What amazes me is that a country that has prided itself on academics and innovation can still give itself such a back eye on the world stage with crap like this. We've stopped drawing our maps with Here Be Dragons on the fuzzy blue parts beyond national coastlines, but this isn't too far off.
Let me explain it to those who might be reading and just haven't gotten it yet-
The theory of evolution is that; a theory. It is incomplete; that's why it's a scientific theory and not a scientific law. Evolution is a jigsaw puzzle with most of the big pieces lying on the table, with the rest scattered about as scientists slowly fit them in. We don't have the entire picture, but we know what it generally looks like.
It's as Doctor Jones put it in my environmental science class a few years ago; evolution is not a perfect, all-encompassing theory, but we have the big pieces and know a lot of it's correct. What the hell does she know though? She's only a research scientist at the renowned Atlanta CDC.
What does evolution have to support it? Only stacks and stacks of scientific research, strata and fossil records, and generations of brilliant, dedicated men and women in the field that cracked open the world to understand what made it tick.
What does creation have? An old book written ages ago by many (mortal) authors each with their own agendas, and hordes of the faithful that believe if they click their heels three times and wish real hard, there's no place like Eden.
Homo Sapiens came into the world in the last quarter-million years, and in more recent eras we haven't evolved massively; it's believed you could teach an Ice-Age man to use a laptop. We did NOT evolve from apes, we all are primates, bitter pill for some to swallow perhaps, and we branched off from common ancestors.
Evolution is real, and it's not an ancient force that sculpted life eons ago; it's very much alive and well today, thank you. Diseases like polio and TB which we believe we have eradicated have returned in more virulent strains. Cockroaches and other vermin become more resistant to poisons. Normal cells mutate into cancerous cells; mutation is one of the driving forces of evolution. The fact that evolution is imperfect is the reason it also works so well.
Quote- evolution is "a theory, not a fact [and] ... should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."
Actually it's a theory BASED on facts, and much of it is correct. It is a working model, but it's the best model we have. The mythology in your holy book doesn't float, for more reasons than I could go into right now without mucking up my own thread.http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1105/darwin-debate-religion-evolution
Almost 150 years after Charles Darwin published his groundbreaking work On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, Americans are still fighting over evolution. If anything, the controversy has recently grown in both size and intensity. In the last five years alone, for example, debates over how evolution should be taught in public schools have been heard in school boards, town councils and legislatures in more than half the states.
Throughout much of the 20th century, opponents of evolution (many of them theologically conservative Protestants) either tried to eliminate the teaching of Darwin's theory from public school science curricula or urged science instructors also to teach a version of the creation story found in the biblical book of Genesis. The famous 1925 Scopes "monkey" trial, for instance, involved a Tennessee law prohibiting the teaching of evolution in the state's schools. (See The Social and Legal Dimensions of the Evolution Debate in the U.S.)
But beginning in the 1960s, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a number of decisions that imposed severe restrictions on those state governments that opposed the teaching of evolution. As a result of these rulings, school boards, legislatures and government bodies are now barred from prohibiting the teaching of evolution. Teaching creation science, either along with evolutionary theory or in place of it, is also banned.
Partly in response to these court decisions, opposition to teaching evolution has itself evolved, with opponents changing their goals and tactics. In the last decade, some local and state school boards in Kansas, Pennsylvania and elsewhere have considered teaching what they contend are scientific alternatives to evolution -- notably the concept of intelligent design, which posits that life is too complex to have developed without the intervention of an outside, possibly divine force. Other education officials have tried to require schools to teach critiques of evolution or to mandate that students listen to or read evolution disclaimers, such as one proposed a number of years ago in Cobb County, Ga. It read, in part, that evolution is "a theory, not a fact [and] ... should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered." The Cobb County disclaimer and a number of other efforts have been withdrawn following successful court challenges by proponents of teaching evolution.
Recent public opinion polls indicate that challenges to Darwinian evolution have substantial support among the American people. According to an August 2006 survey by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 63 percent of Americans believe that humans and other animals have either always existed in their present form or have evolved over time under the guidance of a supreme being. Only 26 percent say that life evolved solely through processes such as natural selection. A similar Pew Research Center poll, released in August 2005, found that 64 percent of Americans support teaching creationism alongside evolution in the classroom.
This view is not shared by the nation's scientists, most of whom contend that evolution is a well-established scientific theory that convincingly explains the origins and development of life on earth. Moreover, they say, a scientific theory is not a hunch or a guess but is instead an established explanation for a natural phenomenon, like gravity, that has repeatedly been tested through observation and experimentation. Indeed, most scientists argue that, for all practical purposes, evolution through natural selection is a fact. (See Darwin and His Theory of Evolution.) These scientists and others dismiss creation science as religion, not science, and describe intelligent design as little more than creationism dressed up in scientific jargon.
So if evolution is as established as the theory of gravity, why are people still arguing about it a century and a half after it was first proposed? (See Evolution: A Timeline.) The answer lies, in part, in the possible theological implications of evolutionary thinking. For many, the Darwinian view of life -- a panorama of brutal struggle and constant change - goes beyond contradicting the biblical creation story and conflicts with the Judeo-Christian concept of an active and loving God who cares for his creation. (See Religious Groups' Views on Evolution.) In addition, some evolution opponents argue that Darwin's ideas have proven socially and politically dangerous. In particular, they say, the notion that more resilient animals survive and thrive ("survival of the fittest") has been used by social thinkers, dictators and others to justify heinous crimes, from forced sterilization to mass genocide.
But while theologians, historians and others argue over evolution's broader social impact, the larger and more intense debate still centers on what children in public schools learn about life's origins and development. Indeed, the teaching of evolution has become a part of the nation's culture wars, manifest most recently in the 2008 presidential campaign, particularly in the attention paid to Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin's statements in favor of public schools teaching creation science or intelligent design along with evolution. And while evolution may not attain the same importance as such culture war issues as abortion or same-sex marriage, the topic is likely to have a place in national debates on values for many years to come.