Page 4
University Daily Kansan, March 30, 1981
Opinion
Science, not theology
If God indeed created the world in seven days, perhaps he should have added an eighth day—one in which people could argue over what happened on the previous seven days.
Years ago, people argued when a spanking-new theory called evolution began raising eyebrows. And they're arguing still, now about whether evolution should be taught as gospel truth (so to speak) or whether the biblical account of creationism should be taught in public schools, too.
At issue are some such time-honored concepts as the separation of church and state; freedom of religion; the progress of science; and who should set the standards for public education. Touching on these issues at a recent trial, creationists asked for equal time in science classes.
In answer to those who'd like to see textbooks detailing fig leaves alongside
Darwin: Yes, creationism is merely an explanation for how man can come about—just as evolutionism is an explanation. But as an explanation, creationism is religion, and the courts have said on a number of occasions that religion belongs in the church and in the home, not in the curriculum of public schools.
Science classes are, after all, for the teaching of science, not theology.
And even if creationism were taught in public schools, just whose version of the Bible would prevel? And why would the creation stories of other major world religions be excluded—after all, they're just as scientific. And why wouldn't the ancient creationist mythology be taught—Prometheus, Cronus, Zeus and the rest?
Science classes aren't trying to destroy religion. They're simply trying to educate students in modern science, just as students can be educated in religion elsewhere.
Creationism's a fine theory but not right for classrooms
Redford and Hoffman are cruising through Georgetown as woodward and Bernstein. Redford thinks he's cracked the case. Hoffman needs more evidence.
"Look," says Redford in exasperation, "if you go to bed and then isn't snow on the ground, and when you wake up the next morning, there is snow on the ground, you can
AMY HOLLOWELL
safely say it snowed during the night, even though you didn't actually see it snow,
Hoffman besithetly agrees, and a little scientific assuming takes the reporters a long way—all the way, in fact, to the President of the United States. All of the right pieces fell into the right places and the mystery was solved, thanks to the Redford snowfall theory
If only these guys would make a tab at the origin of our species; the Great Unsolved Mystery could use some Redfordian theorizing.
Not that this, man's greatest enigma, has anything at all to do with snowfall or corrupt politics or that movie stars and journalists all in all where we came from. Surely this is jist.
But what isn't just is that no one knows for sure where we're coming from or how we got here. No one, it seems, was awake during the night when it happened.
Everyone has a theory, though. There are big bans and apes and dinosaurs and supernatural forces, depending on which book one reads, and for every convinced author, there is a convinced following. Everybody's got the answer, or so they think.
So then the question is, what do teachers teach? What should they answer when the kids start asking about origins? There isn't, of course, a simple answer.
However, in America, we have a very basic principle in our Constitution that makes a teacher's job perhaps a bit easier. That is, in America, we have a firm dedication to the church and state. We believe in the individual's freedom to believe what he wants to believe.
We do not, therefore, teach religion in our public schools. We should not, therefore, teach religion.
as creatismism, in our public schools. Such theories have no place in science class, any more than evolution theory has a place in Sunday school.
Not that creationism may not be a valid theory, but it is one based on religious beliefs, beliefs which are not necessarily embraced by every student in a public classroom. If it is included in public curriculum, it should be offered as religious theory, along with the theories of other religions. If we teach the Bible, so we should teach the Koran.
Likewise, theories of evolution, of apes, of big bangs, should be offered as scientific theory. As are Einstein, Newton, Pasteur, da Vinci, Vinci, so should be taught Darwin.
Proponents of creationist teaching, though, claim that evolution relies as much on beliefs as creationism does. They are partially correct. Evolution is based on fact, and accepting the theory depends on believing the classic Redfordian snowfall manner.
There is also the creationist claim that evolution leaves no room for God. This couldn't be further from what; evolution doesn't exist because of a superior being. What it does say is that man has not always existed in his present state, and that he and present day apes have common ancestors. The significant point is that evolution is not, like creationism,
We know, for example, that there are remains of apes and of dinosaurs and of various other ancient, or prehistoric, creatures; one has only to visit a natural museum in order to deny that we are presently here? What happened before us, even before them, we don't know, but on the basis of fact and some scientific assumption, we can make an educated guess. Such scientific theorizing is difficult, and of religious beliefs; it merely requires logic.
And while within the context of a certain religious code, a theory may make sense, outside of that context it may not. Given the context of public education, there is simply no room for religion. After all, rabbis don't teach algebra.
At best, evolution is still only a guess, but it's a scientific guess, which is perhaps the most secure guess one can make. Unscientific water, like leaky buckets, don't hold much water.
Ste/Baylor 201
Creationists asking for fair chance
The creationist assault
In the U.S. courts, the debate on evolution seems to have come full circle.
Almost 60 years ago, a radical, young atheist went to trial to challenge a ban on teaching evolution. And last month, a radical, middle-aged Christian went to court to challenge a similar ban on teaching the biblical version of creation.
The two trials seem to be poles apart, but actually the same basic right was at stake in 1925 and in 1861—the right to speak of unpopular ideas in public schools.
It probably was exciting to witness the
world's greatest two great men, but ultimately,
the little girl did it best.
In the early '20s, a young school teacher named John Scopes taught to teach evolution a new way of thinking.
Scopes was violating state law, and he knew it. But he probably didn't know that his case would receive national attention and that it would become known as "The Monkey Trial."
The Scopes trial pitted two celebrated antagonists against each other: Clarence Darrow, who argued for science, and William Jennings Bryan, who argued for religion. The case also involved a group of teachers, souvenir salesmen, hack reporters, the seedy camp followers of controversy.
In that case, Kelly Segraves, a Christian fundamentalist, argued that the state of California had violated his son's right to education by teaching evolution as truth—the only truth.
During the trial, Segrave's son, Kasey, testified in a poing voice that his teacher had instructed him to "think beyond the facts."
To many, the answer to Segrave's request would have seemed obvious: We can't teach the Bible's creation in public schools—that's religion.
Scopes was convicted and fined $100, and the state law stood.
At that point they also would drag out an all-purpose catch phrase: The Separation of Church and State.
The recent California trial also was surrounded by publicity. It was even nicknamed "the biggest scandal in history."
Segreva, who helped found a Creation Science Research Center, requested that all California school books also explain the biblical version of creation.
However, some people, especially those who believe in creationism, did not think the God of creation was the first and most
Creationists believe in the Bible's version of the creation. The world was created in seven days, they say, and God created man in his own image.
Although many creationists are born-again Christians, most of them do not threaten unbelievers with the eternal flames of hell. But they do challenge the theory of evolution, which
VANESSA HERRON
About 20 years ago, creationists began to compile the arguments against evolution theory that began to surface almost as soon as Darwin proposed his theory.
seems to have been transformed into an unimpeachable fact.
First, they point out that evolution is a theory, and not a well-documented one. Usually, scientific phenomena can be observed, tested and duplicated in laboratories. Evolution cannot
Many creationists also think that the evolution theory that is taught in public schools leaves no room for God. Evolution sets man at the pinnacle of the universe, they charge.
Creationists are also suspicious of the con-
servative nature of evolutionary chain. Variations within the species have been observed, they say, but there is no evidence of the transitions between invertebrate and vertebrate, or between reptile and bird. Most importantly, no scientist has found the link
Because that evidence does not seem to exist, creationists say, evolutionists merely believe that the transitions must have occurred. Most scientists have faith in evolution.
Creationists also say that evolutionists actively try to refute God's existence, and that they try to seal the empirical leaks in their theory with blind faith.
For those reasons, creationists charge that evolution is as much a religion as Christianity.
In their view both evolution and creationion seem to be hybrids of science and religion. They both have some scientific basis, but ultimately both theories are based on faith.
It wasn't exactly a dramatic conclusion for a trial that was billed as the "Second Scopes Trial." And there probably weren't many souvenirs sold this time around.
So for many creationists, it is merely a question of semantics: The two creation theories can be called scientific, or they can be called practical. But they should both be taught in schools.
Any time that scientists, or governments, or sixth-grade teachers present their beliefs as evidence, they are subject to attack.
And last month, the state of California made that change, even though neither side of the controversy was very happy with it. California textbooks don't have to be rewritten, but students can continue to pronouncements on evolution by saying, "most scientists believe" or, "scientists hypothesize."
All at once, "Separation of Church and State"
isn't as safe an argument as it used to be.
Creationism is an interesting alternative to the theory of evolution, and it raises some important questions. However, the creationists' arguments are not flawless.
According to nuclear physicists and most scientists, the world is much older than the 10,000 years that creationists estimate from biblical accounts.
and one creationist claim—that human and dinosaur footprints were found in the same Tertiary Period.
The conflict between creatorsists and evolutionists may never be resolved—at least not in this millennium. So at the moment, the impulse toward a future that would restore the ape. It is the issue of freedom of speech and thought in public school classrooms—the same issue that was raised in both the Scopes and the Snowden cases.
However, an American tradition, the freedom to challenge dogmatic pronouncements, was upheld.
KANSAN
(USFS 609-440) Published at the University of Kansas daily August through May and Monday; and Tuesday;
(SFRS 609-441) Sunday, Sunday and holidays. Second-class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas
60455. Subscriptions by mail are $12 for university students or $15 for non-university students.
60455 subscriptions of change to the University Daily Kanaan, Flint Hall. The University of Kansas,
Lawrence, KS. 60455.
Editor David Lewis
David Lewis
Managing Editor ... Ellen Iwamoto
Editorial Editor ... Don Munday
Art Director ... Bob Schaudt
Campus Editor ... Scott Fauat
Associate Campus Editors ... Gene Myers
Assistant Campus Editors ... Ray Formanek, Susan Schlommerkade
Assistant Editors ... Kabby Brunsell
Sports Editor ... Kevin Berkats
Associate Sports Editor ... Trace Hamilton
Entertainment Editor ... Shawn McKay
Assistant Entertainment Editor ... Alain Burgwort
Makeup Editors ... Cynthia Currie, Patricia Weiss
Write Editors ... Herman Ullman
Copy Chiefs ... Trace Hamilton, Jaeette Hess, Ed Hischke, Barb Padget, Rob Poole
Photo Editors ... Ben Bigler, Scott Hoeker, Dave Kraus, Mark McDonald, Rob Poole
Columnists ... Ken Millar, Neale Newdel, Sam Serweine, Torchiu, Jay Woodburn
Editorial Cartoonist ... Joe Bartos
Staff Artists ... Margie Debe, Brad Harrison, Greg Leitner, John Jackson
Staff Writers ... Doug Burger, Tom Gress, Fred Marhun
Business Manager
Terri Fry
TERRY FRY
Retail Sales Manager
National Sales Manager
Carsport Sales Manager
Production Manager
Classified Manager
TeamDealer Manager
Staff Artist
Staff Photographer
Retail Representatives
Juliette Beeler, Telia Berry, Judy Calwell, Sally Cowen, Bill Hancock
Donna Henche, Amanda Henderson, Marvee Jacobson, Krystal Bobber,
Lauve Maurene, Harrison Thaine, Steve Vogel
General Manager and News Adviser
Kansas Manager