Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Unlucky thirteen? Last year “terrible” for evolution, says Karl Giberson

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

No, really. To listen to Giberson (author of Saving Darwin), this has been the worst year for “evolution” since the dinosaurs caught themselves an asteroid.

In a publication called Church and State (“challenging religious privilege in public life”), he tells us,

Evolution did not fare well in 2013. The year ended with the anti-evolution book Darwin’s Doubt as Amazon’s top seller in the “Paleontology” category. The state of Texas spent much of the year trying to keep the country’s most respected high school biology text out of its public schools. And leading anti-evolutionist and Creation Museum curator Ken Ham made his annual announcement that the “final nail” had been pounded into the coffin of poor Darwin’s beleaguered theory of evolution.

Americans entered 2013 more opposed to evolution than they have been for years, with an amazing 46 percent embracing the notion that “God created humans pretty much in their present form at one time in the last 10,000 years or so.” This number was up a full 6 percent from the prior poll taken in 2010. According to a December 2013 Pew poll, among white evangelical Protestants, a demographic that includes many Republican members of Congress and governors, almost 64 percent reject the idea that humans have evolved.

Toldjah. It’s the “13” effect again. 1913 was bad too. Alfred Russel Wallace died that year.

But seriously, readers, it’s a surprise Giberson is even using the word “evolution.” Here’s what he and Francis Collins had to say in their recent book, The Language of Science and Faith: “We avoid using the ‘E-word’”:

Theistic evolution is the belief that God created life using natural processes, working within the natural order, in harmony with its laws. So, why don’t we simply use the term evolution to describe our view? We don’t use the term, at least not at this point in our discussion, because it is associated with negative ideas, including atheism, and many readers would have a constant uncomfortable feeling while thinking about it. The word evolution carries emotional baggage that we are tossing overboard. (pp. 19–20)

Musta fished it back.

Well, it’ll be interesting to see what Giberson says about 2014.

Note: It’s kind of surprising that a well-known Christian theologian would be writing in a publication like Church and State. On the books page, get a load of the one suggesting short-lived Pope John Paul I was murdered. You know, just like Princess Di and Elvis. (Or wait, no, didn’t someone see all three of them down at the donut shop together recently? Figures.)

See also: Observant Jew Prager takes on Christian Darwinist Giberson

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Hat tip: Daniel Quinones

Comments
Dang, missed being in the clown-car by 1 post.drc466
January 19, 2014
January
01
Jan
19
19
2014
11:02 PM
11
11
02
PM
PDT
While it's nice to see someone recognize issues w/ Evolution, it's only too typical to see an evolutionist say the only problems that occurred during the year were PR problems. Kinda like politicians having a bad year - it must be a communications issue, it couldn't be the fact that everyone just really hates their policies. Just like evolution - must be a case that the people are uninformed, or that the other side's propaganda (Darwin's Doubt) is more effective than their "truth". How about a nod to the scientific blows to evolution this year? Mammals found way earlier in the timeline? More evidence that dino fossils still contain original organic material? Still no progress in OoL? More complexity and function in DNA found? Anyone? Hello? Is this thing on?drc466
January 19, 2014
January
01
Jan
19
19
2014
10:59 PM
10
10
59
PM
PDT
I was pointing out the ignorance of the Amazon book ranking in a category. I also pointed out that it is trivial to find contrary statistics. The clown-car response consists of, - some rant about Darwinist/Atheist by bornagain77 (I am disappoint that Quantum wasn't mentioned once!), - utter divorce from statistics by lifepsy who thinks that the highest levels of evolution support correlate with the lowest levels of "data" which is at odds with the fact that the more science education someone has then the higher the support for evolution. - mapou, desperately re-interpreting reality given objections to evolution is mainly creationist and usually religious in some way. Plus the OP link was to a site called "Church and State - challenging religious privilege in public life" -sixthbook showing difficulty in counting past 5.Lincoln Phipps
January 19, 2014
January
01
Jan
19
19
2014
10:46 PM
10
10
46
PM
PDT
Let's see: Most people accept evolution. Check. Evolution is a fact like gravity. Check. Intelligent Design is creationism. Check. Blame it on the religious. Check. And finish by linking to Coyne. Check. You really made sure to cover everything, didn't you LP?sixthbook
January 19, 2014
January
01
Jan
19
19
2014
09:45 PM
9
09
45
PM
PDT
My perspective is that many avenues of human endeavor are overrun by elitist snobs who believe that perceived consensus and the public narrative determines Truth, whether it's in politics, economics, theology, history, science, or whatever. Incidentally, I read In God's Name many years ago---David Yallop presents pretty convincing evidence that Pope John Paul I was murdered. -QQuerius
January 19, 2014
January
01
Jan
19
19
2014
09:42 PM
9
09
42
PM
PDT
The tired and gutless Darwinist tactics of associating any criticism of Darwin's pseudoscientific theory with young-earth creationists are backfiring in their faces. It smacks of elitist condescension and it insults the intelligence of the masses. People can easily see through that crap, especially when the lady protests way too much.Mapou
January 19, 2014
January
01
Jan
19
19
2014
08:59 PM
8
08
59
PM
PDT
It's only going to get worse for the Darwinian mystics. This is probably simply the result of the internet being around long enough and people having access to arguments and evidence against Evolution, and can also conveniently fact-check a lot of their grandiose claims with a literature search. IMO, the public's positive perception of Evolution is inversely correlated with their access to data.lifepsy
January 19, 2014
January
01
Jan
19
19
2014
08:45 PM
8
08
45
PM
PDT
Lincoln Phipps, the Darwinian atheist, thinks he has successfully refuted Darwin's Doubt on this site by labeling it 'Creationist'. Perhaps Mr. Phipps, the Darwinian atheist, does not realize that being a Darwinian atheist on this site is considered much worse offense to sanity than being a Creationist is on this site. ,,, And in case you don't know Mr. Phipps, not all 'Creationists' are backwoods, gun-toting, tobacco chewing, cousin marrying, hicks. In fact, there are actually a few 'Creationists' out there who manage to have indoor plumbing. :) Such as this crowd in New York: "Darwin's Doubt" Eric Metaxas with Stephen Meyer - video https://vimeo.com/81215936bornagain77
January 19, 2014
January
01
Jan
19
19
2014
08:23 PM
8
08
23
PM
PDT
"Darwin's Doubt" was not anti-evolution- it is anti- blind watchmaker/ unguided evolution being able to produce anything of note, especially given the time constraint.Joe
January 19, 2014
January
01
Jan
19
19
2014
07:57 PM
7
07
57
PM
PDT
Another commentator that doesn't know how Amazon book listings works. The publisher puts the book into a category but its ranking in that category is NOT related to sales from people who are looking for books in that category but overall Amazon sales rank. The book was also in Creation category and I'd say that it would be Creationists that would be buying this book and not palaeontology students. The categories are changed by the publisher to bump up the apparent popularity. The UD O'leary was also clueless on this point too. So much like if everyone really believed that gravity didn't exist then we'd all float into space, a public poll on a fact of nature won't ever change nature. That aside statistically 60 % accept evolution (33% reject),
According to a new Pew Research Center analysis, six-in-ten Americans (60%) say that “humans and other living things have evolved over time,” while a third (33%) reject the idea of evolution, saying that “humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.” The share of the general public that says that humans have evolved over time is about the same as it was in 2009, when Pew Research last asked the question.
http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/ So there are statistics and then there are statistics. In the end two groups are the problem; white evangelical protestants and black protestants. For the young black protestants then education will solve their ignorance but given a society that has the world's highest prison population and throws a significant number of young blacks into prison then this is a systemic problem of US society. For a different spin on the statistics, http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/01/03/karl-giberson-says-that-evolutions-had-a-bad-year-but-he-really-means-that-christianity-did/Lincoln Phipps
January 19, 2014
January
01
Jan
19
19
2014
07:32 PM
7
07
32
PM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply