Test Darwin

27th November

This is the sort of thing I find fascinating. This story I found particularly interesting, Darwin a sacred cow? Sounds about right.

Quote, “Many leading scientists argue that theories about intelligent design should not be allowed in school because they are simply not scientific.” Or maybe it’s that they cant explain the science? Or they don’t like the idea of a being greater than themselves?

What was most interesting was the quote by the teacher:

“There’s a sense that if you criticise Darwin you must be some kind of religious nut case.

“We might has well have said Einstein shouldn’t have said what he did because it criticised Newton.”

Wish this had been around when I was at school. I wish there had been the opportunity for debate but alas there wasn’t.

Shame really.

Dan

9 Responses to “Test Darwin”

Livi
27th November 2006
9:48 pm

meh, I’m studying secularization in religion (the idea that society is becoming less religious) and it seems to me that anyone who disagrees with science therefore has to be religious and religion has got it all wrong.

Yet when science fails and God steps in, people don’t know what to do. They won’t appeal to the idea of God. They don’t like the Bible because God Himself didn’t write it. Even if He did are you more likely to believe it?!?!

As for evolution, I’m leaving that to the pros for now!

Sirkent
27th November 2006
10:40 pm

I found tyou from Ben’s blog (in case you’re wondering).

“We might has well have said Einstein shouldn’t have said what he did because it criticised Newton.”
Well, Einstein had good evidence and proof for what he said, so no, we shouldn’t say that! It was indeed scientific.

Intelligent Design on the other hand is without proof. It requires faith and therefore it’s religious. It should be taught in church.

How can you argue that ID should be taught in schools, when everything else taught is scientific, based on proof, etc? Geography, history, maths, english, science, etc – all are proovable. ID isn’t. Even Relgious Studies doesn’t claim that any of the subject matter is true, just that it’s belived to be true by many people!

Dan
28th November 2006
12:20 am

Sirkent, first off Hi!

Having sat on both sides of the fence I think the debate is needed in the classroom.

I think you are missing the point though, that the debate doesn’t take place and Darwin is in some ways idolised.

For me I would have loved to see the debate in class as I too once accepted evolution as was taught but there are some serious flaws.

First off a question I came across “There is, however, another question that I would like to ask of evolutionists. Where did Lucy get her husband? In other words, since sexual/reproductive function would be useless without a partner, how did it ever develop by random mutation? What is more, since it would have allegedly taken “millions of years” to produce fully functional body systems, how did the species reproduce themselves during this long age of development? And, if they somehow could reproduce without a male/female reproductive systems, why did they need to develop them?”

And a quote from a once atheist Prof. Antony Flew “It seems to me that Richard Dawkins constantly overlooks the fact that Darwin himself, in the fourteenth chapter of The Origin of Species, pointed out that his whole argument began with a being which already possessed reproductive powers.”

Funny how that is overlooked in biology lessons?

Sirkent
28th November 2006
9:44 am

Hi Dan!

I don’t think there’s any problem having a debate in the classroom, but what most people (especially in America) want, is the teaching of one or the other, or the factual teaching of ID, when it has not (and quite possible cannot) be proven as fact.

However, it’s important to remember that (as with all science) evolution is simply a theory. It does however have a huge amount of evidence for it. What must be remembered is that the evolution of sexual organs would have happened so long ago that actually finding any evidence of it is practically impossible. Even if the process was recreated in a lab, most people wouldn’t accept that as evidence.

I think this URL ( http://www.evolutionary-philosophy.net/sex.html ) offers some very good theories for why sexual organs came about. It’s not hard to imagine them working practically.

Dan
28th November 2006
10:16 am

Which is a shame as I think and know that having a debate in the classroom is a good thing. It leads to new ways of thinking but in the UK everyone is so stuck in there ways and the flaws of evolution are not discussed which I personally would have at least like to have known about when I was doing my GCSE’s.

Sadly evolution is taught as fact in schools here, which to me is just wrong. I only learnt that it was really a theory fairly recently long after doing my GCSE’s and that is surely not right?

That is an interesting link by the way and I’ll look at it more later today (in a lecture!).

Karl
28th November 2006
2:16 pm

I think the important thing is that the theory of evolution is taught in classrooms. Whether you believe that evolution is true or not, the theory is quite beautiful and, frankly, genius.

But at this point in time it’s the accepted fact that evolution is true. What I think most people forget is that Science is about testing ideas and producing evidence to prove that a theory works. Any good scientist will tell you not to accept anything at face value (something which most religions seem to ask you to do?) but to look at the evidence for yourself and then decide – that’s what science is about!

Dan
28th November 2006
2:38 pm

I have no issue with it being taught but taught as fact is clearly wrong. It should be taught for what it is a theory that has it’s strengths and weaknesses. Do you not think that the problems with evolution should not be taught?

What is interesting though is that an increasing amount of scientists here are questioning it.

Also I would disagree with accepting at face value for religion. If we did then I don’t think that there would be quite so many denominations as there are.

Livi
28th November 2006
8:58 pm

Wow this is a hot topic!

I had my Human Rights conference today, and one of the issues arising was evolution. I asked the leader of the Baptist Church in Kiddy what he thought, and he said that although he doesn’t know all the answers, he believes that God created us, but it doesn’t matter ‘how’ as much as ‘why’, and that he’s happy for the scientists to find out!

Dan
28th November 2006
10:00 pm

That’s a very good answer!

Leave a Reply




“ Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable - if anything is excellent or praiseworthy - think about such things. ”
Phillipians 4:8

Twitter Updates