From: Terry M. Gray (grayt@lamar.colostate.edu)
Date: Thu Aug 21 2003 - 14:00:51 EDT
Not to be exclusive and recognizing that we're not a large number
here, it might be interesting to poll the Ph.D.'s in the life
sciences on this list to see how many of them believe that biological
evolution is a well established theory--perhaps asking the question
in the form stated in Howard's original post.
In your judgment, is biological evolution a well established theory? Yes or No
If you want to participate, please send me
(grayt@lamar.colostate.edu) your Ph.D. institution, graduation year,
major/department and your unqualified answer. I want life
scientists--no geologists (unless you're a paleontologist) and no
cosmologists, astronomers, physicists (unless you're an exobiologist
or biophysicist). No M.D.'s unless you're an MD/PhD with the Ph.D. in
the life sciences.
You get the drift, right?
TG
>I would be willing to bet it might be because the idea that a
>"higher power" waved a magic wand and it all occured is easier to
>understand than all the intricacies and "theories" of evolution.
>
>I can say that even after hanging around on this list for (I think)
>over a year (maybe two) now and reading a good many (I'd say nearly
>all) posts on the subject, I'm still not convinced about anything
>one way or the other. I believe more than anything that I don't know
>and I really don't have time to find out unless I want to get a
>major in biology instead of my current goal, which is *not* going to
>happen since the only reason I would be doing it would be to answer
>that one question (possibly) and even then I can't be 100% certain I
>would be convinced 100%.
>
>I'd say that most people can't understand it and it seems that the
>"experts" are even divided on the subject; do the scientists on this
>list agree on a majority of the same things? Has anyone ever done a
>poll of this lists members to see how many of them even agree on any
>aspect? You would have to break it all down and not just make it
>like "do you believe that we evolved?" you would have to specify how
>we evolved, what part was natural selection, etc... "what and how"
>and see how many on this list answer the same way. I would be
>willing to bet that the answers would be all over the place, no
>wonder why poeple aren't accepting the thoeries as fact, "which are
>the facts?" whose (which) truth would you want them to believe?
>See, maybe you guys (and gals) can believe things without having all
>the problems worked out, most people can't believe things unless
>they are neat, complete, with all the i's dotted and all the t's
>crossed and they have to understand what it is they are believing,
>I've heard scientists say they don't understand their own theories,
>but they work on paper or in science or mathematically. Most people
>cannot "believe" anything they cannot come close to understanding
>(especially if trusted scientists cannot agree) and I'm sorry but
>evolution is one of those, there is so much that seems to the lay
>person as "grasping at straws" it looks like a humanists (or
>scientists, which to a lot of Christians are one in the same)
>fantasy instead of an actual "scientific fact".
>
>My opinion is that until you can all agree, yourselves, on
>everything from what happened (and prove it) to how it happened (and
>back it up with facts) most people who don't have the time or the
>education will just let it go into one ear and out the other. I
>know, I know the YEC's have no "proof" but that's because they hide
>behind hocus pocus and that is what makes it work, whenever they get
>backed into a corner they say God did it with a special creative
>stroke of his hand, people can believe that because they already
>believe God is mysterious, he does miracles and he started all this
>anyway (not to mention that the Genesis account seems to support
>that process) so it's no leap at all for them to believe that if
>they cannot understand it it was God's supernatural doing. But
>science on the other hand, is a study of facts and of proof, and
>evolution is science's baby, so they need facts and proof in order
>to buy it, plus they need to see at least a majority of actual
>scientists buying it also.
>
>I hope I'm making some sense.
>
>Sondra
>
>>From: "Josh Bembenek" <jbembe@hotmail.com>
>>To: gmurphy@raex.com, jwburgeson@juno.com
>>CC: hvantill@chartermi.net, ASA@calvin.edu
>>Subject: Re: Student perceptions re evolution
>>Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 13:27:13 +0000
>>
>>As I understand it, the question put to the students wasn't whether they
>>>accepted evolution but what percentage of academic biologists
>>>accept it. The 2 are, of
>>>course, related - those who don't want to think evolution is true
>>>would like to believe
>>>that "real scientists" agree with them.
>>
>>-Coming out of high school, I had absolutely no quarrel with
>>evolution theory (what little I knew.) I was very eager to learn
>>about science in high school, but learned very little about
>>evolution. I also had little exposure to christian teachings at
>>the time, so most of the influence on my understanding was directly
>>from classroom teachings. Thus in answering such a question, I
>>would have been unfamiliar with what professors thought of
>>evolution (having never considered the question and not being
>>exposed to their views at all- given poor textbooks) and would also
>>have had very little idea of what importance such an issue had. It
>>is doubtful I would have answered 90-100%.
>>
>>> No magic solution here but 2 suggestions - 1 that I've long
>>>harped on & another
>>>prompted by Howard's post.
>>> 1) No headway will be made among conservative Christians who
>>>reject evolution
>>>unless one can convince them that a person can accept evolution
>>>without abandoning the
>>>traditional Christian faith.
>>> 2) To the extent that evolution is identified in the popular
>>>mind with dogmatic
>>>atheists like Dawkins, it's possible for anti-evolutionists to
>>>portray his whole
>>>position - including his insistence on the scientific correctness
>>>of evolution - as
>>>extreme & therefore an aberration. We need to get before the
>>>public as many examples as
>>>possible of evolutionary scientists who don't have extreme
>>>anti-religious views, some of
>>>whom (though not necessarily all) should be Christians.
>>
>>I couldn't have thought of anything better. I am preparing a
>>seminar on Science, Faith and Evolution for our church body and
>>have been thinking deeply on the primary issue that I'd like to
>>convey. For me, it isn't to go around and set certain facts into
>>people's brains, i.e. go on a campaign to convince everyone that
>>the earth is billions of years old. I have no reason for this if
>>it could cause my brother to lose his faith or stumble, see also
>>Romans 14. (Soap Box: My opinion is that those of you who have
>>decided that evolution is true would be better suited to pursue an
>>attitude of weaker/stronger brother towards young earth people
>>rather than the mockery/hostile approach often expressed here.)
>>The primary goal is to understand the nature of scientific fact and
>>how it is interpreted, and to understand the relationship between
>>science and faith not as a war of conflict but as complimentary but
>>not completely overlapping sources of truth. I have been exposed
>>to people who are personally conflicted about the existence of
>>dinosaurs and it greatly astounds/troubles me. In my opinion, the
>>real source of the problem is the nature of Christian truth. Most
>>folks want their doubts completely dismembered and the way to do
>>that is to believe in a set of completely inerrant principles that
>>cannot be questioned from the Resurrection to a young earth. Thus
>>every statement of faith is given equal footing and challenging any
>>of it can challenge the veracity of the rest of it (is this the
>>offspring of Howard's troublesome observation of "biblidolatry?".)
>>I think conveying some kind of philosophy of knowledge, our
>>infallible understanding, and our attempt to understand ultimate
>>truth (something like Platonic forms) are key principles to help
>>Christians open their minds to the possibilities wrt origins, and
>>feel secure about the unknown.
>>
>>Josh
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Chat privately with Bon Jovi, Seal, Bow Wow, or Mary J Blige using
>>MSN Messenger!
>>http://www5.msnmessenger-download.com/imastar/default.aspx
>>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
><b>Help protect your PC:</b> Get a free online virus scan at
>McAfee.com.
>http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
-- _________________ Terry M. Gray, Ph.D., Computer Support Scientist Chemistry Department, Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 grayt@lamar.colostate.edu http://www.chm.colostate.edu/~grayt/ phone: 970-491-7003 fax: 970-491-1801
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Aug 21 2003 - 14:02:25 EDT