My name is Eduardo Moros and I'm new to this list. I'm not at all
surprise neither of the students response nor of the potential response
of the materialistic evolutionists of SciAm. It is interested, though,
to see that the efforts of theists of all camps seem to be having an
impact on the new generations; I'm indeed surprise that 45% of the
students rejected evolution, it seems a large % to me. I sure would
like to see how they plan to correct "preconceptions about genetics,
radiometric dating and statistical probability of spontaneous
self-replicating life forms" without intelectual coersion.
Salu2
SENDER INFORMATION:
Eduardo G. Moros
http://castor.wustl.edu/~moros/
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1897/
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Ranch/3698/index.html
John E. Rylander wrote:
>
> This is an interesting brief article in the current Scientific American
> (http://www.sciam.com/1097issue/1097scicit5.html).
>
> I excerpt here two contiguous paragraphs, finding the "indeed" comment most
> interesting, treating "the chance origin of life" as apparently more obvious
> than the reliability of radioactive and other forms of dating. Either weakly
> sloppy or strongly naturalistically ideological, in my view, though the article
> also makes some other points that are stronger.
>
> --John
>
> http://www.sciam.com/1097issue/1097scicit5.html
>
> ....
> With educational psychologist William B. Michael of the University of Southern
> California, Alters conducted interviews and administered surveys to pick the
> brains of more than 1,200 college freshmen at 10 different schools. In this
> unpublished study, he found that those who reject evolution (approximately 45
> percent) tend more than their counterparts to hold specific misconceptions
> about evolutionary science. They are more likely to agree with statements such
> as "mutations are never beneficial to animals" and "the methods used to
> determine the age of fossils and rocks are not accurate." Indeed, nearly 40
> percent of those skeptical of evolution believe the chance origin of life to be
> a statistical impossibility.
> Having identified these and other erroneous beliefs, Alters says, the next step
> is to develop a curriculum that addresses them head-on. Although "the purpose
> of public school education is not to change people's religious beliefs," he
> notes, students' preconceptions about genetics, radiometric dating and
> statistical probability are certainly fair game.
> ....