Posted on 08/31/2006 7:42:01 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
More adults in the United States believe the theory of evolution is correct, according to a poll by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. 51 per cent of respondents think that humans and other living things evolved over time, while 42 per cent say they existed in their present form since the beginning of time.
Charles Darwin’s "The Origin of Species" was first published in 1859. The book details the British naturalist’s theory that all organisms gradually evolve through the process of natural selection. Darwin’s views were antagonistic to creationism, the belief that a more powerful being or a deity created life.
In the United States, the debate on the topic accelerated after the 1925 Scopes trial, which tested a law that banned the teaching of evolution in Tennessee public schools. In 2004, Georgia’s Cobb County was at the centre of a controversy on whether science textbooks that explain evolutionary theory should include disclaimer stickers.
The theory of intelligent design suggests certain biological mechanisms are too complex to have developed without the involvement of a powerful force or intelligent being.
Last month, Austrian cardinal Christoph Schoenborn said the two views are not necessarily incompatible, declaring, "There is no conflict between science and religion, but a debate between a materialist interpretation of the results of science and a metaphysical philosophical interpretation. (...) The possibility that the Creator used evolution as a tool is completely acceptable for the Catholic faith."
Polling Data
Some people think that humans and other living things evolved over time. Others think that humans and other living things existed in their present form since the beginning of time. Which of these comes closest to your view?
|
|
||
|
Jul. 2006 |
Jul. 2005 |
|
|
Evolved over time |
51% |
48% |
|
Existed in their present form |
42% |
42% |
|
Don’t know / Refused |
7% |
10% |
Source: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press Methodology: Telephone interviews with 2,003 American adults, conducted from Jul. 6 to Jul. 19, 2006. Margin of error is 3 per cent.
An instant classic.
I have always believed that Jimmy Carter , John Kerry Hillary Clinton , Ted Kennedy , Howard Dead , Jesse , Rev. Al and too many more dimocrats to name , evolved from a lower form of life spieces .
I work with some that are still in the process.
Would you complain if the school system decided to teach alchemy as an alternative to chemistry or astrology vs. astronomy in science class?
Not in your HS science classes I would bet. I certainly do not remember studying alchemy when taking an organic chemistry class as an undergrad. (Nor in grad school for that matter)
ROFL! :-)
Krebs cycle placemark
Why don't evos have the nerve to address their placemarkers but instend tend to post their intended to be insulting placemarkers anonymously when everybody knows who they referring to anyway?
"other polls reverse the numbers and make it more like 60% don't believe in evolution"
Source???
And don't forget, Pluto has been recently demoted, too. So much for science not being done but popular vote.
Please read the definition of a "scientific theory" before starting the "it's just a theory" argument.
most /moʊst/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[mohst] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective, superl. of much or many with more as compar.
1. in the greatest quantity, amount, measure, degree, or number: to win the most votes.
2. in the majority of instances: Most operations are successful.
3. greatest, as in size or extent: the most talent. –noun
4. the greatest quantity, amount, or degree; the utmost: The most I can hope for is a passing grade.
5. the greatest number or the majority of a class specified: Most of his writing is rubbish.
6. the greatest number: The most this room will seat is 150.
BUZZ! Oh, sorry... we have some nice consolation prizes for you...
And I suggest that enabling mythological beliefs and ignorance of science in the schools is wrong. If half of parents refused to believe in gravity, would we simply stop teaching it so we don't offend???
However, to imply that either faction, ID or Biblical/Koranic/Hindu/Raelian/etc creationism, of the anti-evolution coalition is science is a lie. If a teacher is caught doing this, they should be fired, and, IMO, impeached and convicted by the Legislature so that they can never again be a public employee. Sound harsh? Well, the law specifies that science be taught. Teaching pseudoscience is a violation of the law by a public servant. The way to deal with that is impeachment for high crimes.
Until ID or creationism has produced some testable hypotheses, and passed the tests, and makes more and/or more accurate predictions about experiments and field observations, they cannot be accepted as science. Calls for teaching them as though they were are affirmative action, as well as high crimes.
My son had Bio this year and his teacher said he'd rather not even teach evo at all because it's such a hot button issue but that he had to. They spent all of two or three days on it and opened up the discussion to *other* ideas of where life came from.
Then he told them that he was going to teach them what answers they needed to put down on the test in order to be considered *correct*, so they would get it marked right. He didn't care what they really thought and told them not to put down what made sense to them, just put down the answers that they needed to to pass. (So much for teaching kids to think for themselves.)
Public school, BTW.
Only among seculars – who have no religious affiliation – does the majority (69 percent) accept the process of natural selection for evolution.
Which is kind of weird if you think about it -- 31 percent of seculars don't accept undirected evolution.
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.