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

Skip to comments.

The More They Know Darwin, The Less They Want Darwin-Only Indoctrination
Evolution News & Views ^ | October 27, 2009 | Anika Smith

Posted on 10/28/2009 7:34:50 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts

The More They Know Darwin, The Less They Want Darwin-Only Indoctrination

According to an international poll released by the British Council, the majority of Americans — 60% — support teaching alternatives to evolution in the science classroom. The percentage is the same for Britons, despite the fact that both countries have been inundated with pro-Darwin media coverage in this super-mega Darwin Year.

Of course, the British media reporting this are chagrined. Britain is the birthplace of Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution, and the official-sounding British Council, the UK group behind the “Darwin Now” campaign that commissioned the Ipsos MORI poll, have spent precious resources educating the world about Darwin. Now some believe the poll shows that efforts by Darwinist organizations aren't working.

Head of the British Council’s Darwin Now program Fern Elsdon-Baker said, “Overall these results may reflect the need for a more sophisticated approach to teaching and communicating how science works as a process.”

While Darwin’s apologists might try to explain the poll numbers as an example of ignorance influencing people’s beliefs, the numbers themselves suggest a different picture.

Across the board, most respondents from the ten countries polled thought that “other perspectives on the origins of species” “such as intelligent design and creationism” should be taught in science class*. When the poll is weighted to include only those respondents who have heard of Charles Darwin and know something about his theory of evolution, the percentage supporting alternate theories increases, from 60% to 66% in Britain and 60% to 64% in the U.S.

The correlation appears again when we consider which countries have more knowledge of Darwin’s theory. The highest numbers of those in support of alternative theories in the classroom correspond to the highest numbers of those familiar with Charles Darwin — 60% in Britain, 65% in Mexico, 61% in China, 66% in Russia, and 60% in the U.S. It appears that the more people know about Darwin’s theory, the more they want to see alternatives in science class.

The basic truth is that most people want evolution to have to compete for its place of dominance in their schools. Interestingly, the U.S. was the only nation with significant knowledge of Darwin where respondents chose the option “theories about the origins of species and development of life on earth should not be taught in science lessons at all.” 14% chose that, compared with 3% in Britain.

*This takes both those who select "other perspectives" only and those who select "other perspectives" together with "evolutionary theories." It should be noted that Discovery Institute opposes efforts to mandate teaching alternative theories in the science classroom — we'd rather have the whole picture of evolution, the scientific arguments both for and against the theory, presented instead.



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Russia; US: Washington; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: antiscienceevos; belongsinreligion; catholic; china; christian; creation; creationuts; darwiniacs; darwinism; divideandconquerfr; doesntbelonginnews; education; educationyahright; evangelical; evolution; evoreligionexposed; godsgravesglyphs; intelligentdesign; judaism; mexico; moralabsolutes; nonintelligentdesign; notasciencetopic; propellerbeanie; protestant; russia; science; socialism; spammer; templeofdarwin; templeofnutters; ussherites; yecspam
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-304 next last

1 posted on 10/28/2009 7:34:51 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Here we go...


2 posted on 10/28/2009 7:36:02 PM PDT by lp boonie (Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: metmom; DaveLoneRanger; editor-surveyor; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; MrB; GourmetDan; Fichori; ...

Ping!


3 posted on 10/28/2009 7:40:12 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lp boonie

I sometimes wonder if people put stuff like this on the FreeRepublic to make us look like morons.


4 posted on 10/28/2009 7:40:41 PM PDT by Hiddigeigei (quem deus vult perdere prius dementat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Humans were made from dirt. Duh!


5 posted on 10/28/2009 7:43:15 PM PDT by Soothesayer (The United States of America Rest in Peace November 4 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

If people are exposed to both worldviews, they do seem to reject the fantasy worldview which is based on unbelievable stories. Evolutionists hate that — they were hoping that it would be the other worldview that would get rejected.


6 posted on 10/28/2009 7:50:10 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Play the Race Card -- lose the game.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hiddigeigei

Actually, all the studies say pretty much the same thing. Morons tend to think someone is trying to make a moron out of them if what they are saying sounds smart. After all, morons are very suspicious of anything that goes over their head. Having said that, most morons have at least learned not to draw attention to themselves on these matters because it is an instant giveaway of their moronic state of mind, soon followed by people laughing and pointing at them. I would be glad to forward these studies to you if you think you can read them.

All the best—GGG


7 posted on 10/28/2009 7:50:34 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Soothesayer; GodGunsGuts

I keep asking people to explain exactly how we got here and they keep telling me I’m stupid.

I keep telling them how exactly we evolved from a different species and they keep calling me a moron.

Darwinists are quite incompetent.


8 posted on 10/28/2009 7:51:45 PM PDT by wastedyears (Clyde Shelton is my hero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Hiddigeigei
I sometimes wonder if people put stuff like this on the FreeRepublic to make us look like morons.

No joke.

9 posted on 10/28/2009 7:52:00 PM PDT by Rafterman ("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -- Curtis LeMay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

==Darwinists are quite incompetent.

LOL...Indeed! They can’t even make their numbers grow after seizing control of the public schools, the courts, the universities, and the MSM!!!


10 posted on 10/28/2009 8:04:23 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

:o)


11 posted on 10/28/2009 8:05:16 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
"Signature in the Cell"--DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design, by Stephen C. Meyer.

What a read! I highly recommend it. Great historical background of DNA developments from the past up to the present day issues. This book, for me, changed my whole outlook of life on this planet. It is tough going, but well worth the effort. They often talk about "landmark" books, well this is one of them, IMHO.

12 posted on 10/28/2009 8:05:47 PM PDT by CanaGuy (Go Harper!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rafterman

That’s a metal detector, and it detects metal. Typical darwiniac mistake.

You could at least conceivably detect that crap with your nose...unless of course you are a Temple of Darwin fanatic, in which case you wouldn’t pick up on it, because the crap would smell the same as your normal surroundings.


13 posted on 10/28/2009 8:10:37 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

By all means let creation science be taught in schools. It should take all of about 10 minuets to teach it and then children can be allowed to make up their own minds in the face of the evidence. For children who study hard and keep an open mind it seems to me utterly inconceivable that they could conclude anything other than that evolution is true ~ Richard Dawkins

http://www.scribd.com/doc/6230199/Articles-of-Richard-Dawkins


14 posted on 10/28/2009 8:13:34 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CanaGuy
I read it as well. The chapters that focused on the origin of DNA blew my mind, and got me thinking about DNA in a way I never had before. Like you, I highly recommend it! Thank for chiming in :o)

All the best—GGG

15 posted on 10/28/2009 8:14:18 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Argumentum ad Hominem :

The fallacy of attacking the character or circumstances of an individual who is advancing a statement or an argument instead of trying to disprove the truth of the statement or the soundness of the argument. Often the argument is characterized simply as a personal attack.

1. The personal attack is also often termed an "ad personem argument": the statement or argument at issue is dropped from consideration or is ignored, and the locutor's character or circumstances are used to influence opinion.

2. The fallacy draws its appeal from the technique of "getting personal." The assumption is that what the locutor is saying is entirely or partially dictated by his character or special circumstances and so should be disregarded.

Ad Hominem is not a valid debate tactic. Pictures, Images and Photos

16 posted on 10/28/2009 8:14:55 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

thanks for breaking my BS meter


17 posted on 10/28/2009 8:15:19 PM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“There are no hypotheses, alternative to the principle of evolution with its “tree of life,” that any competent biologist of today takes seriously. Moreover, the principle is so important for an understanding of the world we live in and of ourselves that the public in general, including students taking biology in high school, should be made aware of it, and of the fact that it is firmly established, even as the rotundity of the earth is firmly established. ~ Herman J Muller


18 posted on 10/28/2009 8:19:51 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: bigbob

Are you sure it was me? I’m sure you break it yourself all the time.


19 posted on 10/28/2009 8:20:20 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Yeah, whatever... maybe a lot of us are just sick of these stupid "creationists vs. evolutionists" threads that are nothing more than thinly-veiled proselytizing. Why don't you keep this baloney in the Religion forum where it belongs?


20 posted on 10/28/2009 8:20:49 PM PDT by Rafterman ("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -- Curtis LeMay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“According to an international poll released by the British Council, the majority of Americans — 60% — support teaching alternatives to evolution in the science classroom. “

Now we got GGG telling us that the internationals should tell us what we should think.


21 posted on 10/28/2009 8:22:00 PM PDT by ColdWater ("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rafterman
It would appear that you are the latest FReeper to make the ultimate sacrifice to the Bearded Buddha of Naturalism. You know, it's not too late to reclaim your brain. But you better hurry up and get it back before the Temple of Darwin clears them out to make room for the next batch of darwin-drones:


22 posted on 10/28/2009 8:27:07 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Easily the biggest challenge facing the ID community is to develop a full-fledged theory of biological design. We don’t have such a theory right now, and that’s a problem. Without a theory, it’s very hard to know where to direct your research focus. Right now, we’ve got a bag of powerful intuitions, and a handful of notions such as ‘irreducible complexity’ and ‘specified complexity’-but, as yet, no general theory of biological design. ~ Paul Nelson Touchstone Magazine 7/8 (2004): pp 64 – 65.
23 posted on 10/28/2009 8:27:40 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin
Easily the biggest challenge facing the ID community is to develop a full-fledged theory of biological design.

I thought their biggest problem was recruiting their first non-paid member.

24 posted on 10/28/2009 8:33:04 PM PDT by ColdWater ("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Thanks for the ping!


25 posted on 10/28/2009 8:36:39 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
But you better hurry up and get it back before the Temple of Darwin clears them out to make room for the next batch of darwin-drones:

Are those the same drones who rejected Darwin's Pangenesis theory?

26 posted on 10/28/2009 8:36:50 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
I thought their biggest problem was recruiting their first non-paid member.

Yeah, that and a single shred of scientific evidence...

27 posted on 10/28/2009 8:36:55 PM PDT by Rafterman ("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -- Curtis LeMay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

Don’t bother making any sense here. It cannot be absorbed in such an atmosphere. These people don’t “believe” in genetics, so I guess they are happy to condemn millions of ill people to their fate because they are so “wise” they can’t tell the difference between a scientific theory and a religious belief.


28 posted on 10/28/2009 8:41:19 PM PDT by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
I clicked on the “more knowledge” link. well worth effort to read the survey, no wonder the ‘council’ would press for more Darwinism teaching. All that effort and so little results.
29 posted on 10/28/2009 8:50:08 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

How about just eliminating the scientifically refuted evidence which is still in school textbooks and allowing critical thought and discussion of the theory instead of teaching information as scientific fact which isn’t? I remember one sentence in my book that dated a fossil to an EXACT year over 300 million years ago — I mean like 300,343,387 years ago. Last I checked we didn’t have that type of accuracy but the information is communicated in that fashion to dissuade any critical questioning. The controversy is because of the dogma surrounding common ancestry. Day by day the whole thing is smelling more and more like the global warming hoax.


30 posted on 10/28/2009 8:55:58 PM PDT by Naspino (Not creative enough to have a tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia
The great trouble with religion — any religion — is that a religionist, having accepted certain propositions by faith, cannot thereafter judge those propositions by evidence. One may bask at the warm fire of faith or choose to live in the bleak uncertainty of reason — but one cannot have both.

Robert Heinlein


31 posted on 10/28/2009 9:00:39 PM PDT by Rafterman ("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -- Curtis LeMay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Hiddigeigei
I sometimes wonder if people put stuff like this on the FreeRepublic to make us look like morons.

LOL, All adults accept the fact that in any given population you have a certain number of kooks. But you are correct, just over look them.

32 posted on 10/28/2009 9:02:15 PM PDT by org.whodat (Vote: Chuck De Vore in 2012.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Rafterman

“Yeah, whatever... maybe a lot of us are just sick of these stupid “creationists vs. evolutionists” threads that are nothing more than thinly-veiled proselytizing. Why don’t you keep this baloney in the Religion forum where it belongs?”

Oh, no! Not proselytizing! RUN!


33 posted on 10/28/2009 9:03:07 PM PDT by rae4palin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: rae4palin

How about keeping the proselytizing in the RELIGION forum, instead of in News/Activism?


34 posted on 10/28/2009 9:09:10 PM PDT by Rafterman ("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -- Curtis LeMay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: CanaGuy

I am just about finished with Signature in the Cell by Meyers. His analysis is difficult to refute. This probably is why Dawkins refused to debate Dr.Meyers. This is a very important book.


35 posted on 10/28/2009 9:09:38 PM PDT by katlynne11 (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Naspino
I remember one sentence in my book

Which textbook are you referring to?

36 posted on 10/28/2009 9:09:59 PM PDT by ColdWater ("The theory of evolution really has no bearing on what I'm trying to accomplish with FR anyway. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: CanaGuy; GodGunsGuts
I found a video here on Meyer discussing his book Signature in the Cell. The video is an hour long so I'll have to watch it tomorrow. Thanks for the heads up.
37 posted on 10/28/2009 9:23:26 PM PDT by scripter ("You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body." - C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: La Lydia; GodGunsGuts; metmom
These people don’t “believe” in genetics...

Amazing...if you can't compete...just lie.

38 posted on 10/28/2009 9:24:22 PM PDT by tpanther (Science was, is and will forever be a small subset of God's creation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin
Was this the same Muller that offered a eugenics breeding program to Stalin?
39 posted on 10/28/2009 9:25:21 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

“Hain’t we got all the fools in town on our side? And ain’t that a big enough majority in any town?”


40 posted on 10/28/2009 9:27:34 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Halfway honest people reject Darwinism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Rafterman; GodGunsGuts
Why don't you keep this baloney in the Religion forum where it belongs?

Uhhhh because Jim Robinson said so and he calls the shots and you don't?

41 posted on 10/28/2009 9:33:11 PM PDT by tpanther (Science was, is and will forever be a small subset of God's creation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

That is not true and you know it……………………

In the USSR, Muller supervised a large and productive lab, and organized work on medical genetics. Most of his work involved further explorations of genetics and radiation. There he completed his eugenics book, Out of the Night. By 1936, however, Stalin’s repressive policies and the rise of Lysenkoism was making the USSR an increasingly problematic place to live and work. Muller and much of the Russian genetics community did what they could to oppose Trofim Lysenko and his Larmarckian evolutionary theory, but Muller was soon forced to leave the Soviet Union after Stalin read a translation of his eugenics book and was “displeased by it, and...ordered an attack prepared against it.”[12]

But nice try.


42 posted on 10/28/2009 9:43:37 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Rafterman
"How about keeping the proselytizing in the RELIGION forum, instead of in News/Activism?"

The mods continually allow it to be posted here so my guess is they want it here.

I also guess I wont be contributing to FR this time around due to this sort of 'exceptionalism'.

If the mods decide to enforce the rules as written and observed by most posters, I'll reconsider.

43 posted on 10/28/2009 9:51:07 PM PDT by telebob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: lp boonie
Here we go.

Where? Fake polls only lead to a fantasy land.

44 posted on 10/28/2009 9:55:48 PM PDT by Jeff Gordon (Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hiddigeigei
I sometimes wonder if people put stuff like this on the FreeRepublic to make us look like morons.

It is not as bad as it looks. Almost all of these posts are the work one person. He is highly dedicated to his beliefs and looks far and wide to bring us his fantasies.

45 posted on 10/28/2009 10:01:08 PM PDT by Jeff Gordon (Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin; All

Then maybe this is a fraud or I’ve misunderstood what the letter writer was talking about here.

“Hermann J. Muller’s 1936 Letter to Stalin
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
geneticist H.J. Muller to Joseph Stalin advocating the creation of a ... eugenics movement, Jewish scholars, Hermann J. Muller, Joseph Stalin, ...
www.mankindquarterly.org/muellersletter.pdf - Similar
by J Glad - 2003 - Cited by 1 - Related articles - All 3 versions”


46 posted on 10/28/2009 10:01:27 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: scripter

I too recommend Meyer and have bought the book and the DVD.


47 posted on 10/28/2009 10:06:07 PM PDT by tongass kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: tpanther
Uhhhh because Jim Robinson said so...

Citation, please?

48 posted on 10/28/2009 10:15:37 PM PDT by Rafterman ("If you kill enough of them, they stop fighting." -- Curtis LeMay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin
By all means let creation science be taught in schools. It should take all of about 10 minuets to teach it and then children can be allowed to make up their own minds in the face of the evidence. For children who study hard and keep an open mind it seems to me utterly inconceivable that they could conclude anything other than that evolution is true ~ Richard Dawkins

Which is the same mentality that most evos on this forum have.

It is simply beyond their comprehension that anyone would look at what they call the *preponderance of evidence* and decide that species to species evolution is not a fact and that variation within species has been grossly misinterpreted as macro-evolution.

49 posted on 10/28/2009 10:22:20 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
I clicked on the “more knowledge” link. well worth effort to read the survey, no wonder the ‘council’ would press for more Darwinism teaching. All that effort and so little results.

Thanks for pointing that out. I for one am cheered to see that in the US, 51 percent agree that "it is possible to believe in a God and still hold the view that life on earth, including human life, evolved over time as a result of natural selection," compared with only 27 percent who don't. And 41 percent agree that "enough scientific evidence exists to support Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution,” compared to 30 percent who don't.

What I'm really curious about, but can't find any information on, is how they determined who "have heard of Charles Darwin and know something about the Theory of Evolution." If they're just self-identified, I'd be interested in seeing the results weighted by whether what they know is accurate. Because as we see here every day, there are lots of people who think they know something about the TOE, but what they think they know is totally off base. Including their opinions doesn't really support the article's headline.

50 posted on 10/28/2009 10:25:50 PM PDT by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-304 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