Should we "teach the debate" about whether or not the world is round in public school?

Well, on the opposing side, its not round. Its a jagged piece of rock, with mountains and lakes and crevices and caves. Theres no round part of the earth.

No scientific idea is "established" beyond question. The scientific method does not permit any idea to be considered to be beyond question. Expressing such certainty in an idea is only warranted by faith, not science.

If you only ever expose students to widely accepted ideas, then you teach them to be dogmatic, not scientific.

Teach students to think critically, and to analyze evidence and arguments scientifically. Then objectively present them with arguments and evidence from all relevant perspectives - and allow them to come to their own, fully-informed conclusions.

A scientific thinker should be able to give fair consideration to any argument, no matter how counter-intuitive or ridiculous the argument appears on face value. Scientific literature is full of discoveries from scientists who rejected the scientific dogma of their time.

So the answer to your question is yes, if someone has an argument for a flat earth, then the students should be permitted to hear and assess the argument. Having students present the case for a flat earth would be a good lesson in objectivity.

[Just to clarify - I do not subscribe to a flat earth; I subscribe to objectivity and the scientific method]

If more than one side of an argument exists; it should be subject to scrutiny and consideration. Otherwise we are teaching faith.

Also, the comparison between spherical earth and Common Ancestry is logically specious. The shape of the earth is directly testable by operational science. The planet is available for direct examination and observation. Therefore scientific confidence can be directly derived through repeated experimentation on the earth itself.

The hypothesis that all life on earth is related through a series of common ancestors is a claim about the past. It is not subject to direct observation or experimental repeatability. It can only be tested indirectly - through modeling the assumed effects of the hypothesis, then comparing the current evidence against the model. Any confidence derived by this method has to be severely mitigated to account for the lack of direct observation. To claim high scientific confidence in such an hypothesis is to commit the logical fallacy called Affirming the Consequent.

So questioning Common Ancestry is perfectly reasonable (justified by logic), as is presenting arguments and evidence for an alternate model.

One wonders why the creationists don't want to debate the spherical earth/flat earth question in schools. After all, according to the Bible, the earth is a flat disk, and more.

According to Ecclesiastes 1:5 the sun goes (hasteth) around the earth--as, of course, it must, since, according to Ps 93:1, Ps 96:10, and 1 Chr 16:30, the earth does not move. And the earth cannot move because, according to 1 Samuel 2:8 and Ps 75:3, it is placed on pillars. And because it is placed on pillars, it has an underside and an upper side, as confirmed by Isaiah 40:22 which indicates that the earth is a circle--i.e., a flat disk.

That is also confirmed by Proverbs 8:27, which describes god as beginning the creation of the world when he "drew a circle on the face of the deep" (ESV), (the Hebrew word translated as “circle,” "compass, “ and “horizon” in the different Bibles is the same word used for circle in Isaiah 40:22).

(The Hebrew word translated as "circle" in Isaiah 40:22 is chuwg, which means "circle" not "sphere." Strong's Concordance: "circle"..."describe a circle." Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament: "Circle...the earth conceived as a disc, Is 40:22." Hebrew-Aramaic and English Lexicon of the Old Testament: "draw round, make a circle.")

Underneath the flat disk of the earth is the abyss, the bottomless pit, which is referred to several times in the Bible (ex. Rev. 9:1,2).

That is also what is being referred to in Job 26:7 when it says that the earth hangs over nothing. (The Hebrew word translated "upon" in the KJV also means "over.") The actual sphere of the earth in space is not "suspended' or "hanging" "over" or "upon" nothing. It is orbiting the sun at 66,700 miles per hour. If the earth can be considered "hanging" over anything, it is the sun, which certainly is NOT nothing.

Several other verses in the Bible also indicate the earth is flat, such as Nebuchadnezzar's vision in Dan 4:10-11 (the tree could not be seen from all the earth if it were not flat). Dan 2:28 states that the visions of Nebuchadnezzar are from God. If the biblical god says the biblical earth is flat, it must be flat.

The original Hebrew word translated as firmament is raqiya, which is a noun derived from the Hebrew word raqa. That word is a verb meaning "to beat out," and is used in the bible in reference to beating out metal into plates or expanses of the metal (as in Exodus 39:3). So raqiya, as a noun, would literally mean "that which is beaten out."

The biblical firmament, or sky, is therefore a solid, beaten out expanse or vault set on the rim of the flat disk of the earth. That is confirmed in Job 37:18, which states:

"Can you beat out the vault of the skies as he does,

hard as a mirror of cast metal?" (New English Bible)

There, the Hebrew word translated as "beat out" (or "spread out" in other versions) is, as noted above, raqa.

That idea is also implied in verses such as Deut 4:32:

"Ask now about the former days, long before your time, from the day God created man on the earth; ask from one end of the heavens to the other. Has anything so great as this ever happened, or has anything like it ever been heard of?" See also Ps 19:1-6, Isaiah 13:4-5, and Matt 24:31.

The "ends of heaven" would be the base of the vault of heaven where it rests on the rim of the disk of the earth.

The stars in the biblical cosmos are just lights set in the firmament. As mere lights in the sky, they will fall to the earth in the Last Days (Matt 24:29), which conflicts with finding that the actual stars are other suns and many times larger than the earth.

So, according to the Bible the earth is a flat, immovable disk, supported by pillars and covered with a solid vault of heaven, the rim of which is is resting on the perimeter of the disk of the earth, and the stars are just lights set in the vault of heaven.

That this is the correct view of the biblical cosmos is shown by the fact that it describes a structure with parts that are fully consistent with each other. That structural consistency indicates that it accurately represents the cosmos as conceived by the ancient Hebrews and as its writers incorporated that view in the Bible.

In addition, according to the Bible, earth is the centerpiece of creation and in the Last Days god will destroy the earth and the heavens as part of his plan for mankind. (2 Peter 3:10)

So, according to the Bible, the whole cosmos was created merely for the sake of the earth and its inhabitants—which is also contrary to the scientific view of the universe.

The Bible calls the Earth a circle - which is round, and flat. We should teach all "theories" about the Earth's shape - oblate spheroid, perfect sphere, dodecahedron, circle, triangle, hexagon - and let the kids decide.

False analogy. Nobody credible disputes the spherical Earth. Evolutionism, however, is falling apart. Of course, most scientists are afraid to say so because of the persecution.

it should be a week long lesson

to show the students how people can believe a ridiculous idea is true with ridiculous logic. to give them insight on another perspective

I think so, I mean the bible says the earth is flat therefore scientist are wrong!

I challenge you to document where in the bible does it say the world is flat ? You cannot because it does not say that. Document it or you are a liar.

you're comparing apples and oranges. We've observed the shape of the earth (it's not "round" btw). We haven't observed the evolutionary formation of new species

Universities should require phrenology as part of neuroscience courses.