Should we or should we not be teaching fixed earth creationism in schools in the USA?

Question

I became aware from a student moving in here from Mississippi about the fixed earth creation story I was wondering why I was not taught this in my own school as a kid and I thought maybe the sprit of God was filling me to go to the fair education institute and order some of these textbooks and demand they be taught here in Michigan as well

Visit http://www.fixedearth.com and enlighten yourself the bible taught things we are only discovering today

Some twenty years of investigating claims that the the Earth rotates on an axis and orbits the Sun, and that the universe began evolving 15 billion years ago and is 15 billion light years thick, have left me without the slightest doubt:
a) That The Earth Is Not Moving;
b) That the Bible’s repeated declarations that it is the Sun that moves and not the Earth are absolutely accurate;
c) That the Big Bang Model ruling today’s cosmology is handcuffed to the Copernican Heliocentricity Model;
d) That both of these Models are built solely on contra-scientific assumptions held together by occult mathematics and fraudulent use of computerized technology
e) That those deceptive and vulnerable assumptions now undergird the entirety of modern man’s "knowledge"
f) That both the Heliocentricity and the Big Bang Models represent the fulfillment of a "creation scenario" of Kabbalic Judaism masquerading as "science"
g) That the purpose of this hidden religious agenda has been to destroy the "creation scenario" of the Bible and thereby destroy the credibility of the rest of the Bible right on through Jesus and the New Testament....
h) That the time for all who love truth over deception to give this issue their most careful and prayerful attention is now. This is especially true for all Christians who realize that their religion stands or falls on the the restoration of the absolute credibility of the Bible. This Biblical non-moving Earth issue alone can force that restoration and expose all the lies now connected with evolution-based false science (I Tim. 6:20,21).

Answer 1

I did check out the link you have given. Cannot find, in the link, any published scientific papers giving any evidence from repeated experiments on any of what you state. Lots of opinions. I did find the following:



"In The Earth Is Not Moving (pp.207-214) there is a piece entitled "Eclipses" wherein I attempted to show that the direction of the moon’s shadow on the earth during a solar eclipse would be different in the heliocentric model from what it actually is, thereby revealing a classic flaw in the heliocentricity model.



Alas, it turns out that the direction is the same in both the geocentric and the heliocentric models, and I regret that error."



Seems this was an error. There are other examples, too numerous to state here.

Answer 2

You should not, because it does not reflect reality. Perhaps just brush upon it in Religious Studies, because (really bizarrely) enough people do believe it to make it worthy of mention, but certainly not in a science class, which is supposed to tell children about the world as it is, not as we would wish it to be.



Let's go through your monumental errors point by point, shall we? I doubt it'll change your mind, because as the adage goes you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. But I feel it's important to try, just in case.



a) Yes it is. The theories of gravity that have sent men to the Moon, probes into interstellar space, and countless objects into orbit around our own planet pretty much confirm that yes, the Earth *must* move. If it didn't, we would literally have to start physics from scratch again. Even if we don't take into account planetary orbits, sufficiently large earthquakes cause the Earth to shake about and can even knock its spin slightly off its axis.



c) God, am I only on C? Oh well, on we go. Not really, no. The big bang theory has little to do with the mechanics of our own solar system and instead looks at the observed expansion of our universe and asks "what would happen if we assume that had always been happening?" From it comes predictions which have since also been observed, such as the existence of black holes (which used to be something of a stumbling block for the singularity central to the theory) and Cosmic Microwave Background energy. That last one is pretty cool - tune an analogue radio to between stations and listen to the static. About 1% of that noise is energy from the formation of the universe (the rest is from the Sun and local sources like electrical devices etc). The theory either must be right, or something incredibly similar, which also predicts the things it predicts, must be right. Suffice to say, it has to be pretty close.



d) Why am I torturing myself like this? This one is just nonsense not worthy of sensible refutation. What I will say, though, is that this "science is all evil! mentality is what a certain early Muslim cleric said, plunging the areas dominated by that religion into a huge intellectual dark age, and passing the torch of enlightenment to the West (after a fashion). It's worryingly anti pretty much everything we value in today's society

f) The pain! The unendurable pain! The fact that the originators of these theories were Christians doesn't put you off this theory, at all? I want you to know that what I'm about to say is not an ad hominem, because I'm not dismissing your argument because of it. Rather, I'm dismissing you because of your argument. You are a four star ocean going, nuclear fuel burning, delusional lunatic.



g) Can't... type... so much... stupid... Let me get this straight. Jews... are trying... to discredit the Creation story given... in the Torah? So they can discredit... The New Testament? I think my brain is trying to escape out of my ears. That's so monumentally insane it deserves some sort of - well, a monument. A towering obelisk reaching to the Moon in recognition of your spectacular insanity.



h) Life force fading... all systems... losing power... Actually there is an important issue to address even here, and that is the history of philosophy. Philosophy used to be entirely governed by divine revelation. "It's like this because God says so". We see this throughout the Old Testament, as well as in many contemporary works from various cultures. Then the Greeks had this idea that perhaps they could discover things about the world and started thinking about how to deduce what was, and was not, on their own. They suddenly weren't saying "Mathematics work because God says so", they were trying to come up with an independent theory of mathematics. Sometimes they took it a bit far, like Pythagoras' scary murder cult of triangles (seriously!), but still, they dropped divine revelation when they discovered thinking. It is this sort of thought (sans the murder) that brought us to the modern age, with all the technology we know and love. Not just these computers, but all the medicine we use to stay alive. What you are espousing is a return to an age of being not so much the people looking at the shadows on the wall in Plato's famous cave, but of being the shadows themselves, or even less, intellectually. It's a gigantic leap backwards almost to when people weren't quite yet people. It is, quite frankly, disgusting.



tl;dr: You are both a terrible human being and very, very wrong.



Had to take some points out because Yahoo said my answer was too long.

Answer 3

For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the religious nature of ID [intelligent design] would be readily apparent to an objective observer, adult or child. (page 24)



A significant aspect of the IDM [intelligent design movement] is that despite Defendants' protestations to the contrary, it describes ID as a religious argument. In that vein, the writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity. (page 26)



The evidence at trial demonstrates that ID is nothing less than the progeny of creationism. (page 31)



The overwhelming evidence at trial established that ID is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory. (page 43)



Throughout the trial and in various submissions to the Court, Defendants vigorously argue that the reading of the statement is not 'teaching' ID but instead is merely 'making students aware of it.' In fact, one consistency among the Dover School Board members' testimony, which was marked by selective memories and outright lies under oath, as will be discussed in more detail below, is that they did not think they needed to be knowledgeable about ID because it was not being taught to the students. We disagree. .... an educator reading the disclaimer is engaged in teaching, even if it is colossally bad teaching. .... Defendants' argument is a red herring because the Establishment Clause forbids not just 'teaching' religion, but any governmental action that endorses or has the primary purpose or effect of advancing religion. (footnote 7 on page 46)



After a searching review of the record and applicable caselaw, we find that while ID arguments may be true, a proposition on which the Court takes no position, ID is not science. We find that ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science. They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; (2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980s; and (3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community. …It is additionally important to note that ID has failed to gain acceptance in the scientific community, it has not generated peer-reviewed publications, nor has it been the subject of testing and research. Expert testimony reveals that since the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries, science has been limited to the search for natural causes to explain natural phenomena. (page 64) [for "contrived dualism", see false dilemma.]



[T]he one textbook [Pandas] to which the Dover ID Policy directs students contains outdated concepts and flawed science, as recognized by even the defense experts in this case. (pages 86–87)



ID's backers have sought to avoid the scientific scrutiny which we have now determined that it cannot withstand by advocating that the controversy, but not ID itself, should be taught in science class. This tactic is at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard. The goal of the IDM is not to encourage critical thought, but to foment a revolution which would supplant evolutionary theory with ID. (page 89)



Accordingly, we find that the secular purposes claimed by the Board amount to a pretext for the Board's real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom, in violation of the Establishment Clause. (page 132)

Answer 4

while i do not necessarily share all your views. i think it is highly unscientific the way that young people are currently taught, i think that while they only teach one view that is evolution in schools surely this is unscientific, surely it would be more scientific to show them all the views and then show them why scientists agree and disagree with various views. frankly i think to do otherwise is precisely the indoctrination of children that dawkins constantly argues is wrong. i heard somewhere a little while ago that one of the ministers for education in England was fired because he suggested that creationism should be discussed in lessons even though he is a devout evolutionist. if they aren't even willing to discuss it, how could they possibly claim to be scientific. when i have children i don't want to impress upon them my views, i want them to know the truth, whatever it is,and to do that they need to look at all of the options and be rigorously critical of all of them, as i have tried (and im sure failed) to do so. i have lots of issues with science in modern day but one of my biggest is the way they treat information. if they are so arrogant that they deem there no possibility that they could be wrong, then i deem them unqualified, because in that moment you cannot possibly be exogesic in your work.

Answer 5

Its really hard to practice both in education ( THE MAN POWER that are needed )



Plus they dont mix well... with so many race and religion . eg Student and Teacher Rights ( You know what i mean )



That one of the main reason school today practice academia teaching where religion's dogmatic points of view were no longer thrust upon students in the examination of their subjects of study. Points of view became more varied as students were free to wander in thought without having to add religious dimensions to their conclusions. ( rather than mandate a fixed "curriculum" for all students. )



Best to keep it at religious schools

Answer 6

Nice joke but evolution is a FACT because we have independently verifiable evidence. Does the Bible?

Answer 7

Fixed Earth Creation is complete nonsense. Just another attempt by pathetic creationists to lie to make their beliefs true.

Answer 8

You realize that the pope doesn't believe literally in creationism right?

Answer 9

That is fine. Just keep it to yourself if you visit another country where they have a nasty sense of humour. Like the UK.

Answer 10

We should, if we want to create a nation of intellectual zombies. We're about halfway there now.

Answer 11

I pledge allegiance to the PUPPY.

Of the Puppy States of America.

And to the Puppy

For Which it Stands.

One Puppy, Under Puppy

With Liberty and Justice

For Puppy

Answer 12

what kind of a Moronic Troll believes in fixed earth creationism



Oh,,YOUR Kind of Troll.....LOL!!

Answer 13

Teach FACTS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVEN & VERIFIED.



Evolution IS A PROVEN FACT



Creationism is NOT A PROVEN FACT, it's just a BELIEF.

Answer 14

It must be hard to type in a straight jacket

Answer 15

Try asking again later.

Answer 16

CREATIONISM, SCIENCE & QURAN: The Holy Quran is Revealed from the Only One God Allah (Who Created you, me and whole universe) thru Angel Gabriel to Prophet Mohammed (Peace be upon Him) since 1400 years which is unchanged a single word from it's original in Arabic. Holy Quran Verses are Scientifically Proofed.

CREATIONISM:

EVOLUTION is NOT correct. Some years before US Scientists and Doctors tried to transplant a monkey's heart to a Child. It didn't support. Because, the monkey's heart has 3 rooms. But the human's heart has 4 rooms. Also they tried to transfer monkey's blood to humans. Also didn't fit.

The Only One God Allah (Who Created you, me and whole universe) Says in Quran Chapter 51 Verse 56: And I did not create the jinn and mankind except to worship (obey) Me.



Quran&Science: The Only One God Allah Says in Holy Quran: Chapter 6 Verse 2. He it is Who has created you from clay,...

32:8 Then He made his offspring from semen of worthless water (male and female sexual discharge).

9. Then He fashioned him in due proportion, and breathed into him the soul (created by Allah for that person), and He gave you hearing (ears), sight (eyes) and hearts. Little is the thanks you give!

82:7 Who created you, fashioned you perfectly, and gave you due proportion;

8. In whatever form He willed, He put you together.

- There are some more Quran Verses about Chromosome.

- There are Verses about Universe. Check thru "SearchTruth" site: 2:117, 3:47, 6:73, 19:35 & 40:68 .... When He Decrees, He only says to it : "Be!" - and it is.

SPEED OF LIGHT: (A Day equals to 1000 Years) Chapter 22 Verse 47. ....And indeed, a day with your Lord is like a thousand years of those which you count.

32:5. ....it will ascend to Him in a Day, the extent of which is a thousand years of those which you count. (Proofs given in Source).



64;2 He it is Who created you, then some of you are disbelievers and some of you are believers. And Allah is All-Seer of what you do.



Speed of Light Calculation: http://in.search.yahoo.com/search?p=Quran%20and%20Speed%20of%20Light%20Calculation

CREATING UNIVERSE: 7:54. Indeed, your Lord is Allah , who created the heavens and earth in six days and then established Himself above the Throne. He covers the night with the day, [another night] chasing it rapidly; and [He created] the sun, the moon, and the stars, subjected by His command. Unquestionably,..

10:3, 11:7, 25:59, 32:4 & 50:38 : He who created the heavens and the earth and what is between them in six days and then...

Created Earth in Two Days : 41:9. Say, "Do you indeed disbelieve in He who created the earth in two days and attribute to Him equals? That is the Lord of the worlds."



GOD DIDN'T TAKE REST ON 7TH DAY. IF HE TOOK, WHO TAKE CARE OF THE CREATIONS, CREATED BY HIM ON THAT DAY/



If He took rest, who took care of His Creations & Creating?

Verse 10. And He placed on the earth firmly set mountains over its surface, and He blessed it and determined therein its [creatures'] sustenance in four days without distinction - for [the information] of those who ask.

Verse 12. And He completed them as seven heavens within two days and inspired in each heaven its command. And We adorned the nearest heaven with lamps and as protection. That is the determination of the Exalted in Might, the Knowing.

EXPANDING UNIVERSE: Chapter 51 Verse 47. With power did We construct the heaven. Verily, We are Able to extend the vastness of space thereof.

NASA PROOFS: UNIVERSE IS EXPANDING: http://in.search.yahoo.com/search?p=NASA%20Proofs:%20Universe%20is%20expanding

ALIENS: Chapter 42 Verse 29 (Click Links).

Click read all the links given to understand the TRUTHS.

QURAN & SCIENTIFIC PROOFS:

Quran and Embryology: http://in.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A8pWB9p8yt1PJnUAqnC7HAx.?p=Quran%20and%20embryology&fr2=sb-top&fr=sfp&vm=r&rd=r1

Watch Dr Zakir Naick's Debates: http://in.search.yahoo.com/search?p=Dr%20Zakir%20Naik%20debates%20in%20Youtube

Islam is growing fast in the world. Click for for Islamification NOT Islamfobia:

http://in.video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?p=Youtube+Why+Became+Muslims&fr=&fr2=piv-web

Answer 17

Please post this "question" in the science section if you dare...