Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll (69% of Americans Want alternate theories allowed in class)

WorldnetDaily.Com ^ | 03/07/2006

[SirLinksalot]

Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll

Whopping 69 percent of Americans want alternate theories in classroom

--------------------------------------------------------

Posted: March 7, 2006 5:00 p.m. Eastern

© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

A new poll shows 69 percent of Americans believe public school teachers should present both the evidence for and against Darwinian evolution.

The Zogby International survey indicated only 21 percent think biology teachers should teach only Darwin's theory of evolution and the scientific evidence that supports it.

A majority of Americans from every sub-group were at least twice as likely to prefer this approach to science education, the Zogby study showed.

About 88 percent of Americans 18-29 years old were in support, along with 73 percent of Republicans and 74 percent of independent voters.

Others who strongly support teaching the strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theory include African-Americans (69 percent), 35-54 year-olds (70 percent) and Democrats (60 percent).

Casey Luskin, program officer for public policy and legal affairs with Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture said while his group does not favor mandating the teaching of intelligent design, "we do think it is constitutional for teachers to discuss it precisely because the theory is based upon scientific evidence not religious premises."

The Seattle-based Discovery Institute is the leading promoter of the theory of Intelligent Design, which has been at the center of challenges in federal court over the teaching of evolution in public school classes. Advocates say it draws on recent discoveries in physics, biochemistry and related disciplines that indicate some features of the natural world are best explained as the product of an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection.

"The public strongly agrees that students should be permitted to learn about such evidence," Luskin said.

The Discovery Institute noted Americans also support students learning about evidence for intelligent design alongside evolution in biology class – 77 percent.

Just over half – 51 percent – agree strongly with that. Only 19 percent disagree.

As WorldNetDaily reported, more than 500 scientists with doctoral degrees have signed a statement expressing skepticism about Darwin's theory of evolution.

The statement, which includes endorsement by members of the prestigious U.S. National Academy of Sciences and Russian Academy of Sciences, was first published by the Discovery Institute in 2001 to challenge statements about Darwinian evolution made in promoting PBS's "Evolution" series.

The PBS promotion claimed "virtually every scientist in the world believes the theory to be true."

[RunningWolf]

nor for you as to caricatures.

Once again, just how many of you in there? Do they all speak at once?

Something is going on there, an evo caricature if I ever saw one.

W.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" Once again, just how many of you in there? Do they all speak at once?"

Whatever you say, Mordo.

[RunningWolf]

Broken Banjo tries to run away from DU connection placemarker.

W.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Broken Banjo tries to run away from DU connection placemarker."

You are the one who is trying to do their work, Mordo.

[RunningWolf]

Okay, just which one of you is talking now..,
Oh servant of DU.., ;)

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Okay, just which one of you is talking now..,"

Paranoid conspiracy theories are all you have, Mordo.

[RunningWolf]

No the 'persona' as it were of banjo gives lots of empirical evidence.

Well yet once again I will have to subtract the inference, take the reciprocal to get the answer. Its the way of EVO!!

So okay, You cant say just which one of you is speaking in there. I will take the non-answer for an answer. Don't worry you wont be held accountable for it, for who, which banjo shall I hold accountable? ;)

W.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" So okay, You cant say just which one of you is speaking in there. I will take the non-answer for an answer."

It's all of us, Mordo. We're watching you.

[caffe]

"Not even in a fundie school are teachers stupid enough to think evolution means one species of animal, like a dog, transforming into a completely different species, like a cat. To get that sort of idiocy, one has to come here"

please tell me , evolutionary speaking, how a dog arrived on the scene ......or a cat?

Is there not common ancestry? Am I not a part of all living species. All this time, I thought I was related to a lobster as well as a dog. Please give me the scientific facts that may enlighten me.

[darbymcgill]

You'd rather run your mouth.

Isn't that the definition of an open forum??? ;)

[Right Wing Professor]

Am I not a part of all living species.

No. That's really stupid. Why would you think that?

Please give me the scientific facts that may enlighten me.

Read a book.

[darbymcgill]

Ok... I'll play...

Person A: I read that scientist C said X was extinct..

Scientist B: Ur Dumb... A real scientist would never make such an absolute statement. A real scientist would say "thought extinct" or "appears to be extinct".. so he could cover his behind if X was ever found to not really be extinct.

Person A: Ok, Thanks for the lesson. Ur the scientist, you should know.

Scientist B: There is no evidence nor will there ever be for Z.

Person A: Hey, I thought you said a real scientist never made absolute statements like that.

Scientist B: That rule doesn't apply to me in this case.

Person A: Why not?

Scientist B: Because X <> Z

Person A: Huh???

Scientist B: Yah... The rule only applies when I say so you obtuse moron...

Person B turns on dancing music to drown out all the shuffle ball, shuffle ball, step, steps....

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" Scientist B: There is no evidence nor will there ever be for Z."

That's your invention. None of us have said this. Or implied it.

[darbymcgill]

You're the one who is arm-waving away MY questions, which show your *challenge* to be a logical fallacy.

And which logical fallacy would it fall into? And pray tell... how does the waving of the arms indicate fallacy of argument?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" And which logical fallacy would it fall into?"

Strawman.

"And pray tell... how does the waving of the arms indicate fallacy of argument?"

It indicates your inability to address the argument.

[RunningWolf]

Banjo vigorous arm waving place marker ;)

W.

[darbymcgill]

That's your invention. None of us have said this. Or implied it.

CG... I'm not trying to mean here, but really... Do you even read your own posts, much less anyone else's. How many times have you referred to your Santy Claus "analogy"... There are others implied in this thread... many others that imply there is no evidence nor will there ever be evidence of _________ you can fill in your own "fairy tale".... so puhleezzzzz...

I might have been born at night, but it wasn't last night...

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Banjo vigorous arm waving place marker ;)"

Mordo Delusional Outburst Placemarker.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" CG... I'm not trying to mean here, but really... Do you even read your own posts, much less anyone else's."

Yes I do. You obviously don't.

"How many times have you referred to your Santy Claus "analogy"... "

As many times as you have been too scared to answer it.

"There are others implied in this thread... many others that imply there is no evidence nor will there ever be evidence of _________ you can fill in your own "fairy tale".... so puhleezzzzz..."

Sorry, that's YOUR invention. Nobody has said or even implied NEVER.

" I might have been born at night, but it wasn't last night..."

Your posts say otherwise. :)

[AllGoodMen]

I sometimes try to wonder how people can believe in evolution and not believe in God. It takes more faith to believe your ancestor was a one-celled amoeba than to believe the Biblical account of creation of each species after their own kind, in my humble opionion.