WIKINDX Resources
|
Rennie John (2002). « 15 answers to creationist nonsense ». Scientist American, juin. En ligne : <http://www.sciam.com/ar ... -answers-to-creationist> (consulté le 23 octobre 2008).
Added by: Marie Musset (08 Sep 2008 12:07:05 Europe/Paris) Last edited by: Marie Musset (27 May 2009 10:27:18 Europe/Paris) |
| Resource type: Web Article BibTeX citation key: Rennie2002a  |
Categories: General Keywords: enseignement de l'évolution, États-Unis, sciences Creators: Rennie Collection: Scientist American |
Views: 1873/3014
Views index: 18% Popularity index: 4.5% |
| URLs http://www.sciam.c ... ers-to-creationist |
| Abstract |
|
"Opponents of evolution want to make a place for creationism by tearing down real science, but their arguments don't hold up. When Charles Darwin introduced the theory of evolution through natural selection 143 years ago, the scientists of the day argued over it fiercely, but the massing evidence from paleontology, genetics, zoology, molecular biology and other fields gradually established evolution's truth beyond reasonable doubt. Today that battle has been won everywhere--except in the public imagination. Embarrassingly, in the 21st century, in the most scientifically advanced nation the world has ever known, creationists can still persuade politicians, judges and ordinary citizens that evolution is a flawed, poorly supported fantasy. They lobby for creationist ideas such as "intelligent design" to be taught as alternatives to evolution in science classrooms. As this article goes to press, the Ohio Board of Education is debating whether to mandate such a change. Some antievolutionists, such as Philip E. Johnson, a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley and author of Darwin on Trial, admit that they intend for intelligent-design theory to serve as a "wedge" for reopening science classrooms to discussions of God. Besieged teachers and others may increasingly find themselves on the spot to defend evolution and refute creationism. The arguments that creationists use are typically specious and based on misunderstandings of (or outright lies about) evolution, but the number and diversity of the objections can put even well-informed people at a disadvantage. To help with answering them, the following list rebuts some of the most common "scientific" arguments raised against evolution. It also directs readers to further sources for information and explains why creation science has no place in the classroom. " Added by: Marie Musset Last edited by: Marie Musset |