Posted on 03/07/2006 2:34:37 PM PST by SirLinksalot
Darwin smacked in new U.S. poll
Whopping 69 percent of Americans want alternate theories in classroom
--------------------------------------------------------
Posted: March 7, 2006 5:00 p.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
A new poll shows 69 percent of Americans believe public school teachers should present both the evidence for and against Darwinian evolution.
The Zogby International survey indicated only 21 percent think biology teachers should teach only Darwin's theory of evolution and the scientific evidence that supports it.
A majority of Americans from every sub-group were at least twice as likely to prefer this approach to science education, the Zogby study showed.
About 88 percent of Americans 18-29 years old were in support, along with 73 percent of Republicans and 74 percent of independent voters.
Others who strongly support teaching the strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theory include African-Americans (69 percent), 35-54 year-olds (70 percent) and Democrats (60 percent).
Casey Luskin, program officer for public policy and legal affairs with Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture said while his group does not favor mandating the teaching of intelligent design, "we do think it is constitutional for teachers to discuss it precisely because the theory is based upon scientific evidence not religious premises."
The Seattle-based Discovery Institute is the leading promoter of the theory of Intelligent Design, which has been at the center of challenges in federal court over the teaching of evolution in public school classes. Advocates say it draws on recent discoveries in physics, biochemistry and related disciplines that indicate some features of the natural world are best explained as the product of an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection.
"The public strongly agrees that students should be permitted to learn about such evidence," Luskin said.
The Discovery Institute noted Americans also support students learning about evidence for intelligent design alongside evolution in biology class – 77 percent.
Just over half – 51 percent – agree strongly with that. Only 19 percent disagree.
As WorldNetDaily reported, more than 500 scientists with doctoral degrees have signed a statement expressing skepticism about Darwin's theory of evolution.
The statement, which includes endorsement by members of the prestigious U.S. National Academy of Sciences and Russian Academy of Sciences, was first published by the Discovery Institute in 2001 to challenge statements about Darwinian evolution made in promoting PBS's "Evolution" series.
The PBS promotion claimed "virtually every scientist in the world believes the theory to be true."
The 21% will probably win.
The problem is your complaints were addressed on the other thread, yet you posted them again as if no one had been able to come up with a reasonable answer to them.
Trust me, we've all seen those same supposed challenges time and again. Nothing new under the sun. . .
sorry about that, I meant to provide a response, I must have forgotten to.
"true, but some things are more certain than others, for example, the process of how the digestive system works, which is pretty much known as fact and not a theory."
Um, no.
Most scientists don't care one way or the other about Darwinian evolution; it's of more interest to sociologists. Somebody could take a poll of historians, psychologists and political scientists, but that is not how science is done. Repeal the law of evolution, it won't make the slightest difference, but it would possibly please those who also don't like algebra.
The scientific community, precisely like the legal community, depends on defending/maintaining/trusting in, a system.
However, ask a lawyer and he or she will admit that justice is secondary to upholding that system.
Ask a scientist, and he or she will most likely state that the system 'proves' the most widely accepted theories within its umbrella.
Same dependence, same central theme ... except that one is engaged in finding means to redefine the core and the other is engaged in defending the findings of those who published previously.
What about pre-Darwinian evolution, can we keep that?
Huh?
" No one likes the zealot atheist evolutionites because they are obnoxious and overbearing and now teaming up with the ACLU."
But you're not a creationist... lol
For example, it was never even mentioned in my physics classes.
Actually sociologists largly ignore evolution in human beings and blame differences between groups of people as being "learned from society".
Not even a hint of following the scientific method in your post. Science provides a method for deciding between or among competing theories.
However, most of the discussion on these threads has centered around whether to permit the teaching of ID in science classes. ID is not a scientific theory, and does not qualify.
Actually, the argument you have laid out would be just as valid for promoting the teaching evolution in churches. Is that what you are advocating?
Why not?
You're kidding me. They didn't try to teach you biology in physics class? What kind of school was this?
Would that really be a guess?
I was told physics was a science, so if scientists are to care about this issue wouldn't the profs have brought it up at some point? It wasn't on the senior comprehensive test either.
OK, so how many Americans support teaching Earth, Air, Fire, and Water as the four elements over teaching the periodic table?
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.