earth , in any direction, some laws of physics do change, ever so slightly.
Apparently it was supposed to be a not impossible new theory which would make redundant the complex and completely unproven string theory, ( conceived as solution to the conflict between "big" and "little" science ), and the magazine cover had huge headlines about it.
It was kind of weird, because did suddenly "feel" the world shift on its axis in imagining this, that from our own measuring point, by using our own measurement system, we ARE the centre of the universe. That using our own, and only, systems of observation ( in other words our "experience" )we "are" at the centre, and that the conflicts/contradictions between close up/sub-atomic etc and very big can only be resolved if include this "warp" in our calculations. Try saying "we are the centre of the universe" a few times. It feels strange, but exciting.
I don't know how much evidence they had nor how much support in general there is for this, but the article treated it as a potentially important change in scientific understanding.
I don't know what has happened to the idea since.
I think it may have been connected to this,
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=000 ... 000&page=1
it sounds familiar, but i read about it in french, and with an even more popularist treatment, which extrapolated to the idea of "us" being at centre of universe because the further away from us in time and space go the more the constants are different, and for us to exist we needed these particular ones, or something like that.
I read somewhere in 2005 that around 30%-40% of practicing scientists held a Biblical view of Creation,
G.I.G.O. You have bad sources of information.
_________________
"The christian god is a being of terrific character; cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust" - Thomas Jefferson
30%-40% is a big number, they wouldn't be real scientists though, if they are limited to what religion says, they certainly would not follow the parameters of the scientific method in their work, because of that.
_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?