Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Results from nationwide poll (Overwhelming support for teaching both sides of Evolution debate)
Zogby International ^ | February 3, 2009

Posted on 02/19/2009 4:06:47 PM PST by 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)

(Excerpt) Read more at evolutionnews.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: 2009polls; antiscienceagenda; catholic; christian; creation; creationism; evolution; fundamentalism; intelligentdesign; moralabsolutes; zogby
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-228 next last
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
I don't follow? In what way does what I said imply teaching that God may be dead?

You said you wanted to teach ID. You do realize that one of the basic tenents of ID is that God may be dead since there exists no evidence that he has been alive in the last few hundred million years?

41 posted on 02/19/2009 4:50:24 PM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
I’m not opposed to destroying the flimsy myth of evolution, first, if that’s where you want to start.

You and 17 other FReepers. Have at it. Give us your one single best brightest undisputable evidence to destroy the "flimsy myth of evolution."
42 posted on 02/19/2009 4:51:04 PM PST by whattajoke (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Marie2
the main creation science teachings

As far as I understand, the 'main creation science' is as written in the Bible in Genesis. That doesn't classify as science class material.

43 posted on 02/19/2009 4:52:25 PM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke

No, since the Bible does not declare alchemy nor flat earth notions to be true.

Find the missing link yet?


44 posted on 02/19/2009 4:52:37 PM PST by Marie2 (Ora et labora)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Those chemists are shaking in their boots knowing that their fanciful “periodic table” is crumbling, the evidence for alchemy is overwhelming!

If not for a “Temple of Chemistry” zealots keeping out our important work and marginalizing and discrediting out spokesmen, we would have long ago superseded Chemistry as the primary science-like theory of matter.

45 posted on 02/19/2009 4:54:53 PM PST by allmendream ("Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Cedric

You just put the burden on them. If you’re not willing to do any of the work, what entitles you to have any say in the matter?


46 posted on 02/19/2009 4:55:43 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

The description of God’s miraculous creation of the earth is indeed found in Genesis. So is the account of the world wide flood.

Creation science presupposes these incidents to be true. So, Biology, Chemistry, Geology etc. are taught from these presuppositions.

For example in Geology we learn the principle of superposition, creation/formation of various strata, petrification and so forth, and in Biology we learn about cells, plant life, reproduction, DNA, micro (as opposed to macro) evolution, all without the imposition of evolutionary thought.


47 posted on 02/19/2009 4:56:07 PM PST by Marie2 (Ora et labora)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Give us your one single best brightest undisputable evidence

You go first.

Never mind, we don't feel like giving you another 150 years to spew more of your gibberish.

48 posted on 02/19/2009 4:56:30 PM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
I didn't know that.

I also said (quoting myself):

“Please note, the above concerns pedagogy only — it isn’t meant to be a comment on the substantive issues (between evolution, and ID, etc.).”

You just have to look back at all the TOE/ID/Creationism threads on Freerepublic to realize that the “controversy” makes the subject far, far, more interesting than simply presenting the orthodox view. Do you expect students (teenagers at that!!) to just take teacher's word for things — or would you rather equip them to be able to think for themselves?

49 posted on 02/19/2009 4:56:43 PM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Probably not correct to brand all Christians as anti-evolutionary, if that’s what you meant.


50 posted on 02/19/2009 4:56:55 PM PST by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

The United Church of Darwin does not allow any disagreement.


51 posted on 02/19/2009 4:57:10 PM PST by Cinnamon Girl (G-d Bless President Bush. He kept us safe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

They barfed up the inane theory.


52 posted on 02/19/2009 4:57:41 PM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Marie2
No, since the Bible does not declare alchemy nor flat earth notions to be true.

We must have read different bibles.

Find the missing link yet?

Sure! Tens of thousands actually. Here are ten to get you started, written in a very simple layman style.

My particular favorite "missing link" is the tiktaalik - because it was predicted and then discovered exactly where it was predicted to be found in the strata. I'm still waiting for the creationist take on tiktaalik.

And by the way, to play your "missing link" game is foolish. For every one discovered, two more "missing links" are created.
53 posted on 02/19/2009 4:57:50 PM PST by whattajoke (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
They barfed up the inane theory.

It takes more than insults and righeous indgnation to prove it.

54 posted on 02/19/2009 4:59:29 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke

“We must have read different bibles. “

Indeed. Can you tell me about any verses on alchemy or flat earth?

Those aren’t missing links, sorry, try again. I’d like to see the link species between one species and the next. Most especially, I’d like to see the one between apes and man.


55 posted on 02/19/2009 5:00:37 PM PST by Marie2 (Ora et labora)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Marie2; whattajoke
Or how ‘bout living cells spontaneously forming on the backs of crystals or life on earth seeded by aliens (Dawkins).
56 posted on 02/19/2009 5:01:41 PM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
or would you rather equip them to be able to think for themselves?

I am sure that you would be the first to call the principal's office if your child came home saying that the science teacher was teaching that God may be dead.

57 posted on 02/19/2009 5:02:46 PM PST by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Cedric
You write:

I’m not opposed to destroying the flimsy myth of evolution, first, if that’s where you want to start.

So I give you the easiest way to get started: "Pick one - your best shot, your best evidence, etc" And then I get:

You go first.

Um. Did you give up so quickly?
58 posted on 02/19/2009 5:02:53 PM PST by whattajoke (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Cedric

It is interesting. Ultimately, evolutionists see matter as eternal. Creationists see God as eternal.


59 posted on 02/19/2009 5:03:32 PM PST by Marie2 (Ora et labora)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

Okay, have someone read this to you very slowly: It is incumbent upon the proponents of a theory to prove it.


60 posted on 02/19/2009 5:03:33 PM PST by Cedric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-228 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson