From: Glenn Morton (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Jan 31 2003 - 00:54:21 EST
>From: George Murphy [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
>Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 10:45 PM
> You're right about popular American notions concerning the
>dating of human
>origins. I think it's worth noting though that that's not just a
>religious view. It
>should be seen as part of the general climate of scientific
>illiteracy - as shown, e.g.
>in a recent NSF study. E.g., only a bit more than half (54%) of
>Americans know that the
>earth goes around the sun once a year & fewer than that (48%) know
>that humans &
>dinosaurs weren't contemporaries (which of course is closely
>related to your point).
>Significant numbers believe in astrology & think that genes are
>found only in
>genetically modified organisms.
I agree with you that it is part of the general ignorance which doesn't stop
at science. But, I simply fail see how it was so different in Victorian
times which would require that everyone in the church was scientifically
literate in the Victorian Church. IF they were so insignificant, why did
Miller spend approximately one tenth of his book refuting an insigificant
minority? Most authors wouldn't was that much ink.
I suspect that the only reason we don't see the same US phenomenon in the UK
today is that basically no one goes to church.
for lots of creation/evolution information
personal stories of struggle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 31 2003 - 00:54:45 EST