Evolution Teaching 'Improving' in Schools, Report Says

Reader Comments
Back to blog

http://www.integraenvironmental.com/pdfs/Enhanced%20Applied%20Bioremediation.pdf
Microbes have; Obviously evolved within our life time; previously the elements they consume never existed before; nor did they.... Think about it.

Leslie Meyer of MN 7:16PM July 12, 2010

One creationist aguement I keep hearing is this: No one has ever witnessed evolution, therefore we can never cofirm that it is true. Think about it. Do you believed that the dinosaurs ate?
If yes, why? no one ever witnessed a diosaur eating. See how flawed the arguement is. Fossils and skeletons show that the dionsaurs had teeth and jaws. A fossilised dinosaur stomache was once found with leaves in it. A tryserotopse pelvis with T-rex teeth marks in it was once found etc etc etc but hey! No one ever witnessed a dinosaur eating anything,so we can't possibly be sure if they really did eat (by that logic anyway).
And if you look into the matter enough, you will find the evidence for evolution is there. There are thousands of intermediate species, despite what some creationists are claiming, some, like the archiopterix, were discovered well over a hundred years ago. If you really want to know which one is true, get some creationist and evolutionist DVDs and see which ones seem the most honest. I find that creationist apologists always contradict each other. Some say Darwin was a fraud, others say he believed in evolution, but only because he was stupid, others claim that he was a very good scientist but his theory has been disproven non the less. Some claim that trasitional fossils found by paliantologists are hoaxes, wheras others claim the fossils are genuine but they are not really transitional species at all and it is simply an honest mistake on the evolutionists part.

T 6:17PM March 10, 2010

Here is what I do not understand. If evolution is supposedly rock solid science, why are the evolutionist so terrified of the teaching of Intelligent Design? Now I am not talking about teaching the Bible, but simply teaching Intelligent Design. No evolutionist can deny that a cell contains organelles, that are more complex than any man made technology the world has seen. It was asked of one scientist "if Darwin thought a cell to be a Volvo, what do we now know a cell to be?" the answer was "a galaxy". The Greek word kosmos, from where we get our word cosmos literally means order. A 3rd century evolutionary philosopher wrote "I cannot understand why there is kosmos (order) in the universe. Now evolutionist will claim that if Intelligent Design is taught, the creationist would be pushing their ideas on people, yet isn't that exactly what the evolutionist is doing by not allowing the teaching of I.D.? Students are smart, why not give them evidence for evolution and Intelligent Design, and let them follow the evidence wherever that may lead. Isn't that the purpose of science to begin with? Let’s start with the term the “theory of evolution.” A scientific theory is In the sciences generally, a scientific theory (the same as an empirical theory) comprises a collection of concepts, including abstractions of observable phenomena expressed as quantifiable properties, together with rules (called scientific laws) that express relationships between observations of such concepts. A scientific theory is constructed to conform to available empirical data about such observations, and is put forth as a principle or body of principles for explaining a class of phenomena.4 Notice I emphasized observable phenomena, because for something to be a scientific theory there has to be observable proof that verifies the scientific theory itself. There has to be physical evidence of evolution occurring (remember from now on when I mention evolution I am talking about macro-evolution. The belief that our ancient ancestor was pond scum). So what am I saying, for something to be a scientific theory there has to be evidence that you can look at of the theory occurring. Here is where the first problem lies no one has ever witnessed the occurrence of evolution. NO ONE! Also there is no proof that verifies evolution ever occurred, so to say in its most basic form that evolution is a theory, according to the definition of a scientific theory is wrong. So evolution is not even a theory because there is no observable evidence that it ever occurred.

Chris Sanford of KY 11:53PM March 08, 2010

For "People Don't Understand Evolution"; You refer that you would rather come from a monkey then the dirt. I would rather have hope as I do, of eternal life, then to go through life as if it all does not matter. You obviously have not felt the power of the Holy Spirit within you. Jesus is so awesome we mere humans cannot even fathom what he is capable of. I pray for you and that you realize that man is not all superior and that you turn to God instead of allowing men that feel they are so smart (college professors)to influence your heart.

MC James of OH 8:02PM November 02, 2009

Based on the above response, it is obvious that a lot of people don't even understand evolution or science. Fist, evolution is about how living organisms have changed over time, not with how the earth "popped into existance." That would be cosmology and no cosmologist would say that the earth just "popped into existance." Second, according to modern evolutionary theory, humans didn't descend from monkeys but an apelike ancestor. How is that worse than coming from dirt? Also, science only deals with what is observable (directly and indirectly)and testable. Therefore nothing supernatural falls within the scope of science. So why teach something inherently unscientific in a science class? Also, which type of creationism would you teach? All of them? It would be cultural and religious bigotry to include the Hebrew creation myth to the exclusion of all others. If we stopped all of our investigations into the workings of nature with "God did it", we would still be in the dark ages. There obviously isn't enough time in science classes now to get across the basic facts and principles of science now without taking more time going over non-science issues.

Kyle Waggener of TN 2:34PM October 14, 2009

Creationism should be taught more in schools along with evolution so the STUDENTS can decide which to believe. Let THEM have the choice. I agree with Steven. People just don't see behind all this evolutionist crap... It's sad. And Creationism is definitely NOT a child abuse, come on. I mean teaching people that humans actually came from MONKEYS and that the earth just popped into the atmosphere out of its own will... Now that is what I think sounds like mystical magical crap.

I Got Faith of AK 8:21PM September 02, 2009

If you want to teach kids creationism, then teach it alongside other fables, in a history or literature class, NOT as a science.

Mary Jones of MS 9:58PM August 25, 2009

Steven Lookabaugh of OH, evolutionists aren't "afraid" of creationissm. We're just so damned tired of people like you attempting to brainwash children with fairy tales that will have them believing mystical magical CRAP for no reason other than to suck them into the organized religion pyramid scheme. It's child abuse!

Atheist of IL 9:55PM August 25, 2009

It is amazing to me to see how terrified evolutionists are of other viewpoints that differs from their own, claiming that it can't be science. This particular organization appears to be a watchdog guarding their precious evolutionary theory. In the Cincinnati area we have a creation museum, and there were hundreds of evolutionists protesting by holding up their evolution signs crying out against a museum that might disagree with them. If creation science is not science then why are evolutionists so afraid of them? Maybe it is because in the end, most people don't really buy into this evolution propaganda. By the way, the creation museum had 400,000 visitors in their first year.

Steven Lookabaugh of OH 9:29AM August 20, 2009

Yes, such language is anti-science. Not because it calls for a critical evaluation of the data - that is perfectly fine - but because of the way it is abused. There is nothing wrong with letting students hear two sides of a scientific discussion. With evolution there is no scientific discussion however. There are no two equal sides. There is science on the one hand, and religion on the other. Implying that creationism has any scientific basis whatsoever is an absurd denial of reality.

Stefan Kruithof 4:11AM August 20, 2009