Evolution Endorsed by Steves

Genrou writes "National Center for Science Education (NCSE) has started an interesting and unusual project. Project Steve gathered about 220 scientists - almost all holding PhDs in all areas of science, and inlcuding two Nobel prize winners, eight members of the National Academy of Sciences, and several well-known authors of popular science books - signed a statement on the importance of teaching evolution and against intelligent design. The unusual part is that all of them are named Steve. Eugenie C. Scott, the executive director of NCSE, explained: "Creationists are fond of amassing lists of PhDs who deny evolution to try to give the false impression that evolution is somehow on the verge of being rejected by the scientific community. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Hundreds of scientists endorsed the NCSE statement. And we asked only scientists named Steve -- who represent approximately 1% of scientists.""

Comments

Creationists taking biblical text out of context

[jcasey]

The major mistake that creationists make is their attempt to interpret biblical information in a scientific context. It should be noted that the author(s) of the book of Genesis did not write the story of the creation in order to teach how the world came to be, rather it was written to express a spiritual concept - that of a parental higher power, god, or divine origin that preceedes mankind. It suggests that this god preceedes mankind and is therefor not man made. Mistake number two is trying to create a scientific theory that justifies this misinterpretation (putting the cart in front of the horse)

RTFA

[yarbo]

The article isn't saying evolution is right (that's another debate). It's saying that the scientific community is nowhere near about to reject it.

Re:Creationists taking biblical text out of contex

[nathanh]

Evolution and Creation share the same problem. They are both improvable.

Evolution is a fact with several real-world examples this past decade. Evolution is most certainly "improvable": if it wasn't then it could never be labelled a science. Falsifiable hypothesis is the keystone of all science.

Regardless of the weight of evidence to support evolution available now or at any point in the future it is unlikely that it will ever be possible to prove that God was not involved. In reality it comes down to a metaphysical discussion on the existence of God, and both are not scientific.

Evolution is science. It says nothing about the existence of God. Having all the answers is not a pre-requisite for being scientific. You are being ignorant when you claim otherwise.