UCF Speakers Series Tackles Evolution Versus Creationism for Darwin's Anniversary

USF Newsroom ^ | Oct. 24, 2008 | Zenaida Gonzalez Kotala

[Soliton]

Eugenie Scott, a national expert on the teaching of evolution, will speak at the University of Central Florida on Monday, Nov. 3.

Scott, the executive director of the National Center for Science Education, will discuss “Florida’s Academic Freedom Bills: Creationism du jour?” at 7:30 pm in room 101 of the College of Sciences building. Her presentation is free and open to the public.

Scott and the NCSE are among the biggest opponents of intelligent design being taught in science classrooms. She has written several books, including “Not in Our Classrooms: Why Intelligent Design is Wrong for Our Schools.” She also has appeared on MSNBC, the Fox News Channel and CNN.

Scott is part of the UCF Department of Biology special speaker series under way this year in honor of the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s work on evolution. The series tackles how the theory of evolution has influenced all aspects of human society.

The UCF Department of Biology has invited a series of speakers to campus beginning this month and stretching into next year to highlight the importance evolution plays in man’s understanding of life science.

Biology faculty at UCF say a basic knowledge of evolution is vital to understand and advance scientific study from conservation biology to developing new medical treatments of disease.

Chris Parkinson and Eric Hoffman, who teach the capstone undergraduate evolution course at UCF, often find undergraduates are unprepared in evolutionary theory when they arrive at UCF. Their goal with this seminar series is to educate the public on the importance of teaching and understanding evolution.

[Soliton]

"Chris Parkinson and Eric Hoffman, who teach the capstone undergraduate evolution course at UCF, often find undergraduates are unprepared in evolutionary theory when they arrive at UCF."

[AndyTheBear]

Their goal with this seminar series is to educate the public on the importance of teaching and understanding evolution.

There is something funny when people promote the "importance of teaching and understanding" scientific theories. Promoting the importance of an ideology, religion, or philosophy makes sense though.

[raygunfan]

it is actually evolutionISM and creationISM....

and the state sponsered religion masquerading as science doesnt fool me a bit...

[RegulatorCountry]

Scott is part of the UCF Department of Biology special speaker series under way this year in honor of the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s work on evolution. The series tackles how the theory of evolution has influenced all aspects of human society.

Imagine that, a gathering to sing the praises of Charles Darwin. Apparently, the influence isn't pervasive enough. I'd suggest an annual holiday, for an even more persuasive promotion. Just think of all the hearts and minds this would bring to Darwin.

[LiteKeeper]

And no opposing viewpoints are going to be offered?

Goebbels would have been proud!

[microgood]

The series tackles how the theory of evolution has influenced all aspects of human society.

I remember learning it in high school and I never really heard anyone ever even mention evolution until I came to FR and the big Crevo threads were going on 30 years later. With the exception of the annual Darwin awards for stupidity, most people in normal society do not ever give it a thought since it has no relevance to their lives.

[Soliton]

And no opposing viewpoints are going to be offered? Goebbels would have been proud!

They are open to opposingscientific viewpoints.

[Coyoteman]

"And no opposing viewpoints are going to be offered? Goebbels would have been proud!"

They are open to opposing scientific viewpoints.

All of the opposition is coming from religious belief, not from science.

[Soliton]

All of the opposition is coming from religious belief, not from science.

I don't understand why they don't admit that. It's as if they are ashamed of having faith.

[AmericanGirlRising]

hmmm... I see alumnis not being happy about this AND the three UCF professors who signed the Support Bill Ayers petition:

505 Suzanne M. Martin University of Central Florida - http://education.ucf.edu/faculty_detail.cfm?ProfID=209 - Professor, Child, Family, Community Sciences

988 Jay D. Jurie, Ph.D. University of Central Florida - http://www.cohpa.ucf.edu/pubadm/facultyandstaff2.cfm?PageNum_rsEmployees=2 - Assis. Profesor, Department of Public Administration

3193 Marcella L. Kysilka University of Central Florida - http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~kysilka/resume.html - Professor, Educational Foundations

[LiteKeeper]

No, they aren’t. Especially when they are allowed to set the rules for what is and what isn’t “science.”

[Coyoteman]

No, they aren’t. Especially when they are allowed to set the rules for what is and what isn’t “science.”

So who else but scientists should set the rules of how science is conducted?

I can't believe you are serious about wanting anti-science fundamentalists to have a say in how something they hate is conducted. Analogies would be criminals helping run the police departments and arsonists telling firefighters how to do their jobs.

[LiteKeeper]

Christians and creationists are not the least bit anti-science. Most of the scientific disciplines were founded by theists/deists.

What you fail to see is the difference between "operational science" [that which is leading to technological advances today], and "origins science" [which describes the origin of the universe, and life]. Evolution has nothing to do with the former, and everything to do with the latter...and in the latter, your conclusions are based upon assumptions of things that you can neither prove, nor disprove.

[Soliton]

No, they aren’t. Especially when they are allowed to set the rules for what is and what isn’t “science.”

You are a smart guy. You know that "science" has a definition and a well defined methodology. It hasn't been changed for evolution or ID.

[Soliton]

three UCF professors who signed the Support Bill Ayers petition:

All three were in squishy socialwork fields, not biology and have nothing to do with this. It's a nice emotional argument though!

[Soliton]

the difference between "operational science" [that which is leading to technological advances today], and "origins science" [which describes the origin of the universe, and life].

You (or someone) have created two new terms for perfectly good ones that already exist, pure science, and applied science. You neglect that pure science has repeatedly led to applied science advances. In the case of the "origins science" of evolutionary biology, it has led to genetics and cures for genetic diseases. Applied science would not exist without pure science. Genesis, in fact, was Man's early attempt at pure science, they simply got it wrong because they didn't have the tools or scientific method required to get it right. Their mistake has had real word ramifications to this day (like this conversation).