# The evolution debate in the US continues

By Murray Bourne, 18 Dec 2007

In the eSchool News article Key states take up evolution debate, we learn of the continuing discussions on the teaching of "intelligent design" vs evolution in the US.

It's good that they are having a debate, rather than just accepting and implementing intelligent design as the only option. However, there is a lot of wasted time and energy going into this. What's next from the religious conservatives? Will they be calling for a return to the teaching of concepts like the Earth is flat and that it is the centre of the universe, and it was all created in 6 days? Oh, please...

Seems to me that under Bush and his cronies, America has headed more in the direction of religious conservatism - even radicalism - at the expense of rational and informed thought. No wonder that science education has suffered as a result.

[Update: Deleted paragraph - not especially relevant.]

If you want good progress in education you have to establish a genuine 'learning community', where the society values knowledge over dogma.

The British realised long ago that there should be clear separation between church and state. There should also be a clear separation between church and school room.

### 2 Comments on “The evolution debate in the US continues”

1. John says:

Hey i love your website, you do a great job but Wow, i have to say i am pretty disgusted with the article titled "The evolution debate in the US continues" because you totally mock intelligent design even though it makes way more sense than evolution. I suggest you spend more time studying the facts and less time writing articles, maybe then you will make a better educated decision. Intelligent design is based on the bible and FACTS. Evolution is just a theory. For you to make a riduculous comment saying that religious conservatives will want to restudy the earth being flat, is just flat out naive. Please check out answersingenesis [no longer available] for facts and proofs on Intelligent Design, Thanks.

2. Murray says:

My intent was not to disgust and I am sorry if the article offended you. I wanted to trigger some thinking and I am glad that this has occurred. (The flat earth bit was part of that trigger, of course. But think about it for a while. People were burned in the Middle Ages for daring to suggest that perhaps the bible was not so scientifically accurate... The current debate reminds me of those wasted centuries.)

There are differences between the concepts "fact", "theory", "hypothesis", "belief" and "faith". It seems that there is some confusion about these vital concepts that is evident in your response.

I have spent my life studying "the facts", including where the bible came from and when & why it was written - and by whom.

Thank you for the link (the site came across to me as more of a commercial enterprise than anything else). To quote from one of the advertisements for a DVD in there:

The vastness of space boggles the mind.

Yes - and that very vastness and a consideration of the speed of light indicate that the Earth is much older than the few thousand years that a literal interpretation of Genesis implies.

Anyway, I won't convince you no matter how much I write here. I wish you well in your quest for the truth.

### Comment Preview

HTML: You can use simple tags like <b>, <a href="...">, etc.

To enter math, you can can either:

1. Use simple calculator-like input in the following format (surround your math in backticks, or qq on tablet or phone):
a^2 = sqrt(b^2 + c^2)
(See more on ASCIIMath syntax); or
2. Use simple LaTeX in the following format. Surround your math with $$ and $$.
$$\int g dx = \sqrt{\frac{a}{b}}$$
(This is standard simple LaTeX.)

NOTE: You can't mix both types of math entry in your comment.