Tip-toeing Around Evoltion

Recently, "educators unveiled new guidelines...that call for sweeping changes in the way science is taught in the Unites States" according to this article in the New York Times. Apparently these new guidelines take a firm stand on teaching evolution to students. My first thought was "yes, progress!..more students will be taught the threory of evolution". However, as I expected, the idea of teaching such contreverical subjects, like evolution and climate change, has already drawn hostile commentary. Additionally, while many states are expected to adopt the new guidelines within the next year or two, it will still take several years before schools translate them into thier curriculum. As such, schools will continue to postpone the teaching of evolution.

The thing that struck me the most, however, was how Judith Luber-Narod, a high school science teacher at Abby Kelly Foster Charter Public School, was hesitant about teaching a controversial subject so she thought, "how can you teach the environment without talking about it?". I found this very strange because I was skeptical to how a teacher was supposed to teach a topic, without ever actually talking about it directly...

Mrs. Luber-Narod came up with an experiment to try and stimulate global warming. She explained nothing about global warming itself, and only told her students to watch the experiment and come up with your own conclusion, as such not actually talking about the subject. While these students were exposed to the topic and forced to come up with their own opinion, do you think that is enough to substantially educate these students?

We All Need a Savior

Religion is a very powerful influence on people's lives. It helps dictate your beliefs, thoughts, and morals. It also helps create traditions, friendships, and even enemies within a community. As such, when I found religion is a key factor to why many Americans choose not to believe in evolution, I was not at all surprised, according to this article only about 39% of Americans believe in evolution. I was more curious to why religion and evolution are not compatible? Well the obvious fact is that the theory of evolution clearly contradicts the book of Genesis. In the catholic religion, it is said that God created humans and the earth was built a little over 10,000 years. While evolution argues humans descended from primates and the world is billions of years old.

While there is a clear contradiction between the two, an article in the New York Times brought up another interesting aspect to why religion and science often butt heads. Within this article, Paul Brown, a Republican from Georgia's 10th congressional district, shared that "Evolution is lies to try and keep me and all the folks who were taught that from understanding they need a savior". The work savior intrigues me a savior is seen as someone who can rescue you, such as God. And once you believe in evolution, some would argue, you will no longer have a savior.

However, the Pope John Paul II wrote that, "there is no conflict between evolution and the doctrine of the faith". If the Pope, a highly religious figure, sees no issue with the theory of evolution, than why do you think others continue to not accept it? Is it solely because they think they will lose their savior? Or is it more because they are ignorant to what evolution is? Either way, what are other reasons to why so many Americans choose not to accept the theory of evolution?