College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

Professor commemorates Darwin's 'On the Origin of Species

By Mark Payne

Print this article

Published: Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Updated: Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Dr. Barbara Forrest is currently a professor of History and Political Science at Southeastern Louisiana University. She is the co-author of “Creationism’s Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design” with Paul Gross, which speaks about the creationist movement “Wedge Strategy”, that has advanced through a religious agenda, rather than a scientific agenda.
She was on campus to lecture Feb. 16 for the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s “On the Origin of Species.”

Q: How has Darwin influenced science?
A: Well Darwin’s impact on the biological sciences was huge. The biological sciences during Darwin’s day were not as rigorously empirical as the physical sciences. The physical sciences were far ahead, in terms of their scientific methodology than biology. Biology was still governed by the old biblical understandings of where life on earth came from. What Darwin did was apply rigorous empirical methodology to Biology that the physical sciences were having so much success with. So Darwin really modernized Biology. Not only has he had an enormous impact on Biology, but his ideas about evolution have spun off to other fields, even Computer Science, which now, models some of its software applications after the process of natural selection.
The theory of evolution, by natural selection, has been an enormously productive and fertile theory.

It’s important to bring it to Northern Kentucky University, because anybody now in the modern world, who wants to understand science properly has to understand how fundamental evolution is to the study of Biology.
So young people here who are studying science, who are studying Biology, or any related field, certainly want to get a modern scientific education and that has to include evolution, because so much of modern science depends on it.
Medicine, Biomedical research, is built on the foundation of what Darwin discovered.

Q: What is your argument against Creationism, specifically the Discovery Institute?
A: The major argument against the Discovery institute is that what they’re doing is promoting a religious agenda. Not a scientific agenda. In fact, they really don’t even care about science; they are just using it as vehicle to attack the teaching of evolution. The discovery institute is nothing more than a pretty, well oiled, propaganda operation. Rather than making any contribution to the education of children, or to the way science is done. These guys simply do nothing, except use politics to advance an idea that has been debunked many, many, many times, as a religious idea rather than science.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

9 comments

Your name
Fri Feb 20 2009 15:40
It's Not Darwin's or Wallace's Theory
It's Not Darwin's or Wallace's Theory
Both Darwin and Wallace admittd that they did not originate the theory of natural selection,instead, they gave priorty on the idea to Patrck Matthew and Charles Wells. My latest research also shows that non of the ideas in "On the Origin of Species" are novel to Darwin(search Google for "wainwrightscience"
Best Wishes, Prof. Milton Wainwright,,Dept.Molecular Biology and Bioetechnology,University of Sheffield UK.
kari
Thu Feb 19 2009 07:57
Darwinism is a theory. So is Creation. As a christian, I really don't care how the world was created. I know that God did it, (however) and that's enough for me.
Al Cibiades
Wed Feb 18 2009 17:01
Its rather difficult to state objections to two such massive movements to deceive and miseducate children and the public as creationism and ID. Dr. Forrest just went for the core point that both are religious indoctrination deceptively masqeurading in scientific clothing.

Leaving aside the massive ignorance both of scientific fact, the concepts of science and even the basic tenets of evolutionary biology, the creationists and their slicker allies, the ID proponents suffer from the same underlying corruption of thought which attempts to substitute faith for fact. This is evident in the common attempt to misrepresent the foundational concept of methodological naturalism, idiotically declaring it "closed" minded because it ignores consideration of the supernatural. They never mention that since, the supernatural is by definition unobservable, there is nothing of use to ignore but wish engendered fantasy.

One could spend months refuting all the foolish but deceptive arguments of creationists but the power of the wish to believe out of emotional need is very hard to break, indeed, resulting in this fact vs. faith confusion.

Harold Orndorff
Wed Feb 18 2009 16:04
So this is her argument against creationism? She calls it names and makes some unsupported assertions - none of which are arguments.
blackhorse
Wed Feb 18 2009 14:01
Just another example of those on the Socialist Left view Conservatism and Religion (Except Islam) - beliefs that should be shunned, denigrated and despised in college and university groupthink.. Accept Darwinism and nothing else on campus. Outside views or theories on how the universe was created will not be accepted, especially mentioning God. Intolerance on the Left shows no bounds, the Liberal Facism it promotes under the guise of "fairness" "diversity" and "multiculturalism". Further proof that college professors promote and display Liberalism and welcome no other viewpoints, just like those who are pushing for the Fairness Doctrine....Marxism at it's best........
Les Lane
Wed Feb 18 2009 12:15
Evolution is conservative (not a liberal) concept. It has been accepted in the scientific community for more than 130 years. Creationism is a reactionary concept which originated in the 16th century. It began to die out early in the 19th century and was gone, at least from the scientific community, by the end of the 19th century.
Sarah_Bellem
Wed Feb 18 2009 11:08
Dr Forrest has done some very important work and she is much kinder to the Discovery Instittute than they deserve! The DI is nothing more than a PAC that wants to bring good old time religion into your children's science classroom. As good politicians they morph and craft their message to seem innocuous and sincere. But they know what they are doing is dishonest. They are just modern charlatans.

They have no evidence to support their ideas and they have been debunked over and over by legitimate scholars.

concerned
Wed Feb 18 2009 02:59
Is she liberal in her views of creationism or is she just intolerant of other peoples perspectives?
josh
Wed Feb 18 2009 02:57
you don't see too many scientists killing each other over theory.






log out