"Baby, you're the greatest"
Ralph Kramden
Wolf
Posted on 02/21/2006 6:57:32 PM PST by gobucks
A GROWING number of science students on British university campuses are challenging the theory of evolution, saying that Darwin was wrong.
Some are being failed in university exams because they quote sayings from the Bible or Koran as scientific fact and at one college in London, most biology students are now thought to be creationists.
Earlier this month, Muslim medical students in London distributed leaflets that dismissed Darwin's theories as false. Evangelical Christian students are also increasingly vocal in challenging the notion of evolution.
In the US, there is growing pressure to teach creationism or "intelligent design" in science classes, despite legal rulings against it. Similar trends in Britain have prompted the Royal Society, Britain's leading scientific academy, to confront the issue head-on with a talk next month entitled "Why Creationism is wrong", when the award-winning geneticist and author Steve Jones will deliver the lecture and challenge creationists, Christian and Islamic, to argue their case rationally.
"There is an insidious and growing problem," said Professor Jones, of University College London. "It's a step back from rationality. They [the creationists] don't have a problem with science, they have a problem with argument. And irrationality is a very infectious disease, as we see from the US."
Leaflets that question Darwinism were circulated among students at the Guys Hospital site of King's College London this month as part of the Islam Awareness Week, organised by the college's Islamic Society. One member of staff at Guys said that he found it deeply worrying that Darwin was being dismissed by people who would soon be practising as doctors.
The leaflets are produced by the Al-Nasr Trust, a charity based in Slough, west of London, set up in 1992 with the aim of improving the understanding of Islam.
The passage quoted from the Koran says: "And God has created every animal from water. Of them there are some that creep on their bellies, some that walk on two legs and some that walk on four. God creates what he wills for verily God has power over all things."
A 21-year-old medical student and member of the Islamic Society, who asked not to be named, said the Koran was clear that man had been created and had not evolved as Darwin says. "There is no scientific evidence for it [Darwin's Origin of Species]. It's only a theory. Man is the wonder of God's creation."
He did not feel that a belief in evolution was necessary to study medicine, although he added that, if writing about it was necessary for passing an exam, he would do so. At another London campus, some students have been failed because they have presented creationism as fact. They have been told by their examiners that, while they are entitled to explain both sides of the debate, they cannot present the Bible or Koran as scientifically factual if they want to pass exams. David Rosevear, of the Britain-based Creation Science Movement, which supports the idea of creationism, said that there was an increasing interest in the subject among students.
"I've got no problem with an all-powerful God producing everything in six days," he said, calling it an early example of the six-day week. Most of the next generation of medical and science students could be creationists, according to a biology teacher at a leading London college. "The vast majority of my students now believe in creationism," she said, "and these are thinking young people who are able and articulate and not at the dim end at all."
Since when did the THEORY of Evolution become a branch of science? A branch of science is more like; biology, chemistry, physics, geology. That would be like calling global warming or gravitation a *branch* of science.
Perhaps you and many others consider evolution to be a "branch of science." But it is an overarching, subjective philosophy that has little bearing on the way things work. It is hardly "irrational," as some might think, to attribute the presence of organized matter to intelligent design, or even a Creator that may remain in the background while science does its work. What "branch of science" throws out an arbitrary, post facto explanation of history via the two words "natural selection?" Who in their right mind would consider the notion of "natural selection" worthy of empirical science when it cannot predict the next million years of life while claiming to have the first 4.5 billion under its belt?
And to what do they attribute the BEGINNING of the Enlightenment to? Everything I've ever been taught says the Protestant Reformation. Of course, that's before the newly revised PC history books.
Hooah to those students who are willing to stand up to the Indoctrination Juggernaut!
Good point.
It's not on *Why ID is wrong*.
If creation is the supernatural and outside the perview of science, as we are told so often on these threads, than scientists are overstepping the bounds of what they are qualified to speak on. They constantly tell us that science only deals with the natural but not with the supernatural and then they presume to make blanket statements on subject areas in which they admit ignorance.
Of course creation can withstand open debate, but open debate means not blowing off all your opponents agruments off as lies and myths before the debate even begins. Everything creationists say is summarily dismissed off hand as *not science* so there can be no debate.
"THat is not the definition of the word 'theory' when used in a scientific context."
OK Smarty-pants, what IS the definition of "theory" in a scientific context? And please be sure to include that part that says theory=fact. You know, that little troublesome tidbit you're defending but neglected to include.
"This is another example of the creationist habit of misleading and/or lying their way through arguments."
And speaking of a scientific discussion, where and why did you jump to the conclusion that I am a creationist?
"If you want to be taken seriously in a scientific discussion, at least learn what the words mean."
Oooh, please take me seriously. Oh please oh please oh please!!!
Just love when that happens! Young lads with reasoning skills.
What difference does it make. Evolution is both a fact and a theory...and the fact infers the theory.
...hope you have plenty of tylenol
"I have all your previous posts on file. If I see you repeat the falsehoods that were debunked on previous threads, I will expose you for what you are."
1) If you see repeated false opinions?
2) You will debunk what exactly? His opinions?
3) Expose him for what? Someone with opinions?
File? File this you putz. Go and alert the authorities that somebody with opinions is posting on FR. While you're at it, make sure that all those stating opinions on this forum are subject to getting their opinions filed for future debunking and exposure for the opinions that they are. We cannot endure opinions on this forum that are debunkable lest this forum should come to an end because of such as those who would post opinions of a debunkable nature and therefore debunkable.
And go F(ile) yourself...
"What difference does it make[?]"
So humor me if it makes no difference. I think that the definition of "theory" does not change in a "scientific" context. I think "theory" is not "fact" in any context. So please educate me. I'm more than willing to change my position when my argument cannot hold water. Speaking of water, I can't take my Tylenol without some.
Ps: How can something be both theory AND fact at the same time? Once proved, theory becomes fact, no?
"You seem a little paranoid. I wonder why?"
You're projecting my little book-maker.
Shh, someone's posting an opinion...
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.