Should the theory of evolution be questioned in school textbooks?

Question

Would it be fair to say in a science textbook, used in public education, that 1-5% of the scientists don't accept the theory of evolution and presenting their theory using 1-5% of the science textbook that deals with evolution?

Answer 1

Say this with me: "Creationism is not science. There are no alternative theories to evolution that are accepted by any legitimate scientist. Evolutionary theory has been borne out by vast amounts of experimentation and observation. It is a fact. The word 'theory' does not mean what you think it means, but is rather a well-documented series of statements that describes a specific group of processes."

Now repeat.

Answer 2

Why do people continue to give their naive and totally irrational opinions on this topic. If you're uneducated about a topic, then you can't hold an opinion. (At least that's my opinion, haha). But seriously... no one said we evolved "from" apes. Its that we share a common ancestor. And those that refute evolution saying "oh, nothing has been proven. it's so dumb" have probably never taken a biology class or read about the "theory". Science theories have such outstanding evidence to get to that level that they are basically principles. And it has been proven. Look at how fast strains of bacteria acquire resilience to antibiotics!

As far as the actual question goes, I don't think that the 1-5% percent, which is probably closer to 1%, should be represented in the book. It may be fair to say that not all agree, but going into detail on their struggles with giving up the church even though they are scientists really wouldn't do anybody any good in a science classroom setting, now would it??

Answer 3

Being completely honest... When we teach children, we teach them in stages because of the limitations of the ability to comprehend complexities, gray areas, and so on. In fact, I'd argue that this is where creation myths come from... Little kids don't accept the answer "we don't know" very easily, so people invented the "God did it" answer to cope in many ways.

So when we teach complicated subjects like evolution, we really *do* need to teach it in black and white form for younger children. It should be made 100% clear to them that evolution is a fact.

As they get older and more mature, we can delve into the details. Evolution remains a fact (it is after all...), but there are disputes within the scientific community about how evolution works at very sophisticated levels of detail.

So here's the rub... This is what we do now! When we teach college level evolutionary biology classes, students learn exactly where the gray areas are, what's unclear, what is clear, and more!

In other words... the system works with evolution as it does with every other subject. Creationists sometimes argue that non-science nonsense like creationism, intelligent design, and scientific creationism should be introduced out of fairness. But it's not fairness they seek, it's special treatment. NONE of those arguments has lived up to the scrutiny that evolutionary theory has had to endure, and so they haven't earned the right to be presented. No (not one, zero, less than one) credible scientist accepts any of those arguments, as their proponents (a) aren't scientists or (b) aren't educated well in evolutionary biology (e.g., they're chemists).

Answer 4

The theory of evolution has been repeatedly challenged by proponents of bogus and off-the-wall blue sky speculation. Some of these off-the-wall things are likely to come up (e.g. Biblical Creationism). The textbook should certainly mention these things, and label them for what they are: Not Science, and give good reasons why they're not science, and why the theory of evolution is still a valid scientific theory.

Answer 5

in a proper text book it would be called just that a theory of evolution. the text would present the facts as we know them, such as the earth being 4.6 billion years old, fossils are dated accurately using radioactive isotopes and other methods etc etc. and the conclusion of all of this evidence is that evolution is right.

(on a side note we did not evolve from apes or monkeys, we evolved with them from a common ancestor, they aren't our parents they are our cousins)

1-5% can believe what they want, but mostly those scientists just try to prove their theory right instead of looking at the facts objectively. they are not being true scientists.

in astronomy classes both the big bang and the steady state theories are explained but the evidence backs up the big bang more and so it is the widely accepted theory.

for creationism i would like to see more actual evidence than a book written 2000 years ago. (or 5000 or however old it is), so far i have not seen any major proof that creationism is the better theory.

i do think that a text book should present both theories though, even if one is mostly disproven.

Answer 6

It is very clear why evolution is a problem by reading these posts. Some of you say its a theory while others say it's a fact. Well, it's not both! How do you expect the common man to act if some of us are calling ourselves scientists yet you can't agree whether its fact or theory?
I say evolution should be taught stated as the theory that it is. I think a lot of people confuse the facts e.g fossil records, carbon dating, phylogeny etc proof for evolution. The truth is that these are facts that build the theory, which is yet to be proven. Bottom line: there is evidence for evolution but it needs to be proven.

Answer 7

Science isn't done by vote. It is done by consensus.

And science is developed in universities and science journals, by, and in front of people who have spent their lives understanding the issues. Science is NOT developed in front of 10th-graders.

Consensus does not mean "unanimous." Many scientists have *personal*, *religious* reasons for opposing evolution ... reasons unrelated to scientific reasons (just as many doctors can have personal, religious reasons for opposing abortion ... reasons unrelated to medical reasons). A scientist may even attempt to back up their opposition to evolution using scientific arguments ... but not one so far has been able to make a dent in the current consensus of the scientific community that evolution is the backbone of biological theory.

I have read a LOT about, and by, many of these 1%-5% of scientists who dispute evolution ... a few of them backing their beliefs with scientific arguments ... but I am yet to read of one ... not a single one ... who does not acknowlege deep religious beliefs. That does not disqualify them. It does not mean they are wrong. But it does factor into how we evaluate that 1% to 5% number.

The other problem is that those 1% to 5% may dispute evolution ... but they do not offer a coherent theory as an alternative. It is a fallacy to say that "Intelligent Design" is an alternative theory. I'm not just talking about evidence. I'm talking about what their theory actually *says*. It posits something called a Designer ... but this has no proposed properties, no proposed mechanism, no proposed energy source, no proposed origin, no proposed motive (motive is not a requirement for evolution, but it *is* a requirement for an "intelligence"), etc. It does the OPPOSITE of an explanation. Instead of explaining complex things in terms of something simpler (as natural selection does), it describes complex things in terms of something infinitely *MORE* complex.

So *at best* in a 25-page chapter on evolution, the sidebar "presenting their theory" (as you put it) will be a quarter-page empty gray box.

As far as school textbooks ... their responsibility is to give students a *BASIC* education in the current theories as practiced by mainstream scientists. School textbooks are NOT the place to cover unfounded alternatives (like Intelligent Design).

There have been many cases in courts across the country, and the details have *always* emerged that the efforts to get "alternatives" into school textbooks and classrooms have been driven by religious forces. Every single time.

The "teach the controversy" strategy is one born out of frustration at being unable to convince scientists of these alternatives ... so they turn to trying to convince school-children! ... Or if not able to convince them, at least to *confuse* them (which is verified to be occuring). That is NOT the purpose of public schools.

{edit}

telvin4 wrote: "Some of you say its a theory while others say it's a fact. Well, it's not both!"

Yes it is! It is BOTH a fact AND a theory. The word "evolution" is a shorthand for the *process* of evolution (which is a *fact*), and for the *theory* of evolution (which is the theory that *explains* that fact). This is no different from the statement that gravity is both a fact and a theory ... the word "gravity" is both a shorthand for the *law* of gravity (the inverse-square law of matter attraction, which is a *fact*) and the *theory* of gravity (which is the theory that *explains* that fact, in terms of a theoretical "force").

Your misunderstanding is another example of how evolution is already hugely confused in schools because its explanation is constantly undermined by religious forces that treat evolution unlike anything else in science, and even try to muddy the definition of what "theory" means in science.

Answer 8

It would be very fair; but it will never happen. Just another way of mind control; presenting the theory of evolution as fact. I think if schools are going to teach the theory of evolution they should also teach the "theory" of creationism ... then let each individual decide what they choose to believe.

Answer 9

I think that is completely fair. However, in most societies it is not what is fair that wins! Students should be encouraged to explore all theories on a subject and decide which one holds the most merit for them, but what usually happens is others make that decision for them and force-feed it to them (much as Genesis theory from the bible was/is force-fed to the religious)

Answer 10

Only if you also question whether the world is round and that gravity really exists. There is verifiable proof that evolution happens. Now....whether man evolved from apes is not a proven fact. But man is definitely evolving even from 50 years ago. As are other plants and animals.