This is an extract of the home page of the ironically named, "truth in science" web site;
The theory of Darwinian evolution has been presented as scientifically uncontroversial and the only credible explanation of origins. This is despite the National Curriculum which states:
Pupils should be taught…
“how scientific controversies can arise from different ways of interpreting empirical evidence (for example, Darwin's theory of evolution)”
The National Curriculum for Key Stage 4 Science (Sc1: Scientific enquiry)
Few schools have taught this controversy. This is partly because many popular textbooks present Darwinism as the only scientific theory of origins and give little coverage to alternative theories, sometimes misrepresenting them.
New GCSE Science Specifications in September 2006 give a fresh opportunity to reconsider what is taught about origins in science lessons. These specifications place an emphasis on students understanding 'How Science Works'. This concept is explained as follows by the Edexcel Examination Board:
“How Science Works is primarily about helping students to engage with and challenge the science they meet in everyday life. Students need to adopt a critical, questioning frame of mind, going ‘behind the scenes’ to understand the workings of science and how it impacts on society and their lives.”
We consider that it is time for students to be permitted to adopt a critical approach to Darwinism in science lessons. They should be given fair and accurate presentations of alternative views.”
Ok lets just take the key points here in order. They categorically state that the theory of evolution has been presented as scientifically uncontroversial.
This is true. It has been presented as such because it is uncontroversial. Let me try to prove it to you.
Look here at the Steve project which has the names of PhD’s who have signed up to a very strongly worded statement that says this;
Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to "intelligent design," to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools.
You can only sign up to this if you have a PhD and your name is Steve i.e. about 1% of the population of Phd”s. They currently have 775 or lets say 775 x 100 = 77,500 scientists signing up to this.
Creationists/ID ers have also generated various lists - with much weaker statements - with few signatures and without making sure they are all PhD’s.
The most optimistic lists I can find have only about 600 sigs. A quick calculation based on these numbers shows 99% of scientists very strongly backing evolution and stating ID is rubbish. So no evolution is not scientifically controversial.
Truth in Science then quote a part of the curriculum which talks of scientific controversies being taught. They then say few schools have taught this controversy.
Now bearing mind what I have just said about how un-controversial this subject is then why would the government as part of the National Curriculum imply that it is? Something’s not right here.
The fact of the matter is that this is NOT, in truth, what the Government are actually talking about - why would you think they were? Oh yes Truth In Science “accidentally” gave you that impression didn’t they.
Have a look at this;
Truth in Science is currently pushing Intelligent Design. This is what Jacqui Smith, Minister of State for Schools, had to say about it in April 2006:
Intelligent design is sometimes erroneously advanced as a scientific theory but it has no underpinning scientific principles or explanations supporting it and it is not accepted by the international scientific community. - Jacqui Smith MP, Minister of State for Schools and 14-19 Learners
And this, again from the Minister for Schools;
The scientific controversy referred to in the programme of study is that arising from Darwin's rejection of existing scientific theories based on the evidence he had collected. An example of such a theory is inheritance of acquired characteristics supported, among others, by the French scientist Lamark and based on the available scientific evidence at the time.
Creationism cannot be used as an example of a scientific controversy as it has no empirical evidence to support it and no underpinning scientific principles or explanations. It belongs in a different realm of knowledge, that of religion.
The full letter can be seen here
So there we are. Truth In Science have deliberately set up the main page of their web site to mislead people and also to misrepresent the governments position.
- - -
Quote for the day;
“The zeal which begins with hypocrisy must conclude in treachery; at first it deceives, at last it betrays”
Francis Bacon, Sr. quotes (English Lawyer and Philosopher. 1561-1626)