Despite Scopes, Evolution Still on Trial

AP ^ | 7/9/05 | Bill Poovey

[Crackingham]

Jim Sullivan stood outside the Rhea County Courthouse and recalled the carnival-like atmosphere during the Scopes Monkey Trial in 1925, when the teaching of evolution was put on trial.

"They had fights on all these corners and people all over the place," said Sullivan, 85, who remembers seeing Bible-toting preachers and monkeys on leashes.

As the town prepares for its annual re-enactment of the trial here eight decades later, debate over teaching evolution lives on.

Eugenie Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education, said it is increasingly difficult to teach American students the basics of evolution.

"We have been facing more anti-evolution activity in the last six months than we have ever faced in a comparable period before," Scott said Friday.

In Kansas, the state school board could change science standards to include criticism of evolution. In Cobb County, Ga., labels describing evolution as a "theory, not a fact" were required in some textbooks before a court overturned the order.

Scott said 31 states this year have had "some kind of incident, such as efforts to get creationism taught or limit teaching of evolution."

[balrog666]

One, I noted that evolution is a very FLAWED theory. Gravity, even if it is a theory, is a very solid theory by comparison.

On the contrary, the theory of gravity is very tenuous. And most scientists couldn't pick a more established theory than evoution.

Second, gravity is unlike evolution in the fact that it can be OBSERVED. Evolution cannot - as it is purported to take years upon years upon years - be observed in the same capacity.

The effect of gravity can be seen, the theory is much more complex. And, for the record, evolution has been observed many times, which makes me wonder why you would bother to post your nonsense if you are so ignorant of the actual science. A religious agenda, perhaps?

[Dr.Hilarious]

You don't think the secularists are pushing a worldview?

[D-fendr]

LOL!

Well both movies had about the same amount of truth in 'em...

[theymakemesick]

For an "incomplete theory", the LAW of gravity is pretty well documented mathmatically. Newton's law of universal gravitation states the following: Every object in the Universe attracts every other object with a force directed along the line of centers for the two objects that is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the separation between the two objects. Considering only the magnitude of the force, and momentarily putting aside its direction, the law can be stated symbolically as follows. where F is the magnitude of the gravitational force between two objects G is the gravitational constant, that is approximately : G = 6.67 × 10−11 N m2 kg-2 m1 is the mass of first object m2 is the mass of second object r is the distance between the objects

[D-fendr]

there ARE people who don't want evolution to be taught as fact.

Unfortunately "evolution" is a name given to a lot of different things, even what amounts to philosophical theories. And at the higher end of evolution teaching there is, I think you would agree, quite a lot of speculation, and beyond that there are evolution teachers that go way past what is known scientifically.

So a lot depends on precisely what you teach as fact when it comes to evolution. Could you summarize what you believe are the facts of evolution?

[Matchett-PI]

"There are people right here in the USA who won’t be happy until they can establish a theocracy

The Framers of our founding documents set up our government according to the principles of the Biblical Worldview to ensure that that can never happen.

If the origional intent of the Constitution they drew up is upheld and defended against those who want to illigitimately call it a "living document", it will be impossible for any tyrannical mentality on the extreme right or the extreme left to obtain absolute power and control to impose his personal conscience on the rest of us.

The founders of the United States of America believed that all men were created with equal authority. Thus they declared the following principle as the foundation of their political union. They said:

" We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

The founders also believed that this concept of equal authority was taught in the Bible. They used Sir Walter Blackstone’s Commentary on Law to explain and illustrate this Biblical concept. The following is from Blackstone's "Commentary on Law" concerning the equality of mankind at creation:

"If man were to live in a state of nature, unconnected with other individuals, there would be no occasion for any other laws, than the law of nature, and the law of God. Neither could any other law possibly exist; for a law always supposes some superior who is to make it; and in a state of nature we are all equal, without any other superior but him who is also the author of our being."

This phrase "law of nature" was explained by Blackstone a little earlier in his "Commentary on Law" in the following manner:

"This law of nature, being coeval with mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all times; no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this: and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original."

*

"....four basic principles. ...summed up by an eminent English statesman and jurist, Sir James Stephen, as follows: "These principles were, firstly that the will of the people was the one legitimate source of the power of the rulers; secondly, that the power was most properly delegated by the people, to their rulers, by means of elections, in which every adult man might exercise the right of suffrage; thirdly, that in ecclesiastical government, the clergy and laity were entitled to an equal and co-ordinate authority; and fourthly that between the Church and State, no alliance, or mutual dependence, or other definite relation, necessarily or properly existed."

[wyattearp]

One, I noted that evolution is a very FLAWED theory.

Doesn't matter if you say it in caps or not. You didn't back up your assertion that it is a "flawed, pseudo-scientific theory" with any kind of evidence whatsoever.

Do so now, please.

[balrog666]

You don't think the secularists are pushing a worldview?

All extremists push a worldview. But few secularists are extremists just like few Christians are Young-Earth-Creationist whackos.

[bobdsmith]

That's the law of gravity which describes gravity, not the theory that explains how it works (ie are there such things as gravitons etc)

[Dr.Hilarious]

All extremists push a worldview. But few secularists are extremists just like few Christians are Young-Earth-Creationist whackos.

Uh, okay. I don't quite see what that has to do with what I posted, but whatever.

[balrog666]

For an "incomplete theory", the LAW of gravity is pretty well documented mathmatically. Newton's law of universal gravitation states the following:

Buy a clue, the Law of Gravity is *NOT* the smae thing as the Theory of Gravity.

[D-fendr]

Would you consider Dawkins an extremist?

I think it would also help the discussion if you would define what you mean by the theory of evolution.

[balrog666]

The Framers of our founding documents set up our government according to the principles of the Biblical Worldview to ensure that that can never happen.

Utter baloney. They clearly intended to actively prevent such an imposition.

[bobdsmith]

yea dawkins is an extremist (didnt ask me but I answer anyway)

[bobdsmith]

i think he agreed with you (?)

[balrog666]

Do your own homework.

[D-fendr]

I can't do homework on your views, opinions and beliefs.

[balrog666]

i think he agreed with you (?)

Did he? Oops, sorry.

[wyattearp]

I think it would also help the discussion if you would define what you mean by the theory of evolution.

Here is a very good definition:

"Biological evolution ... is change in the properties of populations of organisms that transcend the lifetime of a single individual. The ontogeny of an individual is not considered evolution; individual organisms do not evolve. The changes in populations that are considered evolutionary are those that are inheritable via the genetic material from one generation to the next. Biological evolution may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion of different alleles within a population (such as those determining blood types) to the successive alterations that led from the earliest protoorganism to snails, bees, giraffes, and dandelions."

- Douglas J. Futuyma in Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer Associates 1986 - retrieved online 7/09/2005 from http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-definition.html

[R. Scott]

I still don’t understand how the lack of religion can be called a religion.