How did we get here? (UK sees huge decrease in belief in 'evolution')

Guardian ^ | 15 Aug 06 | Harriet Swain

[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.

[xzins]

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

[expatpat]

The Theory of Evolution has never said that it did.

Where did life come from, then?

[MooseMan]

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.

[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...."

And what did He form it from?

[5050 no line]

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.

[xzins]

What did he form it from?

And cars put themselves together too.

[RobRoy]

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.

[RobRoy]

>>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.

[Antoninus]

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.

[Quark2005]

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?

[bray]

All the Kings Scientists and all the Kings Monkeys can't put Humpty Darwin together again.

Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
Shalom Israel

[Antoninus]

How about examples of animals which failed to evolve? Or evolved only a small amount?

As for Chimeras, I give you:



My opinion isn't that evolution didn't happen. It's that the mechanism for why it happened (or didn't in some case) hasn't been determined yet.

[LiteKeeper]

SPOTREP

[PatrickHenry]

Hi. I won't be in this thread. I'll ping you when a good one comes along.

[Dimensio]

Where did life come from, then?

There are a number of hypothesis on this subject. The theory of evolution is not dependent upon any one of them being correct

[Dimensio]

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.

The theory of evolution postulates no such thing. The theory of evolution makes no statements regarding the processes responsible for the emergence of the first life forms.

[Dimensio]

Ann Coulter is doing her part too.

What "part" is Ann Coulter doing in presenting long-refuted lies?

[Boxen]

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

I never said anything of the sort.

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

For kicks, let's suppose that first life was placed on this planet by space aliens. How would this genesis scenario prevent evolution from occuring?

[expatpat]

If Darwin's theory (a) does not explain how life arose, and (b) there are no empirical examples where a new species has developed from another one, what good is it? [I speak as a scientist (not biology), not as a religious person].

[StJacques]

OK, fair enough.