If first you don’t succeed try, try, again.
Salvador over at Uncommon Descent posted this 40% of freshman in UCSD’s sixth college reject Darwinism.
Why is it that all of the sudden Darwinism is a requirement for biology majors at UCSD to graduate? Does it have anything to do with their science education? If Darwinism was so fundamental to biology, why wasn’t it a requirement for the last several decades in the first place?
I think Salvador must have meant it as a rhetorical question. We all know that biology has absolutely nothing to do with neo-Darwinism. It is just one great farce. The Darwinian priesthood is befuddled and hysterical over the persistent increase of Darwinian skeptics. In typical Darwinian fashion, they come to the only conclusion possible, Darwinian critics are either ignorant or mentally ill Creationists. Anything else is just not scientific in the Darwinian universe.
Being elite humanitarians, Darwinists out of their compassion, set out to save these ignoramuses and mentally ill Creationists from their misguided delusion. The Darwinian Priesthood will spare no expense or any underhanded method to
indoctrinate reeducate these outcasts. I say reeducate because indoctrination K-12 has failed these outcasts. We keep telling them evolution is a fact and there are overwhelming evidence to support evolution, but it did work. Darwinians are great secular humanists that will not give up on the least of our society. Even at the universities the great Priesthood will never give up their duty to convert everyone to Darwinism. Although 40% of unbelievers is a lot but this time Darwinists will succeed in converting them because they will be dazzled by the authority of the “Professors” .
Comments on “Darwinian Fails to Indoctrinate”
Thankfully, even Will Provine who boast about making atheists in his intro biology class only reduces the numbers of IDists in class by about 20% after the completion of his course. That’s still distrubing that it’s even that much, but it shows that even after a semester of shoving Darwinism down the throats of students, to the remaing 80%, it is unpersuassive.
Dembski, noted that assigning Denton’s book, in contrast, 100% were doubting Darwin within a matter of weeks. And that includes the die-hards. And of course we saw what happened in Caroline Crockers intro biology class. The students were practically bursting in celebration!
I’m sorry to see the indoctrination happening, and it does have an effect, but I’m confident these students are not incurably damaged. With the advent of the internet, these kids will be able to google and get good information on ID. They’ll run into the volumes of postings of us defenders of ID on the net, and they’ll see the light!
After the Soviet Union became the first to launch an artificial satellite, we discovered that no schools in America taught evolution, really. Repeated polls find that, even since that scare into serious science education, most biology teachers avoid the topic because nattering nabobs of negativist anti-naturalism raise a ruckus (yeah, you guys). And that’s just those kids who take biology — most don’t even take it.
If anyone understands evolution, it’s a miracle. 40% “disbelieve” although only 20% take it? At least most of the science kids are paying attention.
The 40% probably have been subjected to severe propaganda campaigns operated by their local, so-called Christian, creationist groups. What a tragedy.
edarrell, thanks for this comment.
So the USA lagged behind, the atheistic Marxist Soviet Union, in rocket science is because we didn’t teach evolution? Wow that is the sign of a true believer. 🙂
I am sure you are right. Evolution was never mentioned in biology textbooks before 1957. I am sure you won’t find Haeckel’s embryos or Kettlewell’s peppered moths as Icons of evolution in biology textbooks.
I know what you mean. Those nasty Creationists pressured biology teachers to avoid teaching evolution. But something puzzles me with your impeccable logic. If most biology teachers avoided teaching evolution then what help the U.S. developed a space program that landed the first Man on the moon? I though you said that the absence of evolutionary teachings were the cause we lagged behind the Soviet’s science programs.
That is not scientific. You know perfectly well that miracles are outside of naturalistic science. Your statement is nonsense.
It is a tragedy. With people like you and all the scientists who continuously tell us how ignorant, and close-minded we Christians are for not realizing the overwhelming evidence for evolution. You put it into textbooks, but avoid teaching it to us. You keep telling us that it is a fact and we won’t listen. You fill the media and culture with evolutionist jargon, but the Christian propaganda is just too powerful for you Darwinists. I just have one question. How come you Darwinists have not been selected out of the gene pool yet?
No, we discovered after 1957 that science education in the US was way behind where it should have been in many areas — of course, you, as a tool of the international communist conspiracy, would like to keep that a secret, yes? 😉
Evolution was treated poorly in textbooks prior to 1957, virtually absent. It’s not treated thoroughly in texts outside of college today. I’m sure you’ll never confess to what Haeckel got right, nor will you confess that replacing Haeckel’s hoked up drawings with photographs that show what really happens makes the point. Don’t let the evidence creation gives us get in the way of your rant, ever. Nor would you ever admit that it was no creationist who discovered the problems with Haeckel, nor would you ever admit to having read Darwin’s dressing down of Haeckel. And especially you’d never admit that Jonathan Wells’ amazingly dishonest and deceptive book makes Haeckel look like a piker. The false idols of anti-evolution are ever more dangerous than any icons of evolution, even when the latter are not 100% accurate. Science at least keeps striving for accuracy.
Your bizarre affectation that evolution had something to do with landing humans on the Moon is almost endearing. It’s a good demonstration that there is no thought, no statement of historical fact, that cannot be twisted by a creationist into a clever almost-bon mot. No, I didn’t say that the absence of evolution teaching in the U.S. caused the Soviet space successes — the truth is that the Soviet Union was wracked by their own intelligent design crisis at the time which crippled their biology, too. Rocketry is a separate sort of science, as most of your readers immediately recognized, even if you don’t.
Yeah, miracles are outside of science. That double the number of Americans understand evolution than were taught it is evidence of some sort of miracle. And it’s evidence of the power of truth. Truth wins in a fair fight, Franklin observed. It does very well in unfair fights, too. Even so, it’s important to stand up for the truth and fight to spread it.
If evolution is so ever-present (and it’s not), why don’t you understand it? Dollars to doughnuts you can’t explain how it’s supposed to work. If you could, why would you take the Soviet position against evolution now? Even in the Soviet Union they don’t hold to those ideas any more.
Which shows the power of progress, the power of freedom in economics and ideas, and the ultimate futility of trying to legislate against the facts of nature.
The facts remain: Evolution is not taught well in America. Most kids never get exposed to it, and most of those who get exposed get a half-baked version. The facts remain that most biology teachers in America tell of creationists who make trouble for them, their courses and their students, whenever evolution is mentioned. Stalin and Lysenko would be happy that their legacy lives on in America in such a fashion.
The rest of us, those who don’t think much of Stalin’s legacy is worth promoting, wish for better understanding of evolution, for more kids, sooner.
edarrell’s last comment is full of nonsense, distortions and lies and once again never directly addressing the questions and arguments posed to him. It has more resemblance to a diarrhea of the mouth, which does not deserve a response, in fear of being stained by mere contact.
However, I will venture this one point since he mentioned “international communist conspiracy” .
So for Darwinian secular humanist like edarrell, Marxism is good because it is anticlerical. Marxism also brought us communism and totalitarianism of the Soviet Union and Mao’s China, where the belief of those who disagree with them are evil. Evil must be eradicated to the tune of 61 million in the Soviet and 35 Million in China. Secular humanists will always hide behind noble words like “intellectuals, science, freedom, and fairness” , words that have no connection to Darwinian secular humanists like edarrel. This is the reason you will continue to hear the kind of blathering attack on Christianity from people like edarrell.
Comments are closed.