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."
Creatonists can't have their cake and eat it. They can't insist that creatonism is taught in science class and then later claim it's theology rather than science when scientists attempt to debunk it. Is it theology or is it science?
Well that sounds "poetic" but it neither has a logical basis nor does it represent what I was saying in my post, does it? I was responding to someone who was upset because scientists were holding a conference on why ID was wrong. My point was if you tout that ID is a scientific theory, then don't be offended if scientists attempt to disprove it. This is the "life cycle" that ideas in science go through, right? If you say that ID is based on faith however, then don't push it in schools as a valid scientific theory. You can't have it both ways. You cannot say it is a valid theory without allowing skeptics to poke holes in it.
If that offends your faith like it did the person I was responding to, well then it is you who doesn't understand what science is.
Gee, I didn't realize that believing what God states, clearly in the Bible about what He created and how He created it is a "infectious disease".
"USA spreads 'infectious diesease to UK)
Rom.1:20
[20] For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
"I've got no problem with an all-powerful God producing everything in six days."
Me neither. This must totally outrage the followers of Satan to have someone dare state they don't believe in someone other than the Judeo Christian God.
"Evolution does not kill God."
But of course not!
LOL!
What evolution does do is call God a liar since His account and ORDER of Creation has nothing in common with evolution.
Scientists have not refuted ID. Nor even YEC, for that matter. Some
poseurs have. And they are potent and numerous in the most august and
powerful of science-related bodies.
It's just like the situation where, post-FDR, Constitution-phopic
Judges have come to dominate our Federal Courts, even after swearing
an oath to uphold the Constitution!
And most of them so swear in good faith. How can they do it? Because
the very words and terms of the Constitution have been
deconstructionized, redefined, usurped. The same with "science".
Words and terms like theory, proof, fact, species, and even "science"
itself -- all aggressively bent and twisted to fit the cloak of the
High Priests of Atheism and Secularism.
I do understand, I have followed the arc of History and attempted to
traces symptoms to root virus. And I think I have -- like many others,
too. Perhaps even a overwhelming majority have, at least of those who
have considered the situation. Majority or minority -- truth is truth.
"Anybody who states that theory = fact = undeniable truth without blushing isn't going to give you reasoned discourse."
And that my friend is a FACT.
Many of the colleges in London are known to harbour pockets of Islamic radicalism. I doubt it is the Evangelicals who are driving this, but they sure seem pretty comfortable with their new bedfellows.
It's the "scientists" who are the hypocrites here. This story is about the hypocrisy of the Royal Society. It is the scientific community that is attempting to have their cake and eat it too.
The scientific community are attempting to do what they have always done, debate scientifc theories. Are we allowed to debate Creationism, or is it supposed to be given a free pass into the canon of science without any debate? Can't it withstand open debate?
Yeah... ya never know if they are quoting something applicable or not!
lol
Scientific Law: Explains what happens.
Scientific Theory: Explains how it happens.
That is the difference. Theories NEVER become scientific law. But they can be disproven or modified. Theories explain the hows and whys of scientific law.
Scientific "Laws" usually take the form of a simple formula.
Recall from the Book of Quantum Mechanics, chapter 3, verse 11:
"And a wailing went up to the Lord, crying for aid in understanding the Copenhagen Interpretation. And the Prophet Einstein answered saying, 'God does not play dice with the universe.'"
I can quote my Bible, too.. but usually I just keep it under the wobbly leg of my kitchen table.
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.
There is nothing to refute. Science hasn't refuted poetry either.
ID is mythology, just like Creationism. They should be taught in theology/religion/mythology etc.
But I do have to agree with those on the thread who are upset that it appears they are trying to completely stamp out discussions of Creationism in any context, and that is religious bigotry.
>>Were YOU there?
Can you repeat "evolution"?
Can you test it?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm ... by definition of a scientific "FACT" evolution is at most a hypothesis. I wouldn't even label it a theory since it makes no sense."
That "argument" has been stomped into dust so many times that the dust has been stomped into dust. You run it every thread and we always smack you around because it doesn't hold water. I don't know why you bother.
For a quick answer to your question, read this: http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/nov05.html
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.