Replies

The third criteria, however, is one Spradling was not prepared to fulfill. Dini asked that Spradling “truthfully and forthrightly affirm a scientific answer” to the question: “How do you think the human species originated?” Spradling was denied a recommendation based entirely on the fact that he did not accepted Darwinism as a fact.

I have to agree with the professor on this one. The student was specifically asked for the scientific answer. Even if he believed in creationism or ID, the student should be fully cognizant that those concepts, at a college level, are not science. Based on that alone, I would asses that this science student does not have a sufficient grasp of science to warrant a bachelor's degree in any science, let alone a letter of recommendation.

The question of believing in evolution as FACT can actually be answered quite simply. If it were indeed proven fact, it would not be called a "theory".

It would have advanced to the status of a "Law", as have the laws of motion, thermodynamics, and others.

The THEORY of Evolution is not proven fact, by its very name, which does have scientific significance.

To elevate theories to the status of laws implies a willingness to atribute far more weight to the lowly hypothesis than is warranted.

That, in my opinion makes for a far looser cannon on the deck of scientific inquiry than one who refuses to call a theory fact.

Make of that what you will, but as a scientist, the refusal to state that any theory is fact is entirely scientifically correct.

The professor required that the student accept Darwin's theory of the origin of species as being factual.

Quoting from the introduction to the book Origin of the Species:

"After five years' work I allowed myself to speculate on the subject, and drew up some short notes; these I enlarged in 1844 into a sketch of the conclusions,..."

"For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived."

It is a religion because the book Origin of the Species does not explain the origin of the species.

You have to take on faith that Darwin's theory is fact.

Darwin himself states that his theories are actually his speculations and there is ample evidence that come to a different conclusion.

Why can't it be taught as a theory and the actual words of Darwin be used to explain where it came from?