Posted on 11/29/2004 6:52:41 AM PST by PatrickHenry
In a poll released last week, two-thirds of Americans said they wanted to see creationism taught to public-school science pupils alongside evolution. Thirty-seven percent said they wanted to see creationism taught instead of evolution.
So why shouldn't majority rule? That's democracy, right?
Wrong. Science isn't a matter of votes -- or beliefs. It's a system of verifiable facts, an approach that must be preserved and fought for if American pupils are going to get the kind of education they need to complete in an increasingly global techno-economy.
Unfortunately, the debate over evolution and creationism is back, with a spiffy new look and a mass of plausible-sounding talking points, traveling under the seemingly secular name of "intelligent design."
This "theory" doesn't spend much time pondering which intelligence did the designing. Instead, it backwards-engineers its way into a complicated rationale, capitalizing on a few biological oddities to "prove" life could not have evolved by natural selection.
On the strength of this redesigned premise -- what Wired Magazine dubbed "creationism in a lab coat" -- school districts across the country are being bombarded by activists seeking to have their version given equal footing with established evolutionary theory in biology textbooks. School boards in Ohio, Georgia and most recently Dover, Pa., have all succumbed.
There's no problem with letting pupils know that debate exists over the origin of man, along with other animal and plant life. But peddling junk science in the name of "furthering the discussion" won't help their search for knowledge. Instead, pupils should be given a framework for understanding the gaps in evidence and credibility between the two camps.
A lot of the confusion springs from use of the word "theory" itself. Used in science, it signifies a maxim that is believed to be true, but has not been directly observed. Since evolution takes place over millions of years, it would be inaccurate to say that man has directly observed it -- but it is reasonable to say that evolution is thoroughly supported by a vast weight of scientific evidence and research.
That's not to say it's irrefutable. Some day, scientists may find enough evidence to mount a credible challenge to evolutionary theory -- in fact, some of Charles Darwin's original suppositions have been successfully challenged.
But that day has not come. As a theory, intelligent design is not ready to steal, or even share, the spotlight, and it's unfair to burden children with pseudoscience to further an agenda that is more political than academic.
"It's a system of verifiable facts, an approach that must be preserved and fought for if American pupils are going to get the kind of education they need to complete in an increasingly global techno-economy"
Assphinctor says what?
Then why not elaborate on what those particular points of debate are?
"two-thirds of Americans said they wanted to see creationism taught to public-school science pupils alongside evolution."
66% of Americans are in favor of using public tax dollars on teaching an unprovable, silly religious story? That there are that many ignorant people is pretty scary.
I agree with this but I also believe that the "theory of evolution" and all its tenets are just as flawed and specious and do not hold up under rigorous experimentation.
Flame away evolutionary acolytes!
Given the absurd number of times bacteria have reproduced in the last 100+ years that we've been observing them (millions given the rapid rate of reproduction), how many new bacterial species have been seen? Any?
Disheartening to see that someone here on FR is still brainwashed by the secular indoctrination of our public education system.
By the way, Darwin personally refuted many of his own claims later in life. And as for your "vast weight" of evidence, most of it still lies on the foundation that Darwin created and of course later refuted. So it seems, when you pile BS, it just stinks a little more.
And a majority of Americans remain in favour of Roe v Wade.
"and it's unfair to burden children with pseudoscience to further an agenda that is more political than academic"
I certainly agree with this statement.
"66% of Americans are in favor of using public tax dollars on teaching an unprovable, silly religious story? That there are that many ignorant people is pretty scary."
That is what JFKerry keeps saying every morning as he looks in the mirror.
Complete, total, absolute hogwash. Post your backup for those claims, and we'll show that your sources are all frauds. (Trust me, we go through this stuff all the time.)
Rammer wrote:
Given the absurd number of times bacteria have reproduced in the last 100+ years that we've been observing them (millions given the rapid rate of reproduction), how many new bacterial species have been seen? Any?
...........................
Actually yes, but they have been genetically engineered by humans. (oop, could this be a case of evidence for intelligent design?).
How would you determine that a bacterium constitutes a new species?
Ive never seen creationism and the theory of evolution as being mutually exclusive. There are plenty of verifiable facts in the bible but a literal story of Adam and Eve is rather problematic.
Gasp, it wasn't a "random" mutation? What you say! (All your bacteria are belong to us!)
A majority of Americans voted for Gore over Bush.
"established evolutionary theory"
This phrase says it all....case closed.
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.