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

Skip to comments.

How did we get here? (UK sees huge decrease in belief in 'evolution')
Guardian ^ | 15 Aug 06 | Harriet Swain

Posted on 08/15/2006 11:34:34 AM PDT by gobucks

Evolution is on the way out - more than 30% of students in the UK say they believe in creationism and intelligent design. Harriet Swain reports on a surprising new survey. *snip*

This means more than 30% believe our origins have more to do with God than with Darwin - evolution theory rang true for only 56%.

Opinionpanel Research's survey of more than 1,000 students found a third of those who said they were Muslims and more than a quarter of those who said they were Christians supported creationism.

Nearly a third of Christians and 10% of those with no particular religion favoured intelligent design.

Women were more likely to choose spiritual explanations: less than half chose evolution, with 14% preferring creationism and 22% intelligent design. While three years of learning how to weigh evidence appears to make students slightly more inclined towards evolution, with 57% of third-years choosing it compared with 54% of first-years, it does not appear to put them off belief in God.

As many third-years as first-years believed in creationism, although slightly fewer supported intelligent design.

The findings come as little surprise to Roger Downie, professor of zoological education at Glasgow University. Two years ago he surveyed the views on evolution of biology and medical students there. *snip* He says schools and universities need to be clearer about how science differs from other evidence, such as that provided by religion.

"The impression people get is that science is about accumulating a lot of facts in your head rather than testing of evidence and fine-tuning what you find." Scientists have recently expressed growing concern about creationism being taught alongside evolution in schools, particularly at the new academies run by the Christian Vardy Foundation.

(Excerpt) Read more at education.guardian.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: anothercrevothread; creationism; crevolist; darwin; devolution; enoughalready; europeanchristians; evolution; faith; pavlovian
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-226 next last
Evolution is now believed by less than half of all UK women, the land that gave birth to Darwin. A very good trend, indeed, but unsurprising as well, given that women are the ones who suffer most when men are reduced, and trained to see themselves as competitive hairless apes that can sweet-talk.

He blames the influence of Christian fundamentalists in America....

Rather misleading when you read up on this foundation:

Christian Vardy Foundation

1 posted on 08/15/2006 11:34:37 AM PDT by gobucks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: gobucks

You can't measure a rate of evolution. You can't predict what will evolve next. It loses believers as it fails to provide utility.


2 posted on 08/15/2006 11:40:17 AM PDT by .cnI redruM (Those who don't fight evil condemn those who do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

It loses believers as it has not produced a new species of serious change to an existing one in human memory.


3 posted on 08/15/2006 11:42:22 AM PDT by Jim Verdolini (We had it all, but the RINOs stalked the land and everything they touched was as dung and ashes!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

Life does not come from non-life.

It's that simple.


4 posted on 08/15/2006 11:54:57 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Supporting the troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

Science is not done via polls. Science is done by scientists.

Polling people regarding scientific questions is a waste of time.


5 posted on 08/15/2006 11:57:56 AM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

Liberals come from monkeys. Just ask one, they'll admit it! ;)


6 posted on 08/15/2006 11:57:58 AM PDT by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

"Life does not come from non-life.
"

The Theory of Evolution has never said that it did.


7 posted on 08/15/2006 11:58:48 AM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: avacado

Liberals haven't made it terribly far.


8 posted on 08/15/2006 12:12:18 PM PDT by .cnI redruM (Those who don't fight evil condemn those who do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

The drop in "belief" in evolution is most likely due to the increase in islamomaniacs, who share with Christians a certain suspicion of science, particularly biological science.

As to whether the Theory of Evolution depends on popular "belief" to be considered the consensus theory in biology... well, we all know the answer to that one, even those of us who don't want to admit it.


9 posted on 08/15/2006 12:32:31 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Life does not come from non-life.

It's that simple-minded.

Fixed it for you.

10 posted on 08/15/2006 12:36:34 PM PDT by mc6809e
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

It's hard to imagine anyone calling Dr. Stephen Hawking a Christian fundamentalist. He is a pre-eminent theoretical physicist. (I am a less-than-eminent psychologist with a great deal of skepticism about religious and scientific dogma).

Hawking pointed out that the "big bang" theory central to evolutionary thought could only be true if we contradict all known laws of physics. He also pointed out that extremely minute changes in the weights of different atoms would have made the carbon molecule impossible. In other words, human life could not exist.

Other scientists have pointed out that the theory of evolution cannot explain the development of the human neuron. The point is that evolution/mutation likely plays a role in species development, but there are huge gaps that the theory cannot explain.

The other point is that it seems intellectually dishonest to discredit Intelligent Design as an alternative or even enhancement to the theory of evolution.


11 posted on 08/15/2006 12:37:16 PM PDT by neocon1984 (end the idiocy of post-modernism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Hello patrick.


12 posted on 08/15/2006 1:11:01 PM PDT by StJacques (Liberty is always unfinished business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

I think the rise of Islam is going to convince a lot of people that evolution is crap


13 posted on 08/15/2006 1:11:12 PM PDT by GeronL (http://www.mises.org/story/1975 <--no such thing as a fairtax)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neocon1984
Hawking pointed out that the "big bang" theory central to evolutionary thought

The validity of the Big Bang theory has no relevance whatsoever to the theory of evolution, whether or not your claim regarding Hawking's stance is accurete. The Big Bang is not "central" to the theory of evolution.
14 posted on 08/15/2006 1:20:43 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

"The Big Bang is not "central" to the theory of evolution".

Just peripheral...., but necessary.


15 posted on 08/15/2006 1:27:07 PM PDT by gobucks (Blissful Marriage: A result of a worldly husband's transformation into the Word's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

Sadly, I see dumbing down isn't limited to the US.

What gets me is this isn't malicious -- just misguided.


16 posted on 08/15/2006 1:28:36 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (The Democrat Party stands for open treason in a time of war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neocon1984
The other point is that it seems intellectually dishonest to discredit Intelligent Design as an alternative or even enhancement to the theory of evolution.

ID isn't a scientific alternative and therefore needs no discrediting.

17 posted on 08/15/2006 1:30:12 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (The Democrat Party stands for open treason in a time of war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

nope, it's not even necessary. Nothing about how the universe came to be matters at all for evolution. Evolution is all about what happened AFTER the universe came to be and AFTER the first life showed up on Earth, from an evolutionary science perspective all that other stuff is back story.


18 posted on 08/15/2006 1:30:49 PM PDT by discostu (you must be joking son, where did you get those shoes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Science is not done via polls. Science is done by scientists.

Really? When was the scientific experiment done that proved that life sprang from non-life? Did I miss that one, somehow?

The ancient Greek rhetors believed that their "science" was far advanced, too. Of course, they believed in a geo-centric universe and that future events could be predicted by the movement of the stars.
19 posted on 08/15/2006 1:37:05 PM PDT by Antoninus (Public schools are the madrassas of the American Left. --Ann Coulter, Godless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
ID isn't a scientific alternative and therefore needs no discrediting.

Tell me, is ToE falsifiable? If so, how would we do it? If not, how can you claim that it's a science any more valid than ID?
20 posted on 08/15/2006 1:38:28 PM PDT by Antoninus (Public schools are the madrassas of the American Left. --Ann Coulter, Godless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

"Really? When was the scientific experiment done that proved that life sprang from non-life? Did I miss that one, somehow?
"

It hasn't been done. But that's a completely separate thing. Evolution has nothing to do with how life originated. It deals with speciation only.

Science is not done with polls of the general population. It's that simple. You can believe the Theory of Evolution or not, and that fact has no effect on science.

But, please get over the idea that the Theory of Evolution has anything to do with the origins of life. It does not. I has to do only with speciation.


21 posted on 08/15/2006 1:40:36 PM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
He blames the influence of Christian fundamentalists in America....

Before I even read the post, I somehow knew the Guardian would want to blame this on Bush and America.

22 posted on 08/15/2006 1:43:50 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
It hasn't been done. But that's a completely separate thing. Evolution has nothing to do with how life originated. It deals with speciation only.

Move 'em goal posts.

You can believe the Theory of Evolution or not, and that fact has no effect on science.

Actually, I believe that the ToE provides the most coherent explanation for speciation. My question to you is, how is the ToE falsifiable?
23 posted on 08/15/2006 1:47:50 PM PDT by Antoninus (Public schools are the madrassas of the American Left. --Ann Coulter, Godless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: xzins

The theory of evolution assumes that life exists. That's it. Can you show me where the theory of evolution assumes life from non-life?


24 posted on 08/15/2006 1:49:29 PM PDT by Boxen (:3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

"Move 'em goal posts.

You can believe the Theory of Evolution or not, and that fact has no effect on science.

Actually, I believe that the ToE provides the most coherent explanation for speciation. My question to you is, how is the ToE falsifiable?"




I've moved nothing, nor do I have any power to do so.

As for falsifying evolution, it would be pretty simple. Find a fossil of a mammal before the advent of the dinosaurs. Or, better yet, find a fossil of a modern horse at the time some of its precursors were around. That would do it, and instantly.

There are other well-recognized falsifying methods. Just search for falsifying evolution and read.

I am not in the biological sciences. I'm an amateur student of evolution. So, I can't answer your detailed questions.

I do know, however, that the Theory of Evolution has never had anything to say about the origin of life. There are scientists trying to figure that out, but they're not evolutionists.

As you say, evolution is the most logical means of speciation, whatever your beliefs might be about the origins of life.


25 posted on 08/15/2006 1:58:31 PM PDT by MineralMan (non-evangelical atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

That's certainly a good thing, because life does not come from non-life.


26 posted on 08/15/2006 2:21:43 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Supporting the troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Tell me, is ToE falsifiable? If so, how would we do it?

A rabbit (or any mammal for that matter) fossil in the Cambrian shales.
A true chimera (centaurs, mermaids, griffins). Combinations from different lineages. An Intelligent Designer could put a human torso on horses & fishes and wings on lions. Right?
A shark with a vestigial pelvis (like we find in whales and porpoises).

Produce one of the above and fame awaits you.

27 posted on 08/15/2006 2:22:49 PM PDT by dread78645 (Evolution. A doomed theory since 1859.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mc6809e

Actually, it's simple-minded to think that life does come from non-life.


28 posted on 08/15/2006 2:35:07 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Supporting the troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Thank you for your answer. Sadly, it is a strawman. My statement was that ID was not science. Your response is, I gather, that TToE isn't either.

Rather than open a second line of argumentation, I would first like to conclude this one. TToE's status is irrelevant to the discussion of ID's status.

May we please agree that ID is not science before bifurcating the discussion?


29 posted on 08/15/2006 2:36:07 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (The Democrat Party stands for open treason in a time of war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Boxen

I can show you where it has been taught that way in the past.

Therefore, I welcome your joining in saying that it is not true that life comes from non-life.


30 posted on 08/15/2006 2:36:34 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Supporting the troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
Just peripheral...., but necessary.

Incorrect. Falsifying the Big Bang theory would not falsify the theory of evolution. Moreover, the theory of evolution was devised before the Big Bang theory, which demonstrates that there is no truth whatsoever to your claim.
31 posted on 08/15/2006 2:46:28 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Move 'em goal posts.

What goalposts were moved, and how were they moved?
32 posted on 08/15/2006 2:47:44 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

It looks like the dumbing of youth is happening in the UK as well as the USA.


33 posted on 08/15/2006 2:49:09 PM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Actually, it's simple-minded to think that life does come from non-life.

Like life coming from a pile of dust?

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

34 posted on 08/15/2006 3:00:08 PM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Therefore, I welcome your joining in saying that it is not true that life comes from non-life.

Likewise, I welcome the fact that you admit man could not have literally arisen from dust as printed in Genesis 1.

35 posted on 08/15/2006 3:01:33 PM PDT by Quark2005 ("Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs." -Matthew 7:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

It wasn't the dust, it was the BREATH...the miracle was that God's breath gave life to His children.


36 posted on 08/15/2006 3:03:13 PM PDT by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: kittymyrib

Guess I misread “…God formed man of the dust of the ground…” Was that a misprint?
Or, did God form a dead man, and later animate him?


37 posted on 08/15/2006 3:07:19 PM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

You seem to have missed the notation about God doing the making.

"And the LORD GOD formed....."


38 posted on 08/15/2006 3:12:51 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Supporting the troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Quark2005

Actually, I didn't say that at all. If you check the cite, I didn't mention dust.

But, since you bring it up, the belief is that pre-existing intelligent life formed life here on earth.

It says, "The LORD GOD formed...."


39 posted on 08/15/2006 3:14:15 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Supporting the troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: xzins

So?
He made the body of man, then performed CPR on it to animate it. Doesn’t that presuppose that God has a physical form?
Yes – I am getting a bit snide here, but with a purpose.
I have often asked the question on evolution threads, “Why do so many Christians accept that disease is caused by germs and not by God’s Punishment, that epilepsy does not have to be demonic possession, and that the earth orbits the sun – but they get all bent out of shape on the subject of evolution. What is so special about evolution?


40 posted on 08/15/2006 3:20:25 PM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

Are you interested in a bible lesson? We can start a thread.


41 posted on 08/15/2006 3:26:02 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Supporting the troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
The Theory of Evolution has never said that it did.

Where did life come from, then?

42 posted on 08/15/2006 3:31:46 PM PDT by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

Evolution DOES attempt to say that life sprang from non-life in pre-biotic evolution. It claims and very dubiously, that while there was no O2 on earth, the waves washed up little bubbles and DNA jumped inside and began life. Then, after enough CO2 breathing animals were alive excreting O2, the atmosphere filled up with O2 and the animals mutated to O2 brething animals.


43 posted on 08/15/2006 3:36:43 PM PDT by MooseMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Actually, I didn't say that at all. If you check the cite, I didn't mention dust.

But, since you bring it up, the belief is that pre-existing intelligent life formed life here on earth.

It says, "The LORD GOD formed...."

And what did He form it from?

44 posted on 08/15/2006 3:38:29 PM PDT by Quark2005 ("Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs." -Matthew 7:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Come on, Guys!

This is an article from the poxy Guardian. The far-out Left fringe rag of the UK, whose contributors have only a passing acquaintance with reality.

Given the source, hardly worth posting or discussing.

Save your valuable opinions for something worthwhile.

Move on, nothing to see here.
45 posted on 08/15/2006 3:43:34 PM PDT by 5050 no line
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Quark2005
What did he form it from?

And cars put themselves together too.

46 posted on 08/15/2006 4:01:12 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Supporting the troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The intenet is doing to evolution "theory" what it did to Dan Rather.

Ann Coulter is doing her part too.

The reasonable questions are swamping the evo apologists.


47 posted on 08/15/2006 4:03:48 PM PDT by RobRoy (Islam is more dangerous to the world now that Naziism was in 1937.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

>>Science is not done via polls. Science is done by scientists.

Polling people regarding scientific questions is a waste of time.<<

With that I agree.


48 posted on 08/15/2006 4:04:53 PM PDT by RobRoy (Islam is more dangerous to the world now that Naziism was in 1937.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
May we please agree that ID is not science before bifurcating the discussion?

ID and ToE are both explanations for how the world got to be as it is. And explanations are all that they are. I'd be happy to say that ID is not "science" (from the Latin root "scio, scire" - to know) as long as you'll admit that it's possible that the ID explanation could be true.
49 posted on 08/15/2006 4:11:38 PM PDT by Antoninus (Public schools are the madrassas of the American Left. --Ann Coulter, Godless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: xzins
And cars put themselves together too.

I didn't ask about cars. I know where cars come from. I was wondering what He formed life from. But while we're on the subject, here's a few reasons why it's bad to make an analogy between cars and life:

1) Cars don't reproduce. Life does.

2) Cars don't pass on their changes to other cars. Life does.

3) Cars haven't been around for billions of years. Life has.

But seriously, what did God form life from?

50 posted on 08/15/2006 4:11:46 PM PDT by Quark2005 ("Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs." -Matthew 7:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-226 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