Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Chance & Necessity Whackaloons Dropping Like Flies

February 10, 2009
Intelligent Design
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Zogby poll conducted at the end of January finds 78% of likely US voters favor teaching both strengths and weaknesses of Darwin’s theory of evolution. The same poll conducted in 2006 found 69% favored teaching both sides of the controversy. We’re winning in the public square. Big time.

Comments
Question: Is there a difference between the terms self-organization and spontaneous generation?bb
February 10, 2009
February
02
Feb
10
10
2009
09:36 PM
9
09
36
PM
PDT
But why must we limit ourselves to Evolution? If we are to teach the strengths and weaknesses of evolution, then we need to teach the strengths and weaknesses of every scientific theory that is taught in school. After all, it's about stronger science education, not just stronger origins education, right? That smacks of religion, and ID is not, I repeat NOT religious in nature. For instance, among other things, we should be teaching that the theory of gravity is incapable of explaining why our universe appears to be expanding at an accelerated rate, so it is therefore a weak theory. We should be teaching that the Big Bang theory cannot explain exactly where the matter and energy necessary for the Big Bang came from, and is therefore a weak theory. Basically, any science content in school must (in the interest of better education) include reasons why that science is probably wrong.KRiS
February 10, 2009
February
02
Feb
10
10
2009
09:36 PM
9
09
36
PM
PDT
Seversky,
Of course, it is possible to support teaching the strengths and weaknesses of the theory of evolution without necessarily believing that creationism or creation science or Intelligent Design offer credible alternatives.
It does not, by necessity, mean that creationism or ID is true, but showing the weaknesses of neo-Darwinism will show how truly a lousy theory it is (if it could be called a theory). Once that idea is established (of neo-Darwinism essentialy getting ROFL stomped), ID or creation are basically a step away. Of course there's evolutionists who have realized that neo-Darwinism is a failed theory and are looking towards the idea of self-organization, but this also screams of a intelligence. (Who or what put the information into the universe for this to work in the first place?) I also have my own doubts about self-organization (if it can really happen then why aren't planets littered with life?), but hey, it's better than the utterly pointless theory of evolution.Domoman
February 10, 2009
February
02
Feb
10
10
2009
08:14 PM
8
08
14
PM
PDT
Darwin was the only theory of evolution. Once it became obvious that some type of evolution had occured, it became accepted as fact. Nevermind that its mechanisms show zero ability to produce what we know exists in biological systems (and continues to lose ground the more we learn; Re: ENCODE project findings)uoflcard
February 10, 2009
February
02
Feb
10
10
2009
06:10 PM
6
06
10
PM
PDT
"the best scientific theories are not decided by popular vote." I agree, the best scientific theories are decided by empirical evidence and Darwinian macro evolution has no empirical backing. So I am glad that Seversky agrees with us here.jerry
February 10, 2009
February
02
Feb
10
10
2009
05:12 PM
5
05
12
PM
PDT
scientific theories are not decided by popular vote
Why this can't be true...after all ID proponents are constantly reminded of the thwards of scientists who only dance to Darwinism. It is, in fact, a pervasive comment from the NCSE on down, repeated by the media machine at every turn. Perhaps you are simply mistaken.Upright BiPed
February 10, 2009
February
02
Feb
10
10
2009
05:08 PM
5
05
08
PM
PDT
Of course, it is possible to support teaching the strengths and weaknesses of the theory of evolution without necessarily believing that creationism or creation science or Intelligent Design offer credible alternatives. And it has been mentioned before but it bears repetition, the best scientific theories are not decided by popular vote.Seversky
February 10, 2009
February
02
Feb
10
10
2009
04:55 PM
4
04
55
PM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply