Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Darwin teaching 'divides opinion'
10-27-2009, 08:31 PM,
#1
Darwin teaching 'divides opinion'
Darwin teaching 'divides opinion'

More than half of adults in a survey of 10 countries thought school science lessons should teach evolutionary theories alongside creationism.

Among those who knew of Darwinism, on average 53% felt other possible perspectives should also be taught.

The figure was 68% in Argentina, in the poll for the British Council, which promotes educational opportunities.

In Great Britain 60% felt this way. In Egypt, 27% said such theories should not be in science lessons at all.

The British Council, the UK's international organisation for educational opportunities and cultural relations, is running a programme of activities under the banner Darwin Now.

This marks the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birth and the 150th anniversary of the publication of his work, On the Origin of Species.

There are exhibitions and learning resources in about 50 countries and in a variety of languages.

The learning materials vary but can be used without technical equipment, to make them as widely available as possible.

Opinions

The survey to underpin the work was conducted through Ipsos Mori and involved interviews with some 11,000 people aged over 18, mostly face-to-face, last April.
COUNTRIES IN SURVEY
# Argentina
# China
# Egypt
# Great Britain
# India
# Mexico
# Russia
# South Africa
# Spain
# USA

Of those, more than 7,000 knew of Darwin's work already.

People were asked which statements were closest to their own opinion about how evolutionary theories should be taught in science lessons in schools.

The highest proportion agreeing that evolutionary theories alone should be taught was in India, at 49%, followed by Spain (42%).

One in five in China and in South Africa thought other perspectives - and not evolutionary theories - should be taught.

Those opting for evolutionary theories "together with other possible perspectives, such as intelligent design and creationism" ranged from 38% in Spain to the 68% in Argentina.

'Polarised debate'

"It is quite an interesting response and we need to think about why that is," said the head of the Darwin Now programme, Dr Fern Elsdon-Baker.

Her feeling is that the debate about Darwinism has been portrayed as very polarised: science versus religion.

A previous survey suggested a lot of people were open-minded about having a faith and understanding that evolutionary processes occurred, and she thinks the polarisation of the arguments has confused them about how science works as a process.

"The majority of people in each country polled felt it was acceptable to have faith and think evolution happens by means of natural selection," she said.

So it was necessary to communicate science in a less dogmatic, more sophisticated way, she said.

Darwinism remains controversial.

In March Turkey's scientific and technological research council pulled a cover article about Darwin from its popular magazine, provoking outrage among scientists.

Dr Elsdon-Baker said: "It would be ridiculous to suggest that there haven't been problems with the Darwin anniversary - but the British Council project, which is working in 45 countries, has had a very positive response.

"There's clearly a demand for these kind of science communication activities around Darwin's theory of evolution by means of natural selection."
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_n...ion/8322781.stm

Published: 2009/10/26 00:26:54 GMT
Reply
10-28-2009, 09:12 AM,
#2
Darwin teaching 'divides opinion'
Darwin's theories don't explain jack diddly squat. Neither does creationism. The truth lies somewhere in between and includes something of both.
Reply
10-28-2009, 02:04 PM,
#3
Darwin teaching 'divides opinion'
Quote:Darwin's theories don't explain jack diddly squat. Neither does creationism. The truth lies somewhere in between and includes something of both.

Abgestimmt.
Reply
10-28-2009, 03:55 PM, (This post was last modified: 10-28-2009, 04:07 PM by JazzRoc.)
#4
Darwin teaching 'divides opinion'
Quote:Darwin's theories don't explain jack diddly squat. Neither does creationism. The truth lies somewhere in between and includes something of both.
I don't see Evolution as being between Creationism and Darwinism. I assume you mean Evolution here, rather than "Darwinism", for we all know that Genetics was discovered by Mendel but remained unpublished until after his death, and after the structure of DNA was discovered everything opened up with new fields and their particular discoveries. Darwin would have been overwhelmed by such a complete vindication of his theory in both quantity and quality.

"Evolution" doesn't explain abiogenesis. It's the study of the natural long-term consequences of what happens when living beings reproduce. It's a science. It deals in evidence and its interpretation. There are many interdisciplinary fields which employ Evolutionary Science.

Creationists should argue with the cosmologists about who-started-what and fine tuning, maybe, although they'll get short shrift from them I expect. But Creationism has nothing to do with evolutionary science, as it has nothing to do with science in general.

It's belief system.

Science is a non-belief system, with "show me your evidence" one of its prime features.

That would be a FAIL for Creationism, then.
Reply
10-28-2009, 06:03 PM,
#5
Darwin teaching 'divides opinion'
Quote:
Quote:Darwin's theories don't explain jack diddly squat. Neither does creationism. The truth lies somewhere in between and includes something of both.
I don't see Evolution as being between Creationism and Darwinism. I assume you mean Evolution here, rather than "Darwinism", for we all know that Genetics was discovered by Mendel but remained unpublished until after his death, and after the structure of DNA was discovered everything opened up with new fields and their particular discoveries. Darwin would have been overwhelmed by such a complete vindication of his theory in both quantity and quality.

"Evolution" doesn't explain abiogenesis. It's the study of the natural long-term consequences of what happens when living beings reproduce. It's a science. It deals in evidence and its interpretation. There are many interdisciplinary fields which employ Evolutionary Science.

Creationists should argue with the cosmologists about who-started-what and fine tuning, maybe, although they'll get short shrift from them I expect. But Creationism has nothing to do with evolutionary science, as it has nothing to do with science in general.

It's belief system.

Science is a non-belief system, with "show me your evidence" one of its prime features.

That would be a FAIL for Creationism, then.

Global 'creation myths' as oppose to creationism are somewhat startling in that they mysteriously accord with each other across the globe. Same motifs, same manner of incident in comparative scenarios etc etc I'm sure you are already well aware of this.

That's ALL the evidence that is left -- science has no tools nor method to investigate this...but it is ludicrous to write it off as "FAIL" because of that. Unfortunately, it's a mystery and a mythos and little more seemingly is left.

But plant matter can coalify extremely rapidly and impartial science hushes it up.. or at least grossly underplays this and such like.

Two different points though... the main one is that, as you said yourself, the two, science and myth, are irreconcilable with the tools we have at our disposal presently and potentially forever ..unless we begin to time travel.. but thenwemight already see some evidence of that if it were the case. :huh: yikes

...though it doesn't mean that the coinciding global creation myths are actually irrelevant - this is your own personal choice in perspective adopted because they fall outside of the remit of the scientific method.

Perhaps if we had a more realistic and sophisticated knowledge of what actually was going on precursing the 'great leap' then we might not be making such a utter hash of it now..
Reply
10-29-2009, 10:47 AM,
#6
Darwin teaching 'divides opinion'
I think Lloyd Pye explains a theory of interventionism very well. Look for his talks on google video or on the tracker.
Reply
11-18-2009, 05:34 AM,
#7
RE: Darwin teaching 'divides opinion'
http://books.google.com/books?id=El_oIIESFvoC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Darwin's Pharmacy: Plants as Superpower Solve et Coagula 0 683 06-23-2011, 12:41 PM
Last Post: Solve et Coagula
  CIA Plans to Target European Public Opinion over Afghan War h3rm35 0 663 04-01-2010, 06:32 PM
Last Post: h3rm35
  Opinion: Still crazy after all these years --- 4 1,338 08-23-2009, 10:01 PM
Last Post: ---
  Darwin's Nightmare drew hempel 4 1,454 07-13-2007, 12:14 PM
Last Post: drew hempel

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)