libraries and evolution teaching

[Daniel L Robinson]

On Tue, 17 Aug 1999 07:59:17 -0400 John Grehan <jrg13 at psu.edu> writes:
 
>If students are taught the basics of scientific enquiry - the ability 
>to
>think critically and ask questions. . . 


*This* is the essential missing ingredient. " You boys". . . borrowing
from a phrase used by my favorite lister. . . need to remember that you
are the overcomers.  You are the few who made it across the bridge and
past the "thought police".  I would really question, though, how many of
you have really taken the time to consider the evidence for the Biblical
version of creation.  

Most of us on the other side of the bridge grow up on a steady diet of
evolution and only evolution.  We are not taught to question assumptions
such as the "millions and billions",  or that layering necessarily
involves long periods of time, or even to read the fine print on the
large intermediary form in the museum, which turns out to be an artist's
interpretation, *not* something dug up by an archaelogist.  I was never
taught to wonder why, if evolution is true, is the fossil record not
jam-packed with intermediary forms? 

Because I was not taught to wonder, I missed the *wonder* of it all and
hated science until, in the dorms at U.C. Davis, I ran into some serious
students who felt there was more evidence for creation theory than for
evolution.  Even though I had been a Christian for many years by that
time, I was absolutely astounded that an intelligent students could
actually believe that the Biblical account of creation is compatible with
science.  Nowadays, they have scads of initials following their names,
and believe the evidence even more.   I have fewer initials but more
children following me, and now I am able to share with them the wonders
and mysteries of this marvelous, intricately-designed and orderly
creation.   I was fortunate; most students *never* have the opportunity
to hear the evidence.  

I would venture to say that most creationists only ask for a balanced
presentation,  in the early years,  of differing viewpoints and that
children be taught and encouraged to ask questions. 


John Grehan adds:

>Even if some published efforts are at a disadvantage, enough will get in
(the library).  

This was not my experience when we donated a number of well-written books
that presented creation as *a* viewpoint, not the only viewpoint.  These
books never hit the shelf.  In contrast, there were countless books that
assumed evolution.  

I realize that Doug believes there are many, many faith - based theories
of the origin of the universe.  My normally taciturn, math and physics -
oriented husband, who reads this list vicariously (without a whole lot of
choice. . .) is planning to post about that issue later today.    

I'm headed for cover.  

Martha Wortham Robinson
Kent, WA  (enjoying native plants and butterflies in Washington but
still, despite all of Anne Kilmer's well intentioned and much appreciated
instruction, keeping my eyes trained for that first Monarch. . . )