One of the first arguments offered in Pandas and People is that the experimental models of the early Earth when life first started do not use oxygen. They argue that oxygen would need to be present to account for the oxides. Without oxygen we would not have the ozone layer which would be necessary to protect life from the damaging ultraviolet radiation that would have killed life.(2) Therefor a realistic experiment simulating Earth’s early environment would need significant levels of oxygen. The fallacies used in these arguments leave out some important evidence of why oxygen is left out of the equation. First the massive amount of oxygen produced in our atmosphere is the result of photosynthesis from chlorophyll containing organisms (algae and plants), which did not appear until after life started. Core samplings from the polar ice caps also reveal what the atmospheric condition of early Earth was like, oxygen-less. What little oxygen was found had already been taken up by minerals, forming oxides. Another argument offered in Pandas is that the basic biological molecules necessary for life could not have survived in the proposed early environment.(2) What they mistakenly forget is that life formed in the oceans, where the water could protect it from the extreme environment on the surface. Water with its heat absorbing capabilities (specific heat) could prevent energy sources like volcanic activity or ultraviolet radiation from breaking these early molecules down.
Intelligent design in Pandas argues that because our genetic material codes for something that can be interpreted, than it must have been created by an intelligent creator. This forms the entire argument for the intelligent design movement, complexity means that an int...
... middle of paper ...
...rom http://www.discovery.org/p/89
(14) Berkman MB, Plutzer E. 2011. Defeating Creationism in the Courtroom, But Not in the Classroom. Science [Internet]. [cited 2011 Oct 24] Vol(331: 6016) 404-405p. Available from: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/331/6016/404.full
(15) Jelen TG, Lockett LA. 2010. American Clergy on Evolution and Creationism. Review of Religious Research [Internet]. [cited 2011 Oct 24] Vol(51:3); pg 277-287. Available from: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=3&hid=126&sid=070e4ec0-a873-49af-a1b8-e7e804b1f651%40sessionmgr113
(16) Wexler JD. 1997. Of Pandas, People, and the First Amendment: The Constitutionality of Teaching Intelligent Design in the Public Schools. Stanford Law Review [Internet]. [cited 2011 Oct 24] Vol 49, No. 2; Pages 439-470. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1229302?seq=1. Accessed from EBSCOhost.
Robert Root-Bernstein and Donald L. McEachron, “Teaching Theories: The Evolution-Creation Controversy,” The American Biology Teacher, Vol. 44, No. 7 (Oct…1982). This article, written by Robert Root-Bernstein and Donald L. McEachron sheds light on the controversy of evolution vs creationism in schools and the validity of each being called a scientific theory. The work was created to answer the questions, “Which of these theories is truly scientific and which is a religious belief? Which should be taught in schools?” The article concluded in favor of evolution as a valid scientific theory that should be taught rather than creationism, but also mentioned the worth of understanding the latter.
The concept of creationism has a strong religious history and very deep religious overtones, and the constitutionality of teaching the subject in a public school immediately was questioned. Called to preside over the resulting legal case was U.S. District Judge William Overton. Thu...
The evolution/creationism controversy has been progressing and remains a heated issue that strikes deep into the heart of people’s beliefs. The matter involves the different scientific and non-scientific theories about the origins and development of human beings, which drives to the core of human existence and their relationship with God. It is a personal issue for many, with family, relationships, faith, and morality at stake. Because it is such an individual choice as to what to believe i...
The Scopes Trial, which was also known as ‘The Monkey Trial’ or The State of Tennessee vs. Scopes, was a very popular legal dispute in court that was between the theory of evolution and creationism, and played a major role which shaped the 1920’s. What was just as popular was the interpretation of the case, if not more than the actual result of the dispute. This case received world-wide attention and the media coverage produced many different opinions world-wide. A major factor of why the Scopes trial had received so much attention in such an insignificant town was because of the stage the trial was played out on. The Butler Act is what made the Scopes trial possible. The Butler Act stated that it was prohibited for public schools in Tennessee from teaching evolution, or to go against the words of the Biblical story of creationism. The Act made it ‘unlawful for any teacher in in any of the Universities, Normals and all other public schools of the state which are supported in whole or in part by the public funds of the state, to teach any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible and to teach instead that man has described from lower order of animals’.
"Introduction to Creationism Versus Evolution: At Issue." Creationism vs. Evolution. Ed. Eric Braun. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. At Issue. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 18 May. 2014.
Le Beau, Bryan F. "Science and Religion: A Historical Perspective on the Conflict over Teaching Evolution in the Schools." EbscoHost. MARHO, n.d. Web. 5 Nov. 2013. .
Ham, Ken. "Creation in public schools?!." answers in genesis. N.p., 2002. Web. 7 Nov 2010.
The twentieth century has witnessed the escalation of the creation - evolution debate through famous court cases and Supreme Court decisions on the teaching of evolution in public schools, culminating most recently in a Kansas Board of Education decision. As this highly controversial issue of the teaching of evolution in American classrooms rages on, it may be difficult for some individuals of Christian faith to form an alternative belief other than the extremes of creationism and evolutionism. Before discussing this issue any further, when I refer to strict beliefs in creationism or evolution as extreme views I am not necessarily implying that they are wrong, but are simply two views on completely opposite sides of the creation - evolution debate spectrum. For some creationists, accepting God as Creator as told in the Book of Genesis means the simultaneous rejection of evolutionary theory. For some evolution believers, accepting evolution ultimately results in the replacement of God as Creator with the process of evolution.
A hotly debated topic these past few years centers on the origin of life. Now more than ever, science and religion are butting heads trying to come up with a conclusion, and one that public schools would teach to their students. Alex Rainert, meanwhile, reasons that both “science and religion are engaged in the same project, to discover the origin of life” (141). In short, one could better describe the debate as a crusade between evolutionists and creationists. Both sides have their well-founded arguments, but when one looks at the decisions of the courts, clearly only one side may win the battle when deciding biology curriculum in schools. Despite the overwhelming number of people in favor of teaching creationism in public schools, it may be better to leave science classes free from matters of religious belief.
Since the time that teaching evolution in public schools was banned as heresy and taboo for contradicting the Bible, most public school systems today take an opposite approach in which creationism is seldom ta...
Evolution and Intelligent Design being taught in public schools is a growing controversy. Both supporters and augmenters have been clashing over different perspectives on wither intelligent design should replace evolution as part of the scientific curriculum. The controversy has lead to multiple court cases and religious dispute. The main issue when it comes to teaching this idea of science in our schools is the idea of conforming to an idea without solid evidence. Students whom are required to learn intelligent design rather than Darwin’s idea of evolution will be directly confronted on their moral and religious beliefs. In addition, students will develop a less understanding of science.
The thought of evolution is filled with theories, ideas and beliefs. The definition of evolution is rather simple. According to Jerry A. Coyle, evolution is “the change in the inherited characteristics of biological populations over successive generations (2). Evolution gives rise to diversity when it comes to the hierarchy of life otherwise known as biological organization. Many people find the topic of evolution to be troubling and very confusing. Throughout history churches have preached that evolution is atheistic and a sin if even thought about. Famous scientist, Charles Darwin, is said to really be the first to formulate debated theory of evolution by the means of natural selection. Eventually in the 20th century genetics was compounded with Charles Darwin’s theories of evolution. Even today scientists continue to study different aspects of the theory of evolution.
The evolution theory, one of the most significant theories, laid groundwork for the study of modern biological science. This theory has lead scientists into unending debates due to lack of empirical supports. Until the mid-eighteenth century, when Charles Darwin came up with an explanation to evolution, scientists, then, began to endorse this hypothesis. In “Natural Selection,” Darwin explains the natural selection, a plausible mechanism that causes evolution, to gain approval of his cynical audience for his evolution theory. He supports his claim with numerous examples of animals and plants that have developed traits beneficial for survival. A century later, Stephen Jay Gould, influenced by Darwin’s work, supports the evolution theory with a different method. In “Evolution as Fact and Theory,” Gould, in contrast to Darwin, criticizes his detractors, the creationists who believe that every life form is the creation of a supernatural being, to reinforce the validity of the evolution theory. Gould undermines creationism by emphasizing its misused concepts of theory and popular philosophy, proving that it is not science. Besides denouncing creationism, Gould also provides theoretical examples as evidence to prove evolution is a theory. Despite their different approaches, both Darwin and Gould effectively prove the existence of evolution.
In Chapter 28 of DeWitt’s book, Worldviews: An Introduction to the History and Philosophy of Science, DeWitt builds on his previous discussion of what the theory of evolution is and the historical developments that were discovered during that time, by introducing the implications that arise with the theory. The two main implications that are discussed in this chapter are implications due to religious beliefs and morality and ethics. However, these two particular implications are not the only ones that arise with the theory of evolution, in fact there are a lot of implications involved with this theory.
Without evolution, and the constant ever changing environment, the complexity of living organisms would not be as it is. Evolution is defined as a process that results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations (8).Scientists believe in the theory of evolution. This belief is based on scientific evidence that corroborates the theory of evolution. In Figure 1 the pictures of the skulls depict the sequence of the evolution of Homo-sapiens. As the figure shows, man has evolved from our common ancestor that is shared by homo-sapiens. The change of diet of homo-sapiens over time has thought to contribute to the change in jaw structure and overall skull shape.