Evolution in the Schools

I’ve been following the recent brouhaha in Canada over Creationism and evolution, and it got me to thinking about how to teach evolution.  Being an educator myself, I hold somewhat of an expert opinion on this topic, and in my expert opinion, I think we should teach evolution.

Don’t be surprised, I had learned it as part of my education, and it was actually rather valuable.  There isn’t a problem with teaching evolution, per se, it is how it is presented that poses a problem.  Evolution should be taught as any other science is, not as unquestionable fact, but as a tentative conclusion based on some data.  We should present all the data as well, even the data that shows that wide, gaping holes in modern evolutionary theory (for a listing of some of them, see Jonathan Wells’s book, Icons of Evolution).

There is a controvery out there, and it is being suppressed by the Darwinista.  There is evidence out there that severely challenges Darwinism, but students are not taught about it.  We need to teach our students more evolution, so that they will understand why it is insufficient to explain the world around us.


7 responses to “Evolution in the Schools

  1. Jonathan Wells’ book is below par, academically. He relates as fact things that are soundly disproven. He makes claims that are completely unsupported by research, and contradictory to science.

    It’s not suppressed by anyone. You can buy it on Amazon. It’s in school libraries.

    Claims of oppression are actually quite bizarre, coming about a book from a guy who has actually advocated suppressing science.

    Wells advocates teaching crap to children. While that should be a sin, scientists are happy to simply point out his manifold errors and problems with veracity. (See his chapter on moths, for example. To read it, you’d get the idea that moth scientists think Kettlewell’s research doesn’t show natural selection in action. Each scientist Wells names has called Wells a liar, but in polite terms. Do you advocate dishonesty as a regular academic procedure — or have you never bothered to read his footnotes?)

    Too bad Wells isn’t willing to compete in a fair fight.

    [Do you actually profess stuff in a school? Would Wells’ work pass your academic honor code? It wouldn’t pass codes in any schools I’ve ever taught at.]

  2. I’m not sure what grade you’re suggesting but, in my experience with middle schoolers (junior high) and high schoolers, I can only name a few that would be analytical enough to sort it out. I agree with the concept, just not too sure b/c of what I’ve seen. Maybe I should say, “sounds good in theory”.

  3. professorsmith

    Mr. Darrell,
    Do you deny that Haeckle forged his drawings? Do you deny that Kettlewell attached moths to trees, thereby calling his whole experiment into question? Wells may be wrong about some of his charges, but he is right about others. That Darwinists want to simply sweep those criticisms under the rug is rather telling.

    I’m not sure what you mean by your comment. What are the students being asked to “sort out?” Are you advocating that we teach them untruths just so they won’t have to “sort it out?” I would never advocate such a thing. We need to tell our students the truth about matters such as evolution. There are questions about it, there is a controversy, and they need to know about it. Anything less is indoctrination to materialism.

  4. I deny that Haeckel’s drawings have had any significant impact on evolution studies or theory, especially since they were outed by scientists three or four decades ago. Haeckel’s drawings appear in a few textbooks these days to show how easy it is to be led astray — you might pay attention to that lesson.

    Kettlewell’s research is solid — are you trying to suggest there was a problem with it? Yes, he posed moths to show the color difference for photographs. Are you trying to suggest that is a problem? He made the photograph show what the birds saw — you think that’s a problem? You’re view is unsupported by any scientist — and Dr. Majerus just this month published research reaffirming Kettlewell’s findings. Wells claims Majerus differs with Kettlewell, and so Majerus has rightly called Wells a liar. Do you defend such lies in science?

    Name one thing Wells is right on. His book has been thoroughly rejected by scientists. Not a single chapter is free from distortions of other scientists’ work, and most of them, sadly, resemble the moth chapter, where every single citation claims exactly the opposite of the research cited. It’s a bravura demonstration of the lack of moral fiber among creationists.

    Sweep them under the rug? Hardly. Wells is a liar, and that should be broadcast with neon signs. Note it is you who is denying that Wells’ work is false. Why would you try to sweep that under the rug?

    Evolution is the foundation of modern biology. What is it you have against good science, good medicine, and good agriculture?

  5. Pingback: Another creationist eruption « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub

  6. Square water melons and genetically engineered food are samples that once in a while, life is created. Not a proof, but a plausibility.

  7. professorsmith

    It happens to be the only instance we have where we know the origins of a lifeform. ID has been demonstrated.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s