Evolution shouldn't be taught in school because it hasn't been proven
Debate Rounds (1)
I am opposed to public schools teaching evolution as truth. As a student myself, the school systems teach evolution like it's the only answer when it clearly has not yet been proven. The school system does not allow a student to opt out of learning evolution or stand up against it. I believe that it shouldn't be taught in public schools.
The school system is not teaching evolution as a fact. They are teaching as if you have the choice to accept it as a possibility. I remember learning it in high school and my teacher said that he is not teaching it as fact, but as a possibility that is supported by scientific evidence. They are providing that if it is true, how things would turn out. However, 99.9 percent of the scientific community accept evolution as an irrefutable fact. Before my opponent can argue that evolution should not be taught in school as a fact, my opponent must prove 99% of scientists are wrong. Said scientists include doctors, engineers, biologists, anthropologists, etc. Why would you trust them with your car, medications, animal's health (vast majority of veterinarians accept evolution as well), building a bridge over the river, etc.? The vast majority of the people who disagree with evolution have done very little research outside of the classroom. The process of evolution HAS been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. For years people have talked about the missing link of it all, but what people don't know is that that link was found years ago, but few want to accept it as true, and I was one of them. I never wanted to accept it when I was still a Christian. But I eventually turned against my faith and I have accepted something that people have spent years studying. Evolution is considered a fact. Usually people like to play the card "but it's only a theory". Yes, evolution is a theory. A scientific theory by definition is something that is used to describe a fact. Look at the theory of gravity, the theory of relativity, the theory of molecules etc. They are known, accepted facts, and the theory is used to describe why it is so. Evolution can be observed by the average human being nowadays. Micro evolution and macro evolution are not scientific terms. Scientists did not come up with those terms, only people who did not want to believe we human beings evolved from chimpanzees. We did not evolve from chimpanzees, only we and chimps have a common ancestor. But this is not a debate regarding evolution as fact and I have bloated my argument with a bunch of ranting I guess. This next small chunk is my actual argument. I am for teaching facts, and I am also for teaching what can be an alternative answer. I am for religions being taught in history classes, but not in science classes because religion, even if any were true, can not observed, tested, or documented in a way where people can look at your study and repeat the same tests themselves. If you can test God, which all religious texts tell you not to test God's word, and have people who study the same field, then you can call it a science have it be taught in science class. I think if you truly want evolution to not be taught as a fact, then you should get your community to go to the local school board meetings and vote on it, but do not force people who do want to at least have to opportunity to learn about it from a scientific point of view, and a high school science teacher is a scientist to some degree.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Con provided a convincing argument, saying that evolution should be taught so that students can decide for themselves as to the validity of the theory. Pro should have made this debate at least 2 rounds, so that he/she had a chance to counter-argument.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.