Posted on 06/21/2006 8:33:46 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
In a veiled attack on creationism, the world's foremost academies of science on Wednesday called on parents and teachers to provide children with the facts about evolution and the origins of life on Earth.
A declaration signed by 67 national academies of science blasted the scriptural teaching of biology as a potential distortion of young minds.
"In various parts of the world, within science courses taught in certain public systems of education, scientific evidence, data and testable theories about the origins and evolution of life on Earth are being concealed, denied or confused with theories not testable by science," the declaration said.
"We urge decision-makers, teachers and parents to educate all children about the methods and discoveries of science and to foster an understanding of the science of nature.
"Knowledge of the natural world in which they live empowers people to meet human needs and protect the planet."
Citing "evidence-based facts" derived from observation, experiment and neutral assessment, the declaration points to findings that the Universe is between 11 and 15 billion years old, and the Earth was formed about 4.5 billion years ago.
Life on Earth appeared at least 2.5 billion years ago as a result of physical and chemical processes, and evolved into the species that live today.
"Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin," it said.
The statement does not name any names or religions, nor does it explain why it fears the teaching of evolution or the scientific explanation for the origins of planetary life are being sidelined.
Signatories of the declaration include the US National Academy of Sciences, Britain's Royal Society, the French Academy of Sciences and their counterparts in Canada, China, Germany, Iran, Israel and Japan and elsewhere.
It comes, however, in the context of mounting concern among biologists about the perceived influence of creationism in the United States.
Evangelical Christians there are campaigning hard for schools to teach creationism or downgrade evolution to the status of one of a competing group of theories about the origins of life on Earth.
According to the website Christian Post (www.christianpost.com), an opinion poll conducted in May by Gallop found that 46 percent of Americans believe that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years or so.
Scientists say hominids emerged around six million years ago and one of their offshoots developed into anatomically modern man, Homo sapiens, about 200,000 years ago, although the timings of both events are fiercely debated.
Nearly every religion offers an explanation as to how life began on Earth.
Fundamentalist Christians insist on a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis in the Bible, in which God made the world in seven days, culminating in the creation of the first two humans, Adam and Eve.
A variation of this is called "intelligent design" which acknowledges evolution but claims that genetic mutations are guided by God's hand rather than by Charles Darwin's process of natural selection.
US President George W. Bush said last August that he believed in this concept and that he supported its teaching in American schools.
The academies' statement says that science does not seek to offer judgements of value or morality, and acknowledges limitations in current knowledge.
"Science is open-ended and subject to correction and expansion as new theoretical and empirical understanding emerges," it adds.
"There is indication of global flood in the geological evidence. It's all in how you look at the evidence."
Adding a big boat with two of every single animal on the planet might be stretching the evidence. As would be making this flood happen in forty days, landing on top of a mountain while the waters receded, etc. Where did all that water go? What happened to the saltwater fish? What happened to the freshwater fish? Who was the dummy who left the unicorn outside? Sounds like we need a scientist to figure all of this out.
"If you have evidence to the contrary I'd love to hear it."
LOL you just put two feet in the manure didn't you? Watch what you get from that comment. I'm guessing the science of scripture, or the chuckle from someone who "really" knows the truth. And if you choose not to define the exact ingredients of primordial soup, that means evolution is wrong. LOL, it is really rather funny, as really rather sad that the general population has the IQ of a stick.
Pure nonsense. Any specific hypothesis in molelular biology can be confirmed or falsified.
There a number of interrelated questions regarding biogenesis. One is finding a possible path, one that works in the laboratory. Another is determining if the necessary conditions are part of a plausible history of the earth. Any specific hypothesis in these areas can be confirmed or falsified.
Obviously thes problems are hard, but there are problems in science that have taken millennia to solve. Do you think science should give up when it incounters difficult problems?
"Do you think science should give up when it incounters difficult problems? "
Nah, science doesn't have to give up. Science just needs to say "goddidit", and the problem is solved! </sarc>
That's some very nice dancing there, Battman. I'll give you this, you can parse with the best of them.
"Fowls" meant "anything that flies" when the KJB was written?
How about spongemonkeys? They can fly; are they "fowls"?
(Well, they're foul, maybe he's on to something....)
http://www.rathergood.com/moon_song
Those things make me hungry....
Could also mean grounders outside the base lines, if not kicked back in by a defensive player.
The staff at PhysOrg.com who wrote this article apparently have never felt the need to read even one chapter of Genesis, the source material on which they opine. If that were not enough to discredit them as reliable sources of information, if they did read it they demonstrate very little reading comprehension. According to Genesis God created the heavens and the earth in 6 days, not 7.
Their hackneyed assertions that ID is simply a variant of Biblical Creationism, and one "which acknowledges evolution but claims that genetic mutations are guided by God's hand rather than by Charles Darwin's process of natural selection" is nothing but a straw man - a ridiculous caricature designed to be easily knocked down. The fundamental error is the critics' erroneous conflation of ID with theology. This all-too-typical misrepresentation may be useful to such critics but it is still a misrepresentation, which tends to further discredit the authors as reliable sources of information.
Cordially,
"And, on the other hand, we have some mysterious magical, supernatural entity that speaks or waves its hand and everything magically appears. Or, maybe it's turtles, or a coyote, or a crow. Yes, that's far more believable."
It takes faith and IMO a lot less faith than believing in evolution. I've felt God's presence and seen his impact on my life and that of others. I haven't seen any animals evolve and have no FAITH in those who insist their contrived evidence is real.
"in the end it'll mean nothing as science, intelligence and observation and reality win out."
And then a hurricane or earthquake shows up and all reason is lost as each person fights for their lives among the hordes.
"It takes faith and IMO a lot less faith than believing in evolution. I've felt God's presence and seen his impact on my life and that of others. I haven't seen any animals evolve and have no FAITH in those who insist their contrived evidence is real."
Merely pointing out that the imposition of modern classifications of "birds" and "bat" on a piece of ancient literature that refers to flying things is to anachronistically and improperly interpret the passage, is not "dancing" "parsing".
The Bible was not written in King James English. Leviticus was written in Hebrew. Why don't you go look up the Hebrew word that is used in the text and see how it has been translated over the millenia by scholars.
Cordially,
The fundamental error is the critics' erroneous conflation of ID with theology.
You might want to check with the people actually pushing ID - when they think nobody's listening, they admit that it's about religion.
Read the Discovery Institute's "Wedge Document". You'll learn that it is about theology, no matter what they sometimes claim.
Considering that Islam is increasingly endorsing ID and creationism, you have a real point.
But you will notice that no Creationoid has bitten. When I or Coyoteman or RadioAstronomer or RightWingProfessor when he was still here pull rank, very few Creationoids will take up the challenge. They may go to some CR site to get some "ammo" but they are usually bright enough to realize they have nothing.
So they just slink away.
"Fine by me. What you believe is your business, and what I believe is mine. Go in peace."
A polite response from an evolutionist!! yet more proof that there is a God. :)
"ID - when they think nobody's listening, they admit that it's about religion."
Exactly. And that is why it needs no mention in school. Religion is for the family. School is for learning science math, history, etc. And anyone who wants it in school needs to explain how they handle it when Westboro Baptist Church shows up for group prayer. There is no such thing as non-denominational prayer, and there is no such thing as ID science. It is religion.
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.