Theory Of Evolution example essay topic

In my humble opinion, I think public schools have the right to teach about anything they want. Hence the word "public" schools, parents should have that authority as to whether or not they want their child to attend a school where teachings can get disobedient to their religious belief or not. That's why there is a private school. Anybody can believe in God. But, when there is an answer to a problem or issue that is proven to be correct, then why not rely on that as well. My reasoning is as follows: No creationist, to my knowledge, has given an example of any evidence that, if found, would falsify a young earth or a global flood, in spite of being asked repeatedly.

But of course there are all sorts of possible observations that would refute these theories. If creationists really, truly believed in these things, then they would readily respond to the challenge by offering a statement of potential falsehood, in the certain knowledge that the falsifying evidence has not and would never be found. Their reluctance to do so reveals that deep down; they know that their ideas would not stand up to scrutiny. Evolution is a theory based on the evidence at hand (fossil record, genetic data, age of earth / universe etc).

The basic idea is evolution is science, it's tested, it stands up to the questions, and it's able to adapt to take new input to expand our knowledge. Creation is a theory that is declared by religion, and then spends all its time desperately trying to defend itself. Science never works by absolute certainty or 'truth', but it does work by proposing models that have empirical consequences, and we can have considerable confidence in various models which have been stringently tested and explored. Evolution is one such; it stands in relation to biology pretty much as the periodic table stands in relation to chemistry.

Please be respectful and admit that some very talented people have some very good ideas on the creationist side. I must admit that it is the same for evolution. Ultimately, neither creation nor evolution wins. Each side is NEVER able to even approach a single universal and self evident fact without using evidence, experience, faith, or heresy. Public schools seem to be so horrifically oblivious to the idea of sensitivity.

Science isn't the process where we prove what's right and wrong. Science is the process by which we determine which model is the most accurate description of reality. That doesn't mean that the model is true in every respect; it means that it explains all the data we have and makes predictions about data we might find in the future. Evolution does that. Creationism does not. That's what we mean when we say that evolution is 'true' - that's shorthand for 'evolution is an accurate description of the history of species on Earth.

Creationism is contradicted by much evidence. It's not an accurate description of the history of species on Earth, unlike evolution. We can't know if it's 'right' or 'wrong', but it's certainly inaccurate. Evolution is both fact and theory.

The fact is, evolution has occurred. The way we describe that, the way we model it as the result of processes called 'natural selection' and 'random mutation', is the theory of evolution. It's like the difference between a map and the territory it represents. The theory of evolution is our model of the biological reality of evolution. Yes, just like gravity is a theory (the theory of relativity), germs are a theory (germ theory of disease), and molecules are a theory (kinetic theory of gases.) Theory doesn't mean 'guess' or 'speculation'. (If that's what we meant, we'd say 'hypothesis' or 'conjecture'.) Theory means 'explanatory model.

' A conjecture only becomes a theory when it's been confirmed both by repeating the observations and substantiating the predictions.