Comments on: Likely Voters Prefer Evolution Over Creationism

By: Lou FCD

Lou FCD — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 10:55:16 +0000

Obviously Fred missed the first day of Science class, when the teacher began with, “What is Science?”.He also apparently skipped every single History and Civics class.

By: Fred Inglis

Fred Inglis — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:32:01 +0000

Science = Information/Knowledge.thus the Science of Evolution and the Science of CreationEvolution and Creation are two diferent ways of addressing”Origins” Evolution as in the upward progress of species from a less complex ancestors to a higher more complex Species, over millions of years, apart from the influence of a higher non physicall eternal being.The science of Creation is that all of the mass time space continuim and all that inhabits it,was brought into being out of nothing by one act of creation by the will of the eternal being. [The Physical from the spirit]True teaching of science is all embracing and does not exclude any thought form whatsoever.Evolution and Creation should be equally exposed without favour this is also true in a DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY.Fred the Scott.

By: photojack

photojack — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:23:45 +0000

This is from one of my blogs on http://www.physorg.com concerning the acceptance of evolution by the masses. The link was to http://www.edge.org[QUOTE]There are enough links and other leads to keep the curious mind involved for hours or days, even a lifetime! These scientists aren’t trying to pull the wool over people’s eyes. They are in a genuine, sincere quest for a true understanding of man’s place in nature and how we got there. As other people have mentioned in this thread, churches and religions DO inhibit learning and and are actively trying to block the acceptance of the truth about evolution. It is much more widely accepted and understood in Europe, and like their disdain for Bush, they find it comical that most Americans are so “out of it” when it comes to understanding this fundamental “law” of nature. I am amazed that ANY thinking, aware and reasoning person could possibly doubt the veracity of such a long-established fact.[/QUOTE] photojack from Physorg.com

By: Luiz Claudio Lima

Luiz Claudio Lima — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 17:13:31 +0000

Hallo Greg,Congratulations for your blog.Luiz – Rio de Janeiro – Brazil

By: Stacy

Stacy — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:20:58 +0000

I’m going to guess the reason science teachers scored so low is because it was a question about people’s feelings in general. Perhaps those surveyed had a really bad science teacher when they were in school and it has given them a low opinion of science teachers in general.The second question dealt with a specific concept that the science teacher would be familiar with more so than the average person and was less emotional in nature.

By: SabrinaW

SabrinaW — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 11:45:20 +0000

Have you heard about Science, Evolution, Creationism, the new book by the National Academy of Arts and Sciences? It looks promising because it addresses the distinction between science and religion.

By: Chance

Chance — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 10:36:42 +0000

Why on earth would the science teachers have scored lower than standard teachers and then high again on who people wanted to here from?

By: SabrinaW

SabrinaW — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 14:25:35 +0000

Great post! Thanks for breaking down the results. I agree that this research could have important impacts on science education and the general perception of science by society if we can find ways to use this information constructively.

By: Virgil Samms

Virgil Samms — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 12:58:10 +0000

Profile of Matt McCormick, who teaches a course on atheism.