Results from nationwide poll (Overwhelming support for teaching both sides of Evolution debate)

Zogby International ^ | February 3, 2009

[GodGunsGuts]

Narrative Summary

4. Would you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree that teachers and students should have the academic freedom to discuss both the strengths and weaknesses of evolution as a scientific theory?

(Click excerpt link for responses)

5. Charles Darwin wrote that when considering the evidence for his theory of evolution, “…a fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question.” Do you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree with Darwin’s statement?

(Click excerpt link for responses)

6. I am going to read you two statements about Biology teachers teaching Darwin’s theory of evolution. Please tell me which statement comes closest to your own point of view—Statement A or Statement B?

Statement A: Biology teachers should teach only Darwin’s theory of evolution and the scientific evidence that supports it.

Statement B: Biology teachers should teach Darwin’s theory of evolution, but also the scientific evidence against it.

(Click excerpt link for responses)

[ColdWater]

Then you are knowlegeable that the plate moves about 2" per year consistent with the 300,000 year cycle of magnetic reversals. Looking at the 'stripes' we see millions of years of movement.

If the earth was only 6000 years old, that would mean that the poles were reversing every few decades! How many reversals have we seen in the last few hundred years?

[ColdWater]

Further, references to six day creation are referred to as literal by Moses, Jesus, Paul, and others. They are never referred to as being metaphorical.

Which Genesis is literal? Genesis 1 which states that man was created after animals or Genesis 2 which states that animals were created after man?

[Cedric]

"I can destroy evolution easily!"

"I can destroy evolution easily!"

"I can destroy evolution easily!"

"I can destroy evolution easily!"

"I can destroy evolution easily!"

I never wrote that!

I never wrote that!

I never wrote that!

I never wrote that!

I never wrote that!

Apologize.

Apologize.

Apologize.

Apologize.

Apologize.

[Cedric]

Uh huh.

[ColdWater]

creationWiki ...

says dinosaurs went extinct because evil man hunted them down and destroyed them. Why are these menacing beasts and the great battle between man and these beasts mentioned in the Bible?

[oldmanreedy]

"In our home school I teach my kids what evolution is, often using the evolution scientist’s own writings, so that they have an antithesis to our thesis that creation science is correct."

Interesting. Which "evolution scientist[s]" do you use, and what writings of theirs do you incorporate into your lessons?

[whattajoke]

References to the four corners of the earth and sunrise and so forth are in poetic and prophetic books. References to six-day creation are in historical narratives right in there with the genealogies, the troop movements, and all the literal stuff. Further, references to six day creation are referred to as literal by Moses, Jesus, Paul, and others. They are never referred to as being metaphorical.

This would be more easily accepted if all of Christianity agreed with it. But they don't. In fact, there are plenty of Christians on this very thread that would take issue with this. The problem is that no one knows when the bible switches from literal to "poetic", from historic to prophetic. Hence, the endless array of denominations, internal bickerings, OEC's vs. YEC's vs. Theological Evolutionists, etc, etc, etc.

Firstly, I am not a degreed scientist and doubt I ever will be.

I'm NOT trying to be a jerk here, but... those who DO have degrees in the specialties dealing with those skulls... they DO know what they are talking about. Just as theologians who have studied the original Hebrew know a heckuva lot more about the Bible than I do - and I wouldn't argue with them or disagree with them.

Secondly, those who believe God created the world don’t get grants from secular or governmental institutions.

The majority of scientists who seek grant money in America are Christians who believe in God.

[GodGunsGuts]

==5. Charles Darwin wrote that when considering the evidence for his theory of evolution, “…a fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question.”

What do you suppose the other side of each question was when Darwin wrote that statement?

==Statement B: Biology teachers should teach Darwin’s theory of evolution, but also the scientific evidence against it.

Which groups are amassing the scientific evidence against the “theory” of evolution.

[ColdWater]

Uh huh.

Wow. Your posts get better all the time!

[ColdWater]

Which groups are amassing the scientific evidence against the “theory” of evolution.

I don't know. Haven't seen any yet.

[whattajoke]

Um, okay dude. Here goes:

Cedric the genius did NOT say “I can destroy evolution easily.” I paraphrased him and am terribly sorry.

Cedric the genius DID say, “I’m not opposed to destroying the flimsy myth of evolution, first, if that’s where you want to start.”

Again, I am deeply, deeply sorry for this misquote. As we have all learned, Creationists are very strict about misquotes and have never, ever done so on any of their websites.

Now, back to Cedric destroying the flimsy myth of evolution...

[ColdWater]

the facts

Or does that escape you?

[Cedric]

Sorry I stepped out.

I had to go get my really, really tall boots.

[ColdWater]

I paraphrased him and am terribly sorry.

Don't apologize. Your post was labeling his game, not directly quoting him.

[ColdWater]

Sorry I stepped out. I had to go get my really, really tall boots.

You left? We didn't miss you.

[Cedric]

Your gracious apology is magnanimously accepted.

[Cedric]

Why the quotation marks then, Shakespeare?

[whattajoke]

What do you suppose the other side of each question was when Darwin wrote that statement?

GGG, you really must check your sources! To answer your question, certainly not what you think he meant! Go to your bookshelf and grab one of your well-worn copies of "On the Origin of Species" and check it out for yourself. It's on page 2. This shouldn't take you long.

[ColdWater]

Why the quotation marks then, Shakespeare?

Ask him. Maybe for this?

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

Quotation Marks for Words

Use quotation marks to indicate words used ironically, with reservations, or in some unusual way.

Example:

The great march of "progress" has left millions impoverished and hungry.

[Cedric]

Words, not an entire sentence, professor Johnson.

And you got Genesis 1 & 2 screwed up, too.

Perhaps, you've got a little “fusion” goin’ on in your brain, Mr. Oppenheimer.