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

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 Council’s 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 Darwin’s apologists might try to explain the poll numbers as an example of ignorance influencing people’s 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 Darwin’s 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 Darwin’s 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 previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 301-304 next last
To: Rafterman; GodGunsGuts
Why don't you keep this baloney in the Religion forum where it belongs?

Uhhhh because Jim Robinson said so and he calls the shots and you don't?

41 posted on 10/28/2009 9:33:11 PM PDT by tpanther (Science was, is and will forever be a small subset of God's creation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

That is not true and you know it……………………

In the USSR, Muller supervised a large and productive lab, and organized work on medical genetics. Most of his work involved further explorations of genetics and radiation. There he completed his eugenics book, Out of the Night. By 1936, however, Stalin’s repressive policies and the rise of Lysenkoism was making the USSR an increasingly problematic place to live and work. Muller and much of the Russian genetics community did what they could to oppose Trofim Lysenko and his Larmarckian evolutionary theory, but Muller was soon forced to leave the Soviet Union after Stalin read a translation of his eugenics book and was “displeased by it, and...ordered an attack prepared against it.”[12]

But nice try.


42 posted on 10/28/2009 9:43:37 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Rafterman
"How about keeping the proselytizing in the RELIGION forum, instead of in News/Activism?"

The mods continually allow it to be posted here so my guess is they want it here.

I also guess I wont be contributing to FR this time around due to this sort of 'exceptionalism'.

If the mods decide to enforce the rules as written and observed by most posters, I'll reconsider.

43 posted on 10/28/2009 9:51:07 PM PDT by telebob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: lp boonie
Here we go.

Where? Fake polls only lead to a fantasy land.

44 posted on 10/28/2009 9:55:48 PM PDT by Jeff Gordon (Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hiddigeigei
I sometimes wonder if people put stuff like this on the FreeRepublic to make us look like morons.

It is not as bad as it looks. Almost all of these posts are the work one person. He is highly dedicated to his beliefs and looks far and wide to bring us his fantasies.

45 posted on 10/28/2009 10:01:08 PM PDT by Jeff Gordon (Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin; All

Then maybe this is a fraud or I’ve misunderstood what the letter writer was talking about here.

“Hermann J. Muller’s 1936 Letter to Stalin
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
geneticist H.J. Muller to Joseph Stalin advocating the creation of a ... eugenics movement, Jewish scholars, Hermann J. Muller, Joseph Stalin, ...
www.mankindquarterly.org/muellersletter.pdf - Similar
by J Glad - 2003 - Cited by 1 - Related articles - All 3 versions”


46 posted on 10/28/2009 10:01:27 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: scripter

I too recommend Meyer and have bought the book and the DVD.


47 posted on 10/28/2009 10:06:07 PM PDT by tongass kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: tpanther
Uhhhh because Jim Robinson said so...

Citation, please?

48 posted on 10/28/2009 10:15:37 PM PDT by Rafterman ("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -- Curtis LeMay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin
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

Which is the same mentality that most evos on this forum have.

It is simply beyond their comprehension that anyone would look at what they call the *preponderance of evidence* and decide that species to species evolution is not a fact and that variation within species has been grossly misinterpreted as macro-evolution.

49 posted on 10/28/2009 10:22:20 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
I clicked on the “more knowledge” link. well worth effort to read the survey, no wonder the ‘council’ would press for more Darwinism teaching. All that effort and so little results.

Thanks for pointing that out. I for one am cheered to see that in the US, 51 percent agree that "it is possible to believe in a God and still hold the view that life on earth, including human life, evolved over time as a result of natural selection," compared with only 27 percent who don't. And 41 percent agree that "enough scientific evidence exists to support Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution,” compared to 30 percent who don't.

What I'm really curious about, but can't find any information on, is how they determined who "have heard of Charles Darwin and know something about the Theory of Evolution." If they're just self-identified, I'd be interested in seeing the results weighted by whether what they know is accurate. Because as we see here every day, there are lots of people who think they know something about the TOE, but what they think they know is totally off base. Including their opinions doesn't really support the article's headline.

50 posted on 10/28/2009 10:25:50 PM PDT by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater; GodGunsGuts; tpanther; Agamemnon; editor-surveyor

“Now we got GGG telling us that the internationals should tell us what we should think.”

**************************************************************
Another evo lie posted on FR about creationists. GGG isn’t telling anyone that he thinks internationals should tell us what to think. He posted a thread showing and discussing the poll results.

Evos just can’t seem to come to grips with the fact that their efforts in brainwashing the populace of the US aren’t working, even after getting a monopoly in the public education system.

If you want to see which international is telling us what to think, however, you have to go to the evo camp and take a look at the likes of Dawkins.

But since poll results from overseas aren’t good enough for you, here are some American sources telling us the same thing.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/03/americans_overwhelmingly_suppo.html

Headline: “Americans Overwhelmingly Support Teaching Scientific Challenges to Darwinian Evolution, Zogby Poll Shows” From March 2006.

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=719

*******************************************************
Free Republic Poll on Evolution
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1706571/posts?page=63#63

*******************************************************
Creationism makes a comeback in US
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1856224/posts

*******************************************************
Teaching creation and evolution in schools
Solid research reveals American beliefs
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v13/i2/teaching.asp

********************************************************
Survey Finds Support Is Strong For Teaching 2 Origin Theories
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B07E4D9143BF932A25750C0A9669C8B63

********************************************************
Public Divided on Origins of Life
http://people-press.org/report/254/religion-a-strength-and-weakness-for-both-parties

********************************************************
Americans Believe in Jesus, Poll Says (creation poll results included)
http://derekgulbranson.com/2005/01/17/americans-believe-in-jesus/

*******************************************************
Should intelligent design be taught alongside the theory of evolution? Please answer this Poll.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2103111/posts


51 posted on 10/28/2009 10:31:48 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: tpanther
Amazing...if you can't compete...just lie.

SEOP... Standard evo operating procedure.

52 posted on 10/28/2009 10:32:50 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: metmom
It is simply beyond their comprehension that anyone would look at what they call the *preponderance of evidence* and decide that species to species evolution is not a fact and that variation within species has been grossly misinterpreted as macro-evolution.

And your mentality is the same that most creationuts on this forum have...that is, a total lack of any irrefutable, reproducible, peer-reviewable, independently-verifiable, scientific evidence of any so-called "intelligent design".

So, if you want to talk about preponderance of evidence, please feel free to present some first...

53 posted on 10/28/2009 10:35:00 PM PDT by Rafterman ("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -- Curtis LeMay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: metmom

Microevolution is a term - when used by creationists - that is the evolutionary equivalent of the belief that the mechanism you use to walk from your bedroom to the kitchen is insufficient to get you from New York to Los Angeles.

Over the time frame from the late Hadean to the present, this becomes sufficient to explain both the diversity within and similarities between the forms of life observed on earth, including both living forms directly observed in the present, and extinct form indirectly observed from the fossil record.


54 posted on 10/28/2009 10:37:30 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Rafterman; tpanther; GodGunsGuts

JR has made it clear where he stands on the creation/evolution debate. Every time the evos try to get creation type threads stuffed into the Religion Forum where THEY think it belongs, they fail. And just because evos think something, doesn’t mean that it’s a fact, written in stone. Placement of threads is an opinion and there are plenty of us that think that these threads qualify as well for News and Activism as anywhere.

Evos have an arrogance of an incredibly high degree to constantly be thinking that they are the FINAL WORD on everything. Their opinion is not fact and they just need to get over it when they don’t get their way.

If JR felt that they belonged there, there they would be and there they would stay. This is his site, he calls the shots.

If you don’t like seeing them elsewhere, why do you bother coming on these threads? Why bother with FR at all? There are other God and religion free sites that are very pro-evolution and anti-God that are available for you to use. That way you don’t have to be annoyed because someone is running their site the way they wish.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2368427/posts?page=233#233

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1732037/posts?page=84#84


55 posted on 10/28/2009 10:47:22 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Rafterman
Do you believe that there is a preponderance of evidence that proves evolution?
56 posted on 10/28/2009 10:50:02 PM PDT by tongass kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
How else can a person answer a poll about what they have heard of except by self identification?

If you say you've never heard of something, how could anyone say differently? In looking at the figures I think some of the results are contradictory but then that is the nature of human thinking all time, I guess.

And of course it wasn't the goal of the pollsters to help the respondents to reason out their answers, just record them.

“And 41 percent agree that “enough scientific evidence exists to support Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution,”
compared to 30 percent who don't.”

But compared to those figures how many say they accept Darwin's theory? And if 51% say they “agree, that “it is possible to believe in a God and still hold the view that life on earth, including human life, evolved over time as a result of natural selection,”
does that mean they actually believe that personally or just that it is possible to believe?

The respondents interpret the questions as they must, according to what they think is being asked and answer that question, not always the one intended.

So the conclusions drawn from the the results of every poll is in the interpretation, unavoidably so.

57 posted on 10/28/2009 10:59:31 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Rafterman

Gladly...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2347175/posts?q=1&;page=301#323

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2368427/posts?page=236

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2368427/posts?page=336#344


58 posted on 10/28/2009 11:01:47 PM PDT by tpanther (Science was, is and will forever be a small subset of God's creation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: tongass kid

It is an incontrovertible fact that organisms have changed, or evolved, during the history of life on Earth……………

Biological evolution results from changes over time in the genetic constitution of species. Genetic changes often, but not always, produce noticeable changes in the appearance or behavior of organisms. Evolution requires both the production of variation and the spread of some variants that replace others.

· Genetic variation arises through two processes, mutation and recombination. Mutation occurs when DNA is imperfectly copied during replication, leading to a difference between a parent’s gene and that of its offspring. Some mutations affect only one bit in the DNA; others produce rearrangements of large blocks of DNA.

· Recombination occurs when genes from two parents are shuffled to produce an offspring, as happens regularly in sexual reproduction. Usually the two parents belong to the same species, but sometimes (especially in bacteria) genes move between more distantly related organisms.

· The fate of any particular genetic variant depends on two processes, drift and selection. Drift refers to random fluctuations in gene frequency, and its effects are usually seen at the level of DNA. Ten flips of a coin do not always produce exactly five heads and five tails; drift refers to the same statistical issue applied to the transmission of genetic variants across generations.

· The principle of natural selection was discovered by Charles Darwin (1809-1882), and it is the process by which organisms become adapted to their environments. Selection occurs when some individual organisms have genes that encode physical or behavioral features that allow them to better harvest resources, avoid predators, and such relative to other individuals that do not carry the same genes. The individuals that have these useful features will tend to leave more offspring than other individuals, so the responsible genes will become more common over time, leading the population as a whole to become better adapted.
Distinct species diverge from one ancestor and can no longer interbreed.

· The process that many people find most confusing about evolution is speciation, which is not a separate mechanism at all, but rather a consequence of the preceding mechanisms played out in time and space. Speciation occurs when a population changes sufficiently over time that it becomes convenient to refer to the early and late forms by different names. Speciation also occurs when one population splits into two distinct forms that can no longer interbreed. Reproductive isolation does not generally happen in one generation; it may require many thousands of generations when, for example, one part of a population becomes geographically separated from the rest and adapts to a new environment. Given time, it is inevitable that two populations that live apart will diverge by mutation, drift, and selection until eventually their genes are no longer compatible for successful reproduction…………

Evolutionary biology is a strong and vigorous field of science. A theoretical framework that encompasses several basic mechanisms is consistent with the patterns seen in nature; and there is abundant evidence demonstrating the action of these mechanisms as well as their contributions to nature. Hence, evolution is both a theory and a set of established facts that the theory explains.

Like every other science, there is scientific debate about some aspects of evolution, but none of these debates appear likely to shake the foundations of this field. There exists no other scientific explanation that can account for all the patterns in nature, only non-scientific explanations that require a miraculous force, like a creator. Such super-natural explanations lie outside of science, which can neither prove nor disprove miracles.
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/lenski.html


59 posted on 10/28/2009 11:06:52 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Placement of threads is an opinion and there are plenty of us that think that these threads qualify as well for News and Activism as anywhere.

And there are plenty of us that think these threads DON'T qualify for News/Activism. What makes you special?

Evos have an arrogance of an incredibly high degree to constantly be thinking that they are the FINAL WORD on everything.

Much like CreatioNuts™.

There are other God and religion free sites that are very pro-evolution and anti-God that are available for you to use.

And who the hell are you to assume that I'm "anti-God", lady? My religious beliefs are none of your damn business. On the other hand, CreatioNuts™ like GGG insist on posting their beliefs for everyone to see, misleadingly labeling it "news", then insult people who disagree with them.

And, by the way, I've been "bothering with FR" a hell of a lot longer than you have.

60 posted on 10/28/2009 11:06:59 PM PDT by Rafterman ("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -- Curtis LeMay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]


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

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