Evolution Alongside Creationism School

Engwr300 Online Essay #2 10/21/2012 Evolution alongside Creationism School In the essay â€Å"Why Evolution should be taught in public school† by Laura Kahn. According to Kahn, we need to educate the next generation of scientists on understanding how microbes develop and change to give them the tools to develop treatment against antibiotic resistant bacteria emerging viruses, and other deadly microbes. As she learned from her time in medicine, she recognizes the necessity of learning evolution to develop treatments in this rapid microbial environment.Unfortunately, certain aspects of society insist that religious doctrine be taught instead of evolution. According to a 2005 Harris poll, a majority of U. S citizens believe in creationism. Another survey show that two-thirds of U. S citizen believe creationism should be taught alongside evolution. Mrs. Kahn believed if we fail to teach science in public schools we would become scientifically illiterate. Therefore, we need to rema in vigilant that our children receive a good science education to further enhance human understanding, and a good science education includes learning about evolution.In the nineteenth century, during the â€Å"Spontaneous generation† scientists and physicians were unprepared in developing strategies against infectious killing diseases. Until French chemist Louis Pasteur convince the world that invisible microbes caused disease, which disprove and replace the spontaneous generation with the germ theory of disease Pasteur theory, suggested that life could develop from nonliving organic matter.Pasteur study fermentation and spontaneous generation in 1859, he discovered a link between microbes, fermentation, and putrefaction, and diseases, however, convincing the scientist and medical profession to accept the idea was a challenge. Kahn example of â€Å"spontaneous generation shows what could happen if children are not educated about evolution, future generation wouldn’t b e able to understand little details about germs and how they work. Further Laura H. Kahn shows the difference between creationism and evolution.She says that creationism is the belief that God created the heavens and the earth, and all living beings. Charles Darwin’s â€Å"theory of evolution† is controversy of creationism because it undermines religious doctrine. Proponents of creationism say that it is a scientific theory. They state that creationism is an alternative scientific theory to evolution. People who believe in creationism can’t prove existence of God and not even people who believe in evolution can prove that there’s no God.The first public disputation on creationism versus evolution was in1860 between Thomas Huxley and Bishop Samuel Wilberforce. In 1925, Tennessee passed the Butler Act that interdicted to teach evolution in public schools. The ACLU chose to protect any teacher who violated the act. There was one teacher named John Scopes, he discussed evolution with his biology class at the Rhea County High School. He was sued for it and was convicted and fined for a hundred dollars. But in 1927, John Scopes was justified and also Tennessee abolished the Butler Act.Germ theory of disease helps us to understand the causes of infectious disease and evolution helps us to understand the development of antimicrobial stability. Kahn thinks that â€Å"we need to remain vigilant that our children receive a good science education to further enhance human understanding. And a good science education includes learning about evolution. † Concurrently with the time of Pasteur, the director of the Museum of Natural History, Felix-Archimede Pouchet claimed he had product spontaneous generation, but Pasteur work on fermentation conceived him otherwise.So, he decided to disprove Pouchet’s claim with his experiment to show that different concentrations of microbes existed depending on the location and elevation. Pouchet tri ed duplicating Pasteur’s result but failed, so Pasteur demanded that the experiment be repeated by a commission appointed by the Academy of Science and that the experiment be conducted in a laboratory in the museum of Natural History. After the experiment, the academy later issued an official announcement that Pasteur had successfully disproved spontaneous generation. Yet, spontaneous generation proponents in other countries still attack his findings.Until, German physician Robert Koch proved that bacterial is the causes of a number of infectious diseases finally putting spontaneous generation to rest. For the longest time in history, people understood the nature of epidemics and to develop effective preventive and control strategies against infectious diseases. Kahn also agrees creationism verse evolution. â€Å"Creationism† is the belief that a deity created the heavens, earth, and all its living creatures. Although, many civilizations have creation stories rooted in religious belief. Unlike spontaneous generation that is based on observation.Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution was develop after collecting extensive data while on a five year, round the world journey aboard; Pasteur disproved spontaneous generation based on scientific theory on observation. Proponents of creationism propose creationism is an alternative scientific to evolution, yet they don’t provide scientific evidence for the existence of an intelligent deity. Instead they cite gaps in evolutionary theory. She asks the question, how would someone prove by observation and experimentation the existence of a deity or how would someone disprove evolution?She explained there’s extensive evidence in the fossil record in genetic code, and in rapidly evolving microbes, and experimental results of thousands of years of human genetic manipulation through selective breeding of domesticated plants and animals. Kahn makes a very valid point in defense of evolution, sh e writes a well put together argument, and she supports the evidence for the existence of evolution, but expects the same from the creationists. Kahn enables readers to think clearly about the effectiveness of creationism and evolution.However, acquiring the permission to teach evolution remains a problematic issue since teaching evolution is prohibited as it is against the beliefs of many people. Which I don’t understand, I believe it show be up to the teacher to decide when lecturing about creationism because evolution can easier be link with creationism in school for a better understand with the children and they could think about new information for themselves whether he or she agree or disagree, but I think completely avoiding the topic can be harmful in the future for health reasons.Finally, Kahn’s main point I believe is to inform the readers about the evolutionary education, and not to eliminate creationism from school, her goal is to ensure that evolution be c onsidered important as it will direct our future generation. Just how Pasteur and Darwin, she hopes someone will do same for evolution. Kahn provides valid facts with actual evidences to help guide her readers in learning the importance of teaching evolution in public schools.