Charles Darwin, Clarence Darrow and the Scopes Monkey Trial

Reader Comments
Back to blog

As used in science, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.
Consider the theory of gravity and the theory of relativity - both are theories to explain the observed and can be shown scientifically. Scientists have been observing and proving the theory of evolution for 150 years. Some gaps still exist, but the science community accepts it as a scientific theory. Additionally, some scientific theories do get disproven. At this point, evolution has not been disproven by another scientific theory.
This is different from a philosophical theory which is basically an idea. Creationism falls into this category of theories.
Thus, the two are two different types of theories. Scientific theories are what is taught in science class. Mathematical theories are taught in math classes. Philosophical theories have no place in either science or math.

Nemrac of CO 9:13PM July 21, 2009

i honestly believe niether should be taught in schools in science class. it should be taught in a theology class since they are both THEORIES. Anyways, evolution and creation happened in the past so it isn't really science but maybe an unclear history for people.

Felicia of AL 2:40PM July 20, 2009

I drank a CoaCola today. 12 ounces of gene-modified evolution. A murderer was convicted with DNA evidence. Another, falsely accused and convicted, and sentenced to death, was exonerated and released. Two proper applications of evolution-science-enabled justice.
Which of those evolution science achievements does God want us to outlaw first, corn syrup, grown in the same places where this love of ignorance is venerated, yet upon whose success their livelihoods depend; or DNA evidence in courts, so more murderers and rapists can get away, and more innocents can be executed?
Well? Which?

consumer of TX 6:07PM February 17, 2009

I am amazed at those who blithely testify to their allegiance to the theory of evolution - even to the extent that they are offended when you refer to it as a theory. It is the most malleable of theories. Today's discovery disproves last year's evolutionary assumption? No problem - our theory is big enough to handle it - we'll just change a few details.
I'm all for science and scientists. The problem is with "sciencists" - those for whom science is a religion. That would be those who assert that God does not exist unless they can prove His existence by their man-fashioned methods.
Evolution is not the big question, anyway. The big question is that of the ultimate first cause - something that cannot be explained by any scientific theory, but something that points to a Higher Being.

John of PA 7:43PM February 14, 2009

hi sir i need information about science .....and bioinformatics information ..i have compleated m.sc.bioinformatics...i need more information .
Thanking you
mehala

mehala of IN 3:16AM February 13, 2009

God can do anything, and so the hypothesis of god predicts nothing.
There *is* a vast conspiracy against creationism -- because it is laughable.

Concerned Joe of AL 11:21PM February 12, 2009

This man rants about some other man he doesn't like, making wild accusations while evading the more pertinent scientific questions -- scientifically can it be shown that God has created the world?
The debate between creation and evolution is one that still does not give full scientific discussion of the actual topic full precedence. Its drowned in insults typically, coming down on any who scientifically oppose the established and forced teaching of Darwanism. Its followed by politics, fervor, and hatred. Anything coming from the perspective of intelligent design is often thrown out on the basis of hate, not actual science, and the scientific process is shut out, exchanged for pride and arrogance. The end result is a darwinian dictatorship, where science is NOT free and people are blacklisted and fired from academic positions if they think creationism is the scientifically more correct viewpoint.
Intelligent design is a theory making 100 times more sense then evolution, while its evolution that has 1000 holes and has been disproved more than a hundred times. So how about we focus on more scientific topics, like the huge undependability of radiometric dating and the mathematical impossibility of the living cell, with all the DNA and fragile components coming to life from a lightning strike or some random event. If Darwin knew anything about DNA or the complexity of a single cell, this theory would have NEVER flown. The current state of affairs is driven not by science, but by the religious philosophy of humanism, and the hate of all that dare to oppose it. Stand up for freedom!

Dmitri of FL 11:15PM February 12, 2009

Yes, science will always have unanswered questions but those unanswered questions are what drives discovery and progress. If there were no mysteries to be solved, many of the things that we rely on today would not be here, because scientists would not have bothered to do the research.
Suppose all the scientists that have brought us advancements such as modern medicine, vaccines, etc thought like you? They wouldn't have bothered to do research, and we would still have a very low life expectancy and we would still have kids dying en mass from measles and other easlily preventable diseases. Really, once you say "god did it", why do you need to do research? Your way of thinking stops science and discourages advancement.
Sure, theories are "blown out of the water" all the time, and that is the beauty of science. Science is self correcting. When there is new evidence, theories are revised or thrown out completely to reflect new information. Scripture, however, is static - it never changes dispite the evidence to the contrary. At least when a scientist is wrong, he will admit it and move on, you'll never get such honesty from clergy.
Evolution is supported by 150 years of testable scientific data. It makes predictions that bear out time and time again, with a much better track record than any prophecy the "good book" has. There is absolutely no faith required in science.

John of DE 4:43PM February 12, 2009

we presumably have more knowledge to work with. DNA, for instance, is a relatively recent discovery.
There is therefore no reason to continue to celebrate the Scopes trial as either a definitive or permanent resolution. Same with Darwin. What is EVOLVING for sure is knowledge, details, experimentation, and lots of theories of lots of things.

Muser of NM 3:27PM February 12, 2009

... and boy, did it ever!
Unfortunately what came to light with the Scopes Monkey Trial was the extent and fervor of a populism that promotes ignorance. Eighty years ago America was primarily rural and the Scopes Monkey Trial was a sign of the times. The trial blatantly presented the challenge for progress in education and it laid out the obstacles to the US moving forward in commerce and industry in the modern world.
Yet even in this century we have witnessed a presidency kowtowing to a 'Dumbing-down of America' philosophy. How else can you explain a White House making the National Park Service remove references to geologic ages that extend beyond the 6,000 yrs that some fundamental Christians believe is the age of the earth.
Once education was revered in the US, and hopefully it will again, but political and religious movements have pushed anti-education agenda, and particularly with an anti-science bent. Religious illiteracy also has been a major consequence, too, especially among all the holier-than-thou true believers.

Paul of WA 3:13PM February 12, 2009