Most Britons unaware of Darwin anniversaries, poll finds
by Jennifer Gold
Posted: Monday, November 24, 2008, 10:50 (GMT)
The results of a new poll out today by faith-based think tank Theos have revealed that eight in 10 people in Britain are unaware that 2009 marks two major Charles Darwin anniversaries.
Across the country, special events and celebrations are being planned for next year to mark the 200th anniversary of Darwin’s birth on 12 February and the 150th anniversary of the publication of the Origin of Species on 24 November.
Yet the results of the ComRes poll out today reveal that only 21 per cent of the population are aware of the two anniversaries.
The publication of the results coincides with the unveiling of a programme of major events and publications by Theos and the Faraday Institute on Science and Religion “to ‘rescue’ Darwin from the crossfire of a philosophical battle in which he had little personal interest”.
The programme includes a high profile debate on 12 May in Westminster Abbey – the resting place of the naturalist – to be chaired by the BBC’s John Humphrys. Panellists including Lord Robert Winston, Professor Steve Jones, Dr Denis Alexander, and Professor Nancy Rothwell will exchange their thoughts on the compatibility of belief in God and Darwinian evolution.
The debate is timed to coincide with the publication of two new research projects in February - a ComRes poll on the extent and nature of evolutionary and non-evolutionary opinion in the UK and its relationship to atheistic and religious beliefs, and an independent research project by ESRO into creationism and intelligent design.
Theos will draw on the two pieces of research for a major new report on the compatibility of Christianity and Darwinian evolution. The new year will also see Theos Director of Studies Nick Spencer publish his book ‘Darwin and God’ with SPCK.
Theos director Paul Woolley said, "Towards the end of his life Charles Darwin wrote, 'It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent Theist and an evolutionist.' Unfortunately, too many people today disagree with him.
"Our project aims to 'rescue' his original position and ensure that next year Darwin is recognised as a supremely gifted scientist rather than a theologian or anti-theologian."
Copyright © 2009 Christian Today. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
The comments below are readers' personal opinions and are in no way intended to reflect the editorial opinion of Christian Today.
Added: Monday, February 2, 2009, 17:34 (GMT)
The theories of Evolution and Creation cannot co-exist owing to the two quite opposite fundamental beliefs:
Death came before sin - Evolution
Sin came before death - Creation
Christians cannot believe in both as Evolution is explicitly contradictory to the Bible here.
Jeremy Burgess, Cape Town, South Africa
Added: Saturday, December 6, 2008, 19:52 (GMT)
You guys Darwin-bash just as well as evolutionists ID-bash. When will this stop? Besides, there is no conflict between the Bible and Darwinian evolution.
Evolution says that life came from the 'primordial soup (mud)' and the Bible says the same thing:
"And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground." (Gen. 2:7)
Dust (as powdered or gray; hence clay, earth, mud:-ashes, earth, ground, mortar, powder, rubbish) ‘of the ground (soil - from its gen. redness).
(Genesis) Adam/man (Hebrew-synonyms) = ‘ruddy (red)’, rosy, the flush of blood
"...man became a living soul" (Genesis 2:7b):
soul (Hebrew & Greek) = breathing creature/the animal sentiment principal only
- does not suggest a ‘human’ being but rather a ‘ruddy’ creature (as coming from the ‘red’ earth - dust/ground)
"Prior to being put into the garden, ruddy did not have 'spiritual' ability, he only gained that after he entered the garden; '...and the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man (ruddy) whom he had made." (parentheses mine, Gen. 2:8 & 15)
It was the gaining of this other element that enabled one primate to change from animal to human, and unless he had gained it, could not have changed - thus the reason we don't see other primates in various stages of change.
So then, Adam/man was not initially a ‘human’ being as many believe but rather a ‘ruddy creature of earth’, an animal (had to have been a chimpanzee/rhesus monkey because recent genome mapping shows conclusively that somewhere along the line we picked up the chimp gene).
Religious tendencies are observed strictly in the human species. If human beings are in part ‘soul (animal)’ then why aren’t such tendencies evident in other primates? Could it be because we have something the other animals don’t have?
soul = mortal
spirit = immortal
animal = soul
human being = soul + immortal spirit
Dawn Wessel, Mundare, Canada
Added: Monday, November 24, 2008, 21:02 (GMT)
One of the ironies of the upcoming bicentennial is the fact that nearly everyone accepts that Darwin originated the idea of natural selection,when he himself admitted that others (Patrick Matthew and Charles Wells) came up with idea before him.This fact was accepted by Alfred Russel Wallace and T.H Huxley(Darwin's Bulldog). In addition few of the ideas given in "On the Origin of Species" are novel to Darwin (Search Google for "wainwrightscience" on Google for more details". There has been a remarkably successful cover-up of the historical facts and the Darwin myth will doubtless gain continued momentum in the comming year.
Dr Milton Wainwright,Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology,University of Sheffield,UK.
Dr Milton Wainwright, Sheffield,England
