Nightline 1/13: creationism vs evolution in public school science classes

[Bozita]

THE ORIGIN OF LIFE: A BATTLE BETWEEN FAITH AND SCIENCE

Jan. 13, 2005   

Tonight's subject will make many of you mad. We're looking at creationism versus evolution. It goes to the heart of a passionate debate growing in this country: how we all became humans, how the world came into being and what we should teach our children about it.


Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and his major work, "The Origin of Species," have always been taught in American textbooks. But two years ago, in Cobb County, Ga., stickers were put into those textbooks that read, "Evolution is a theory, not a fact. The material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered." That's all the stickers say. But today, a judge in Cobb County ruled that those stickers should be removed. The decision was part of a suit brought by a parent in the school system against the school board, citing separation of church and state. This will now go through an appeals process, but how did those stickers get there in the first place? Well, it's an example of a growing debate in this country.

"Nightline" correspondent John Donvan has been following a story that echoes the debate in Dover, Pa. In this small town in central Pennsylvania, the debate has turned into a kind of war, a war of words between people with deeply held convictions on both sides of the argument -- those who believe in creationism and those who fight for evolution. And there is no middle ground, no compromise on this one. A lawsuit against the school board focuses on the board's introduction of a book into the curriculum called "Of Pandas and People." The book argues that Darwin's treatise on the origin of life is only a theory, while introducing readers to the study of intelligent design, a different theory that argues an "intelligent designer" created mankind. The textbook doesn't mention God, but the theory is supported by many Christians in the Dover community, and to them, creationism is a fact.

This is a very sensitive subject. It proves so controversial that John Donvan has a very tough time reporting the story, especially because none of the members of the school board -- who approved the book -- would sit down and speak with him. It's a fascinating and provocative topic. We hope you'll tune in to see what happened with the book that has turned Dover, a peaceful slice of American life, into a battleground.

Gerry Holmes & The Nightline Staff
Senior Producer
Washington Bureau

[K-W]

1. Who needs science when you have speculation.

If only reality were a more powerful persuader.

[delhurgo]

2. I'm looking forward to watching this.

Thanks for the heads up.

[porkrind]

3. Stupidity needs to be openly called "stupidity"

Give these fundie ignoramuses and inch, and they will want a mile. Society can't tolerate endorsing lies to appease vocal fundie wackos.

[rurallib]

5. Watch out or they'll have you

thrown off the edge of the earth.

[Zenlitened]

4. How sad that this is still an issue in the year 2005.

Clinging to creation myths... it's demented. Particularly when the reality of evolution is far more intriguing and awe-inspiring than anything in some "holy" book.

[DARE to HOPE]

9. A "holy Book" that shows people at prayer back 6000 years...

This whole subject puts light on the very problem with "fundamentalism." My husband is a biblical scholar, I am a classical musician. I have been a lifelong Christian, and have never had a problem with the two ideas, one, that God created/creates, and then, what a marvelous, connected, awesome creation it is!

If one is really to think in terms of 24 hour days, how do you even count that time until the sun is put into the sky? Really, read Genesis 1, then 2-3. There are two different eras' worth of understanding in those chapters, the "primitive" yet touching story in Gen 2-3 clearly the more ancient. One is out of the watery deep, with humans the crowning glory ("created He THEM,") the other out of the mud, creating "Adam" literally "mudman" and "Eve" "life!" The tender restoring of His children to grace, despite the threat of death for eating of the forbidden Tree, the picture of the Creator of the Universe bending down to sew together clothing for them before they are expelled from the Garden, these are theological lessons, not a science book.

It is so typical of Americans to be undereducated about history and literature as well as math and science, and be very bibically remiss. The different styles and epochs of literature in the Bible should be treated with study and RESPECT, instead of like the latest tabloid newspaper!

Christian "fundamentals" SHOULD entail lists like the NT fruits of the Spirit: "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self control."

But then, I do really think that certain forces with an agenda are supercharging old Baptist ideas into a heresy called the Dominionist movement. Just like 10 Commandments statues and the issue of gay marriage, the science debate is a wedge issue for them to divide us and conquer.

I for one do not think you can be an educated person if you do not understand something about the scientific AND the spiritual nature of this world.

[iwantmycountryback]

6. Can these people please look at their thumbs?

[stevebreeze]

7. gravity is a "theory" too!

Perhaps one of the nobrian-anti-science-fundies can step off the nearest bridge and show us what the word "theory" means.

[K-W]

8. Actually niether are theories.

Both are observable phenomena.

There are theories that describe how both function.

[lukasahero]

10. Isn't gravity a law?

Not that I'm supporting the dissing of evolution simply because it's called a "theory" but if we're going to argue it, I believe we have to have our facts straight. It's called the "Theory of Evolution" and the "Law of Gravity".

Unfortunately the wording (and deliberate misunderstanding of the choice of words) is partly responsible for opening this can of worms up. People are too eager to forget that this is "scientific" theory and just leave the word theory in place with all it's ambiguities. Music theory is real, provable and repeatable and nobody suggests that it's simply a "theory". Likewise scientific theory.