Should Evolution Be Taught In Schools

The New Theory Evolution a simple four syllable word. A word that not only changed the way we view animals and ourselves but also sparked debates. Unfortunately this paper is not based on the 1960’s classic Inherit the wind by Stanley Kramer. Which was about whether or not evolution should be taught in schools. No, in fact, that word has created yet another fire. This time, though, the debate is about whether or not evolution should be given a revision, and as they say there 's two sides to every coin. One such side is that evolution without a doubt needs to be rethought. This side includes Professor Kevin Laland a teacher of behavioral and evolutionary biology at the University of St.Andrews and a few of his colleagues. They find that Darwin 's theories are too outdated because they were thought up before the discovery of genes. Along with that thought is the fact that most of evolution theories now have come to focus on genetic inheritance and the processes that change genetic inheritance. Laland and his colleagues got together eight years ago. Ever since they worked on the broader framework of evolution that was termed extended evolutionary synthesis or EES for short. EES states that the important drivers of evolution that cannot be reduced to genes have to be woven into the fabric of evolutionary theory. EES also says that living things are not simply programmed by their genes but that as they live and develop instead. They also came to the conclusion that not only the organism evolves, but so does the environment that they evolve from. This form of co-evolution brings forth change in the ecosystem. The team has been able to rally large support from other scientists from all sorts of studies, including biology, ecology, genomics, social sciences, and more. Talking about such things to an evolutionary biologist sparks heated verbal battles. Laland thinks, “Perhaps haunted by the spectre of intelligent design, evolutionary biologists wish to show a united front to those hostile to science. Some might fear that they will receive less funding and recognition if outsiders, such as physiologists or developmental biologists, flood into their field.” The reason that Laland and his team got together in the first place was because they noticed …show more content…
Casey Luskin who has earned himself a B.S and an M.S in Earth sciences from the University of California, San Diego; has found what he believes to be the three main issues with how Darwinian evolution is taught in public schools. Starting off with how the students should be informed about how fossil records often lack transitional forms and that “explosions” of new species/life forms which challenges Darwinian evolutionary theory. Secondly, students should know that many scientists have come forward to directly challenge random mutation and natural selections ability to create complex biological features. To end his list he states that students should be directed to the many pieces of evidence that Darwinism uses for proof are weak. Such as how embryos contrary to pictures in textbooks actually look different in the embryonic stage. Also that there is evidence for microevolution instead of macroevolution. But Luskin describes these ideas in a short list according him he would add more “Of course, in a perfect world, I 'd also prefer that more than merely "three flaws in evolutionary theory" be taught to