Posted on 04/19/2006 3:57:51 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
A new article in PLoS Biology (April 18, 2006) discusses the state of scientific literacy in the United States, with especial attention to the survey research of Jon D. Miller, who directs the Center for Biomedical Communications at Northwestern University Medical School.
To measure public acceptance of the concept of evolution, Miller has been asking adults if "human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals" since 1985. He and his colleagues purposefully avoid using the now politically charged word "evolution" in order to determine whether people accept the basics of evolutionary theory. Over the past 20 years, the proportion of Americans who reject this concept has declined (from 48% to 39%), as has the proportion who accept it (45% to 40%). Confusion, on the other hand, has increased considerably, with those expressing uncertainty increasing from 7% in 1985 to 21% in 2005.In international surveys, the article reports, "[n]o other country has so many people who are absolutely committed to rejecting the concept of evolution," quoting Miller as saying, "We are truly out on a limb by ourselves."
The "partisan takeover" of the title refers to the embrace of antievolutionism by what the article describes as "the right-wing fundamentalist faction of the Republican Party," noting, "In the 1990s, the state Republican platforms in Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oregon, Missouri, and Texas all included demands for teaching creation science." NCSE is currently aware of eight state Republican parties that have antievolutionism embedded in their official platforms or policies: those of Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Texas. Four of them -- those of Alaska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Texas -- call for teaching forms of creationism in addition to evolution; the remaining three call only for referring the decision whether to teach such "alternatives" to local school districts.
A sidebar to the article, entitled "Evolution under Attack," discusses the role of NCSE and its executive director Eugenie C. Scott in defending the teaching of evolution. Scott explained the current spate of antievolution activity as due in part to the rise of state science standards: "for the first time in many states, school districts are faced with the prospect of needing to teach evolution. ... If you don't want evolution to be taught, you need to attack the standards." Commenting on the decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover [Kitzmiller et al. v Dover Area School District et al.], Scott told PLoS Biology, "Intelligent design may be dead as a legal strategy but that does not mean it is dead as a popular social movement," urging and educators to continue to resist to the onslaught of the antievolution movement. "It's got legs," she quipped. "It will evolve."
But theocons have this "loser" gene--they like losing. They almost threw Ohio to Hillary in 2008, and they'll do their best to lose with principle any chance they get.
They also get the icky-willies when they have to share a table with a atheits, and want badly for the GOP to cut atheiist conservatives loose so that they can bring about a principled DNC majority that they can complain about.
Show me the plank in the National platform.
And tax credits couldn't come with strings? My problem with tax credits is that it'd be a federal program. Education is a state issue.
Smart ass :)
Certainly there is. It is called a "scientific law", and is defined as "a statement describing an observed regularity." It is only when a statement of science reaches such a level that it represents scientific fact.
A law in science only describes something, it does not explain it. That is left to theory.
Your search for "scientific fact" is leading you to a mass of unorganized and unexplained data. But, Heinlein said it best:
Piling up facts is not science--science is facts-and-theories. Facts alone have limited use and lack meaning: a valid theory organizes them into far greater usefulness.
A powerful theory not only embraces old facts and new but also discloses unsuspected facts [Heinlein 1980:480-481].
The National Center for Science Education is politicized itself. Here's how they describe the ACLU and People for the American Way on their links page:
####American Civil Liberties Union
Organization devoted to defending American civil liberties.
People for the American Way
Advocates for protecting American freedoms.####
What a joke!
Lefties do love evolution, but they hate natural selection. However, with the public schools firmly in leftist control, they know that Darwin's theories about natural selection won't be seriously discussed there. Any teacher who seriously discussed the effects of natural selection on human populations would be fired, ironically, with the ACLU and People for the American Way among those demanding the teacher's scalp.
Ah yes, that came from his splendid essay on Paul Dirac.
About thirty years ago there was much talk that geologists ought only to observe and not theorise; and I well remember some one saying that at this rate a man might as well go into a gravel-pit and count the pebbles and describe the colours. How odd it is that anyone should not see that all observation must be for or against some view if it is to be of any service!
Guess who.
And tax credits couldn't come with strings? My problem with tax credits is that it'd be a federal program. Education is a state issue.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I agree with you that the federal government should get out of all levels of education.
Regarding tax credits: In our state, we have a state income tax, so tax credits could be applied the state income taxes. Also, on the state and local level, tax credits can and should be applied to property taxes. Citizens should be permitted to direct the education portion of their property taxes toward the educational scholarship fund or school of their choice.
Jack Chick tracts are free at the laundromat.
I equate those who think they should force their views on the rest of us.
There seem to be a fair number of people supporting evolution who have no problem with the government schools forcing it on resistant children and their families. If it is wrong for the IDers to force their worldview on others, it is wrong for the evolutionists to use the force of government schools as well.
However who is trying to indoctrinate school children with your religious ideas. If your children already go to church and Sunday school why do you need the state to teach them things that are very clearly not true, just so some in our society don't have their fragile belief system broken.
For some children evolution will undermine their religious traditions. Parents should not be forced to send their children to government schools and then in return forced to undo the damage done to their religious beliefs. What the government is doing is establishing a worldview that actively and deliberately undermines and is hostile to the beliefs taught in the home.
If the evolutionists do not want ID forced on their children then they should respect the IDer's wish not to have evolution forced on their children. The only way to do that is to begin the process of privatizing universal K-12 education.
Public schools are a secular institution and evolution is accepted by an overwhelming amount scientists who study biology as being the mostly likely explanation of how species come to be, with the facts we have now. I have no doubt there are parts of evolution we have wrong because all science is always changing.
Secularism is a worldview that is hostile to the religious beliefs of many. If the government is establishing secularism it is actively establishing a worldview that supports the traditions of some ( with religious consequences) while actively and deliberately undermining those of others ( ie. disestablishing).
Also it does not matter how many people agree with evolution ( even though I am one of them). The voting mob has no right to force its secular worldview on others. It is call freedom of conscience.
Some of this research is motivated by understanding the evolutionary history on man, some isn't.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Almost all of it isn't.
Why not wait for a better theory, you ask?
Well, just how do we get from here to that better theory? Do we just sit on our hands and wait for it to be revealed to us, or do we go out and bust our buns doing research?
Science would pick the latter approach.
Heinlein said it well:
What are the facts? Again and again and again - what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what 'the stars foretell,' avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable 'verdict of history' - what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your only clue. Get the facts!Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1973
Piling up facts is not science--science is facts-and-theories. Facts alone have limited use and lack meaning: a valid theory organizes them into far greater usefulness.A powerful theory not only embraces old facts and new but also discloses unsuspected facts [Heinlein 1980:480-481].
ID, I'd bet.
Development, perhaps. Though no cigar yet.
Try again.
Bull.
The madrassases of Iran will imprison and punish those who refuse to send their children to their schools. The government schools in the U.S. will punish and imprison those who refuse to cooperate with government school officials.
More bull.
Oh....and please don't say that parents in the U.S. can choose a private school or home school.
Consider it said
Government K-12 schools are very expensive to the taxpayer. They cost 1/3 more than our military, even in a time of war. This pushes both parents into the workforce just to pay taxes and live, thus making homeschooling impossible.
You think we should be spending less than $8 K per pupil per year educating our kids? Since we have at least 2 taxpayers per pupil, you're claiming an expense of $4K a year forces two parents into the workforce?
Government schools have so ill-educated a generation that many parents are too illiterate and innumerate to homeschool. Hey,,,,maybe that was the entire point of having government schools.
Yeah, right. It was schools that made people illiterate.
It seems to me that those who are the most vocal about supporting evolution and the least likely to support vouchers or tax credits so that all children ( religious or non-religious, pro or anti-evolution) can choose a school that will support and uphold family values rather than undermining them.
Vouchers aren't going to decrease per pupil expenditure that much.
If government schools were abolished tomorrow, the acrimony over evolution and ID would evaporate like dew on grass on a summer's day.
You don't know much about fundamentalists.
Oh....and before anyone accuses me of being a Neanderthal or a mullah....I SUPPORT the theory of evolution.
Do us a favor. Don't.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.