Skip to comments.
The More They Know Darwin, The Less They Want Darwin-Only Indoctrination
Evolution News & Views ^
| October 27, 2009
| Anika Smith
Posted on 10/28/2009 7:34:50 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
The More They Know Darwin, The Less They Want Darwin-Only Indoctrination
According to an international poll released by the British Council, the majority of Americans 60% support teaching alternatives to evolution in the science classroom. The percentage is the same for Britons, despite the fact that both countries have been inundated with pro-Darwin media coverage in this super-mega Darwin Year.
Of course, the British media reporting this are chagrined. Britain is the birthplace of Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution, and the official-sounding British Council, the UK group behind the Darwin Now campaign that commissioned the Ipsos MORI poll, have spent precious resources educating the world about Darwin. Now some believe the poll shows that efforts by Darwinist organizations aren't working.
Head of the British Councils Darwin Now program Fern Elsdon-Baker said, Overall these results may reflect the need for a more sophisticated approach to teaching and communicating how science works as a process.
While Darwins apologists might try to explain the poll numbers as an example of ignorance influencing peoples beliefs, the numbers themselves suggest a different picture.
Across the board, most respondents from the ten countries polled thought that other perspectives on the origins of species such as intelligent design and creationism should be taught in science class*. When the poll is weighted to include only those respondents who have heard of Charles Darwin and know something about his theory of evolution, the percentage supporting alternate theories increases, from 60% to 66% in Britain and 60% to 64% in the U.S.
The correlation appears again when we consider which countries have more knowledge of Darwins theory. The highest numbers of those in support of alternative theories in the classroom correspond to the highest numbers of those familiar with Charles Darwin 60% in Britain, 65% in Mexico, 61% in China, 66% in Russia, and 60% in the U.S. It appears that the more people know about Darwins theory, the more they want to see alternatives in science class.
The basic truth is that most people want evolution to have to compete for its place of dominance in their schools. Interestingly, the U.S. was the only nation with significant knowledge of Darwin where respondents chose the option theories about the origins of species and development of life on earth should not be taught in science lessons at all. 14% chose that, compared with 3% in Britain.
*This takes both those who select "other perspectives" only and those who select "other perspectives" together with "evolutionary theories." It should be noted that Discovery Institute opposes efforts to mandate teaching alternative theories in the science classroom we'd rather have the whole picture of evolution, the scientific arguments both for and against the theory, presented instead.
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Russia; US: Washington; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: antiscienceevos; belongsinreligion; catholic; china; christian; creation; creationuts; darwiniacs; darwinism; divideandconquerfr; doesntbelonginnews; education; educationyahright; evangelical; evolution; evoreligionexposed; godsgravesglyphs; intelligentdesign; judaism; mexico; moralabsolutes; nonintelligentdesign; notasciencetopic; propellerbeanie; protestant; russia; science; socialism; spammer; templeofdarwin; templeofnutters; ussherites; yecspam
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 301-304 next last
To: GodGunsGuts
2
posted on
10/28/2009 7:36:02 PM PDT
by
lp boonie
(Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment)
To: metmom; DaveLoneRanger; editor-surveyor; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; MrB; GourmetDan; Fichori; ...
To: lp boonie
I sometimes wonder if people put stuff like this on the FreeRepublic to make us look like morons.
4
posted on
10/28/2009 7:40:41 PM PDT
by
Hiddigeigei
(quem deus vult perdere prius dementat)
To: GodGunsGuts
Humans were made from dirt. Duh!
5
posted on
10/28/2009 7:43:15 PM PDT
by
Soothesayer
(The United States of America Rest in Peace November 4 2008)
To: GodGunsGuts
If people are exposed to both worldviews, they do seem to reject the fantasy worldview which is based on unbelievable stories. Evolutionists hate that — they were hoping that it would be the other worldview that would get rejected.
6
posted on
10/28/2009 7:50:10 PM PDT
by
ClearCase_guy
(Play the Race Card -- lose the game.)
To: Hiddigeigei
Actually, all the studies say pretty much the same thing. Morons tend to think someone is trying to make a moron out of them if what they are saying sounds smart. After all, morons are very suspicious of anything that goes over their head. Having said that, most morons have at least learned not to draw attention to themselves on these matters because it is an instant giveaway of their moronic state of mind, soon followed by people laughing and pointing at them. I would be glad to forward these studies to you if you think you can read them.
All the best—GGG
To: Soothesayer; GodGunsGuts
I keep asking people to explain exactly how we got here and they keep telling me I’m stupid.
I keep telling them how exactly we evolved from a different species and they keep calling me a moron.
Darwinists are quite incompetent.
8
posted on
10/28/2009 7:51:45 PM PDT
by
wastedyears
(Clyde Shelton is my hero.)
To: Hiddigeigei
I sometimes wonder if people put stuff like this on the FreeRepublic to make us look like morons.No joke.
9
posted on
10/28/2009 7:52:00 PM PDT
by
Rafterman
("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -- Curtis LeMay)
To: wastedyears
==Darwinists are quite incompetent.
LOL...Indeed! They can’t even make their numbers grow after seizing control of the public schools, the courts, the universities, and the MSM!!!
To: ClearCase_guy
To: GodGunsGuts
"Signature in the Cell"--DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design, by Stephen C. Meyer.
What a read! I highly recommend it. Great historical background of DNA developments from the past up to the present day issues. This book, for me, changed my whole outlook of life on this planet. It is tough going, but well worth the effort. They often talk about "landmark" books, well this is one of them, IMHO.
12
posted on
10/28/2009 8:05:47 PM PDT
by
CanaGuy
(Go Harper!)
To: Rafterman
That’s a metal detector, and it detects metal. Typical darwiniac mistake.
You could at least conceivably detect that crap with your nose...unless of course you are a Temple of Darwin fanatic, in which case you wouldn’t pick up on it, because the crap would smell the same as your normal surroundings.
To: GodGunsGuts
By all means let creation science be taught in schools. It should take all of about 10 minuets to teach it and then children can be allowed to make up their own minds in the face of the evidence. For children who study hard and keep an open mind it seems to me utterly inconceivable that they could conclude anything other than that evolution is true ~ Richard Dawkins
http://www.scribd.com/doc/6230199/Articles-of-Richard-Dawkins
14
posted on
10/28/2009 8:13:34 PM PDT
by
Ira_Louvin
(Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
To: CanaGuy
I read it as well. The chapters that focused on the origin of DNA blew my mind, and got me thinking about DNA in a way I never had before. Like you, I highly recommend it! Thank for chiming in :o)
All the best—GGG
To: GodGunsGuts
Argumentum ad Hominem :
The fallacy of attacking the character or circumstances of an individual who is advancing a statement or an argument instead of trying to disprove the truth of the statement or the soundness of the argument. Often the argument is characterized simply as a personal attack.
1. The personal attack is also often termed an "ad personem argument": the statement or argument at issue is dropped from consideration or is ignored, and the locutor's character or circumstances are used to influence opinion.
2. The fallacy draws its appeal from the technique of "getting personal." The assumption is that what the locutor is saying is entirely or partially dictated by his character or special circumstances and so should be disregarded.
16
posted on
10/28/2009 8:14:55 PM PDT
by
Ira_Louvin
(Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
To: GodGunsGuts
thanks for breaking my BS meter
17
posted on
10/28/2009 8:15:19 PM PDT
by
bigbob
To: GodGunsGuts
There are no hypotheses, alternative to the principle of evolution with its tree of life, that any competent biologist of today takes seriously. Moreover, the principle is so important for an understanding of the world we live in and of ourselves that the public in general, including students taking biology in high school, should be made aware of it, and of the fact that it is firmly established, even as the rotundity of the earth is firmly established. ~ Herman J Muller
18
posted on
10/28/2009 8:19:51 PM PDT
by
Ira_Louvin
(Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
To: bigbob
Are you sure it was me? I’m sure you break it yourself all the time.
To: GodGunsGuts
Yeah, whatever... maybe a lot of us are just sick of these stupid "creationists vs. evolutionists" threads that are nothing more than thinly-veiled proselytizing. Why don't you keep this baloney in the Religion forum where it belongs?
20
posted on
10/28/2009 8:20:49 PM PDT
by
Rafterman
("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -- Curtis LeMay)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 301-304 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson