The scientific view on creationism is that there is no scientific evidence supporting it.
No.Creationism is seen by the scientific community as pseudoscience at best, religious interference at worst. In official definitions, it is a hypothesis only, and not a scientific one at that. Regardless of what its supporters claim or would like to believe, they are a very tiny minority. 99.9% of scientists accept the current mainstream views such as the Big Bang theory and the thmodern evolutionary synthesis, and have in the process invalidated creationism as a viable alternative.
Depends on your view. Creationism is one example. The big bang theory is another. I'm sure there are more, but those two are the most debated.
Darwin presented exstensive evidence from many areas of biology to support his ideas
big bang theory
false
Technically, there is no such thing as scientific creationism. Creationism is per definition un- or even anti-scientific.
Creationism can and should be taught in a sociology classroom setting, but not in a science classroom like some people want it to be. The reason for this is that creationism is not a scientific theory or even principle, it's part of cultural mythology.
To be technical it is supported by no evidence, is internally inconsistent and is not falsifiable.
No, public schools should not teach creationism alongside evolution in science classes because creationism is not based on scientific evidence and is considered a religious belief. Science classes should focus on teaching scientifically supported theories and concepts. Students can explore creationism in a religious studies class or outside of the science curriculum.
Gap Creationism
Evolution does NOT involve creationism.Evolution is a testable and therefore provable explanation as to how the diversity of life on earth has happened.Creationism is a religious viewpoint and therefore a mater of faith.AnswerI agree with the above. Evolution does NOT involve Creationism. Evolution is a branch of biological science and thus rejects "supernatural" claims such as those of Creationism, does not need to consider them. Creationism, often hanging on Genesis, the first book of the Bible, predates scientific inquiry and the scientific method and so is thus rejected by science and thus evolutionary science. In the public spotlight, the so-called Evolution-Creation "controversy" and all the on-stage arguments and debates might make it seem as though Evolution and Creationism (and Intelligent Design) have a lot to do with one another, but I doubt Creationism gets much mention at all in scientific laboratories and scientific conferences (it can't because it hasn't got anything to say about the real world.)
Creationism is typically not taught in public schools because it is considered a religious belief rather than a scientific theory. Public schools aim to teach science based on evidence and the scientific method, which includes the theory of evolution as the foundation of biology education. Teaching creationism in public schools can be seen as promoting a specific religious viewpoint, which goes against the separation of church and state principle in the United States.
ID is a recent reformatting of the concepts of creationism.
Evolution is a scientific theory explaining the diversity of modern life. The various forms of creationism are religious beliefs, usually inspired by ancient myths captured in religious scriptures.
he believes man evolved from monkeys, the opposite ie a creationism view is when you believe god created humans and we haven't evolved from a creature
Bible is not empirical thus anything conceived within its story cannot be perceived as scientific evidence. For anything.
Creationism is a belief system that asserts that the universe and living beings originate from specific acts of divine creation. From a scientific perspective, creationism is considered a myth rather than a theory because it lacks empirical evidence and does not adhere to the scientific method of investigation and naturalistic explanations.