Explore Evolution - A new textbook standard for public schools

t's been nearly 150 years since the publication of Charles Darwin's influential book, On the Origin of Species, and the theory of evolution remains the focus of intense public controversy. So, what's all the controversy about?

It's hard to tell, sometimes. Public debate over this issue usually generates more heat than light. There is no shortage of headline grabbers willing to "go public" with confrontational statements on one side or the other. The media sometimes makes the situation worse. Television news in particular tends to rely on "sound bite" coverage of sharply divided opinions that are easy to describe. This makes for exciting viewing, but is not always helpful in finding answers to the real questions in the origins debate.

This focus on media-ready "good guys" and "bad guys" completely misses some of the real (and more interesting) scientific controversies about evolution. We hope this book will help you understand what contemporary Darwinian theory is, why many scientists find it persuasive, and why other scientists question key aspects of it.

Actually, we shouldn't refer to the theory as "it." As you will discover in the pages that follow, Darwin's theory is not a single idea. Instead, it is made up of several related ideas, each supported by specific arguments. We hope to help you understand what these ideas and arguments are and what different scientists have to say about them in light of current scientific evidence.

The approach we are using in this book is called "inquiry-based" education. This approach allows you, the student, to follow the process of discovery, deliberation, and argument that scientists use to form their theories. It allows you to evaluate answers to scientific questions on your own and form your own conclusions. Our goal in using this approach is to expose you to the discoveries, evidence, and arguments that are shaping the current debates over the modern version of Darwin's theory, and to encourage you to think deeply and critically about them.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• stephen
• meyer
• scott
• minnich
• jonathan
• moneymaker
• paul
• nelson
• ralph
• seelke
• intelligent
• design
• discussion
• trailer
• educational
• hot topics
• religion
• public
• schools
• debate
• balanced
• fair
• approach
• book
• new
• textbooks
• texas

[Oallos1]

In the news today:

Deleting a gene removes a limit to learning and memory in mice. RGS14 appears to hold mice back mentally, John Hepler, PhD, professor of pharmacology at Emory University School of Medicine, says he and his colleagues have been jokingly calling it the "Homer Simpson gene." RGS14 is also found in humans.

Anyone care to speculate on the implication this has for evolution theory...?

[iNova707]

@Ironhoist bro i'm not insulting...they actually believe that, in the bible the talking snake doesn't have a name. If they don't believe in the talking snake then that's another story and another debate. And I dont see why should I give up...they didnt even have evidence or proof to believe what they say.

[Ironhoist]

@iNova707@jailer345 "Whats ur degree man?"

" Yea; and a talking snake, and an apple is a fact. -_-"

Did you just go from debating to insulting the opposition? Why not just wave the "white flag".

[FiverBeyond]

Ho boy.

Creationism -->

'scientific' Creationism -->

Creation Science -->

Intelligent Design -->

"Teach the Controversy" -->

"strengths and weaknesses"

I hope people don't fall for this kind of presentation. This book is distinctly non-scientific and anti-evolution. It uses recycled Creationist arguments, and deliberately misrepresents the most important findings and research in the past fifty years of the neo-Darwinian synthesis.

[Goohuman]

@iNova707

Without the book, that is as good as an answer as can be offered. I'm sure you know that it doesn't follow logically, but is a good example of judging a book by it's cover (or author in this case). Thanks.

[Goohuman]

@iNova707 Indeed. I find myself less concerned with answers since I've become a christian. I would not be suprised if that is a bit unsettling to non-believing scientists, so that is a valid point.

Evolutionists do depend on the research and must be flexible. I contend an honest ID believer must also do research and be flexible.

It is not enough for some to believe one or the other. They must understand. The more research the better.

[iNova707]

@Goohuman there is a huge gap between intelligent designers and evolutionary biologist, that is that when we find a contradiction or something that doesn't fit, we investigate. While ID just say an intelligent designer did it. So yea between research and assumptions I prefer evolutionist...do you get where I'm getting at? All I'm saying is that ID people don't want to investigate, while scientist keep searching and updating. :)

[iNova707]

@Goohuman Sure ill answer you the question, look at it this way. (btw this is an answer) Do you think it will be biased a book saying Christianity is of the Devil by a Muslim or hindu author? Same happens here with authors of the discovery institute. And if it WAS an actually textbook...I haven't heard it is on my university or any...I could believe it in Kansas. So yea I know its biased when all authors are not believers in evolution. I think is more rational if evolutionist postulate errors :)

[Goohuman]

@iNova707 No correction necessary. I know there are atheists or agnostics with a dislike for religion that work on other texts.You don't have to tell me that.

Yes, I got that you believe the authors are biased, but you are avoiding my question. Is the textbook biased?

Who writes what and how they believe becomes irrelevant as long as you are rational and use logic. If Mr Meyer put bias in the book, it should be easy to find to the critical eye.

[iNova707]

@Goohuman I never said evolutionist atheist...because there are believers that believes in evolution(such as me);let me correct you on that first.Also, I said that the Authors...such as Stephen C. Meyer is a very biased guy; just check his videos...the authors are proponents of intelligent design...they claim that ID is a theory...which theres is no evidence at all, when there is evolutionary evidences. And I'll repeat it again; I want autors that actually BELIEVE in evolution and say its errors