Life Science Controversy

This is an awesome book. It describes the outlook of biology not only through the eyes of faith, but from a Christian theistic point of view. In Biology through the Eyes of Faith, it explains the difference between a scientist’s perception of nature oppose to a Christian’s perception. Scientists say the world evolved which conflicts with the theistic view, which says the world came about through the creator God.

It is well known that politics and religion are two topics to never to be discussed with someone one does not know well. In today’s society, it feels as if this list of topics that are socially deemed inappropriate to discuss seems to be growing, with climate change now being a conservation to avoid. This aversion to discussing climate change appears to stem from the fact that the issue tends to polarize opinions, in which people fall into one of two groups: climate change skeptics and climate change believers. This paper seeks to address and analyze the ways in which climate skeptics speak about and understand climate change as well as how climate scientists understand climate change phenomena. More specifically, this paper focuses on how climate skeptics comprehend the relationships between grasslands, livestock, methane and nutrient cycling and how these interconnected concepts do not lead to the type of climate change that “green urbanities /green politicians/green activists/green elite” predict. The paper will conclude with an evaluation of the two differing positions between climate skeptics and climate scientists, in which I will determine which argument I find to be the most accurate.

Climate change is the long term shift in global climate patterns attributed mainly to the use of fossil fuels. Many people are aware of this issue, however, there has been an increase in the amount of people who deny climate change. 23 percent of Americans (compared to last year’s 16 percent) believe that climate change is not a problem (Atkin). To conclude that people do not accept cli­mate change because they do not under­stand it or need to be educated about it, is reasonable. However, I believe that it isn’t skepticism driving this denial. Rather, it is the phenomenon of reaffirming one’s identity. Instead of analyzing the evidence, it is intentionally interpreted in such a way as to maintain a pre-existing belief.

There are many challenges that can come from teaching controversial topics in a classroom. Sometimes people, including parents, forget that we are all human and form our own opinions on certain topics. Many teachers would rather teach current science issues such as physics, geology, astronomy and earth science rather than have conversations and debates over topics that could be considered ‘fake news’. Often times controversial topics can often be uninteresting to students, McCaffrey says that, “For students, the science can be particularly challenging and non-intuitive” he continues and says “Even well-prepared teachers may struggle to help students overcome naïve ideas

In recent years, stem cell research has become a prominent way of treating: heart disease, cancer, HIV/AIDS, spinal problems, and much more ; moreover, in recent years as Stem cell research became more popular, it has sparked controversy over the religion aspect of stem cell research. Stem cell research begins with culturing an embryonic cell and then injecting the stem cell into the area of concern(Robertson). Pluripotent stem cells are gathered and used to treat the areas, pluripotent stem cells are those that are in the earliest stages of development ; in addition, at this stage, cells can learn the jobs and take shape of cells that did the job once before (Robertson).

Intelligent design supporters have believed that a low-key approach is in order to be more successful ,rather than simply asking educational institutions to require that intelligent design be taught. Instead, they ask only that schools teach the controversy surrounding evolution, arguing that broadening the discussion will foster critical thought. (Clemmitt, 2005)

2. I agree that journalism and policies must give all viewpoints the chance to be shared with the public, but I do not support the false balance of scientific legitimacy being granted to all viewpoints. It is important for the public to be informed of current scientific issues, without a doubt; however, I think the public should hear more about the viewpoint that the majority of the scientific community supports. In the process of weighing the evidence, it is true that the less legitimate viewpoints must also be considered. However, the false balance of viewpoints in journalism and policies makes it harder for the general public, especially the non-scientifically trained, to recognize the viewpoint

Evolutionary theory has accrued evidence from diverse scientific fields and is now championed as the centerpiece of biology. Creationism has branched out to include scientific, moralistic, and probabilistic arguments, and its alliance with fundamentalist Christianity has helped it retain political power. Toumey asserts that “without the churches, academies, colleges, lobbies, rallies, broadcasts, and mailing lists of the New Religious Right, creationism would be an obscure oddity; with its Religious Right sponsors, however, it becomes a popular sensation that generates difficult public controversy about science education.”

These last two election cycles have demonstrated the importance of climate change in relation to politics and the american people. What is unfortunate is that what seems to be a very crucial and real problem in our human survival, according to scientists, is being debated by people who do not have the scientific credentials to even discuss the science behind the reality of climate change. Those behind the skeptics, have funded a successful campaign against the reality of the facts and have introduce doubt into the sciences.

Summer for the Gods concentrates on the Dayton, Tennessee Scopes trial, or "Monkey Trial," of 1925. The trial was over a Tennessee law that banned teaching evolution in public schools. The American Civil Liberties Union protested the law with teacher, John Scopes, who agreed to help. The"trial of the century" brought together two famous political enemies, William Jennings Bryan, who led the anti-evolution crusade, and Clarence Darrow, who was known as the best criminal defense lawyer and evolution supporter. The author presents the history of controversy that led to the trial. Fossil discoveries, the rise of religious fundamentalism, and increased attendance in public high schools influenced the anti-evolution movement due to the

Most people believe that the controversy of the existence of global warming stopped long ago. In fact, that is very untrue. The common belief is that, yes the earth is warming, the glaciers are melting, and our atmosphere is being polluted, all due to man-made green house gases. What’s new? Shockingly there are still some scientists who disagree. Global warming; a very controversial phenomenon that is still happening, which already is not being handled sufficiently enough, is being argued that it does not exist whatsoever. This causes the general public to believe that they are being educated on the falsehoods of modern science, when in fact that they need to be educated on when to distinguish misinformation for themselves. These

It has recently been brought to our (the Board of Education) attention that there is a debate in the schools as to whether or not evolution, or creation science, should be eliminated from the curriculum. It is understandable that certain groups of people, such as the “Concerned Parents” organization, are not comfortable with this concept being taught to their students, however, it is crucial that they understand the benefit behind allowing their child to be exposed to a variance of viewpoints and outlooks on the world from a scientific and also social perspective.

Despite great efforts to convince the opposing side, a battle still brews amongst creationists and evolutionists over the beginning of life and the universe, but neither opinions’ palpability can be firmly upheld through scientific manners. Since science can only prove hypotheses that are testable and based on current observations, neither creation nor evolutionary concepts can be proven with irrefutable evidence. However, regardless of the inability to prove either concept, most public school systems promote evolution as a scientific fact. Many students who lack firm beliefs about the origin of life believe what they are taught without giving any personal thought to the matter. Instead of robotically absorbing biased information,

Teaching Creationism or Intelligent Design to our youth can be done in a way that is neither opinion based nor completely fact based, but may hold some risk of personal interpretation. The first thing needed to be considered is how can children of the middle school age range grasp such a deep subject and have the capacity to reach their own conclusion. Information found regarding the development of children in this developmental range was found in the book titled "Characteristics of Middle Grade Students,” Caught in the Middle by the Sacramento Department of Education. It was found that students of this age hold a variety of learning attributes that support the belief that children can handle both sides of this controversial issue. Some

Public schools are a place to learn proven facts and some very well—known and accepted theories. These schools have been led this way for a long time and show no signs of changing. Many states around the country have rejected the teaching of creationism in public schools, since the subject is so controversial among teachers and parents. In Ohio, a bill to develop new science content standards was not successfully passed. Many creationists were upset when they discovered that the first drafts of the standards were filled with evolutionary content, without any allowance for alternative explanations of life’s origins. In the uproar, the state board held a special meeting to investigate the process that the writing team and advisory committee used to draft the science standards (Matthews, Answering Genesis). This is why learning the facts about evolution should be taught at school. By doing this, there would be much less confrontation between teachers, students, and parents. If one has the desire to learn about creationism or any other beliefs of how the world came to be, one should learn it at a place outside of school, such as church or at home.