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 ...
What is that theory exactly? Do you have one that actually passes the test of the Scientific Method?
W.K.
That sort of challenge I made was to get you to respond.
Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't.
I lose the bet. :-)
Now, can you answer the questions I asked in my last post? The man you quoted made the claim that current textbooks today still feature Miller-Urey. I'm sure he mentioned which ones. I don't doubt them, because, like I said in my last post, most textbooks are crap. Still I'd like to see the examples.
I don't recall any seamless transition myself, still that should be no excuse not to know the right answer, especially as one who surfs online, you don't just have to rely on crappy textbooks.
Everyone has to "unlearn" some falsity or false generality or three that was instilled in Publik Skool.
No, I am interested in an answer to the question,“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?
The persistence of Islam...a 7th century ideology used for behavior control...that leaves its adherents with little to no oppportunity to compete successfully in the modern world..is, IMHO, one of the greatest arguments against evolution, :)
The germ theory of disease has been proven.
Evolution has not. Just that would be cause for someone to be skeptical.
Dawkins claims that evolution makes God passe. It appears that many Christians agree that his conclusion would be valid if evolution were shown to be fact.
Dark energy/matter.. which is the source of the planets, solar systems and galaxys too..
What kind of "mold" was used?.. A spiritual mold..
The germ theory of disease has been proven.Evolution has not. Just that would be cause for someone to be skeptical.
As I said, there are major evolutionists who insist that evolution MEANS no need for God.
It's like the Koran and islamo-fascism. Some say that islam doesn't "have" to be violent. Others look in the text and can only agree that the islamo-fascists are correctly interpreting their text.
Some prominent theologians say that evolution does not have to mean the demise of God. Other prominent evolutionists, however, insist that it does. Many Christians think that the 2nd group is correct, that they are mutually exclusive ideas.
My own sense is that any God who can be interpreted into this version of evolution will be dramatically less omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent than the God of the Bible.
With due deference to those believers who accept some form of theistic evolution, I'm not sure the resulting God is powerful enough to bring Jesus Christ alive from the grave. I'm not sure He's even powerful enough to (ex nihilo) change water into wine.
Thanks mom.
Scientific theory assumes that everything is made by natural causes and does not allow for alternate explainations. There is a culture of hatred towards religion by many in the scientific field. Science and religion can co-exist, but many on both sides won't allow it.
You might note the first 3 words "My own sense." This should sufficiently indicate that we're talking about "my opinion."
Now, as to credentials, I'm probably more credentialed by education and experience to comment on theology than most, if one places value in things such as education and experience.
I don't think we really need to go there, though. My claim that an "eventual creation by a guiding hand God" is different than an "immediate creation out of nothing God" is supportable on its face. Such a discussion would be in the area of conjecture, but the bottom line is that one would have to wonder if the "eventual creation by a guiding hand God" COULD do more if He wanted to.
It changes the nature of theology. (Aside: it definitely changes the nature of Christian theology.)
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.