It appears that the United States is not the only country having a hard time accepting evolution. According to a report in Nature, a South Korean creationist campaign has achieved victory in its efforts to see specific examples of evolution removed from high school text books. Their breakthrough is part of a larger campaign to see evolutionary theory removed as much as possible from educational materials. 
 
 The campaign, which was led by the Society for Textbook Revise (STR), is aiming to delete the "error" of evolution from textbooks in order to "correct" students' views of the world. The group started a petition to remove references to 
 
 Advertisement 
 
 evolution from high school textbooks and it now appears that this strategy has worked. The South Korean Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST) announced that textbook publishers will revise editions that exclude examples of the evolution of the horse and the Archaeopteryx, which is an ancestor of modern day birds. 
 
 The announcement has shocked a number of biologists who complain that they were not consulted. According to Dayk Jan, an evolutionary scientist as Seoul National University, the South Korean ministry sent the petition directly to the publishing companies where they judged it for themselves. In its defense, STR claims that its group includes professors of biology and high-school science teachers. 
 
 Moreover, the creationist-minded group is looking to take the issue even further. According to the report in Nature: 
 
 Sponsored 
 
 The STR is also campaigning to remove content about "the evolution of humans" and "the adaptation of finch beaks based on habitat and mode of sustenance", a reference to one of the most famous observations in Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species. To back its campaign, the group highlights recent discoveries that Archaeopteryx is one of many feathered dinosaurs, and not necessarily an ancestor of all birds. Exploiting such debates over the lineage of species "is a typical strategy of creation scientists to attack the teaching of evolution itself", says Joonghwan Jeon, an evolutionary psychologist at Kyung Hee University in Yongin. The STR is an independent offshoot of the Korea Association for Creation Research (KACR), according to KACR spokesman Jungyeol Han. Thanks in part to the KACR's efforts, creation science - which seeks to provide evidence in support of the creation myth described in the Book of Genesis - has had a growing influence in South Korea, although the STR itself has distanced itself from such doctrines. In early 2008, the KACR scored a hit with a successful exhibition at Seoul Land, one of the country's leading amusement parks. According to the group, the exhibition attracted more than 116,000 visitors in three months, and the park is now in talks to create a year-long exhibition. 
 
 South Korea's strong creationist sentiment is apparently due in part to its large Christian population. When it comes to evolutionary skepticism, surveys show that South Korea's numbers are comparable to those of the United States. Nearly one-third of South Koreans don't believe in evolution, claiming that there isn't enough scientific evidence to support it, or that it contradicted their religious beliefs. Others simply stated that they didn't understand the theory — an indication that evolutionary biology is insufficiently taught in that country. In fact, there are only 5-10 evolutionary scientists in South Korea who teach the theory of evolution in undergraduate and graduate schools. 
 
 A recent gallup poll in the United States indicated that around 40% of Americans do not believe that humans evolved from less advanced forms of life. That contrasts to 59% acceptance in Canada, and upwards of 80% in some European countries. 
 
 To counter the work of SRT, Dayk Jang is now organizing a group of experts, including evolutionary biologists and theologians who believe in evolution. Their ultimate goal is to improve the teaching of evolution in the classroom and in broader public life. 
 
 Image via Shutterstock / Maridav. Body image via Wikipedia ||||| Klaus Honal/Naturfoto Honal/CORBIS 
 
 Mention creationism, and many scientists think of the United States, where efforts to limit the teaching of evolution have made headway in a couple of states1. But the successes are modest compared with those in South Korea, where the anti-evolution sentiment seems to be winning its battle with mainstream science. 
 
 A petition to remove references to evolution from high-school textbooks claimed victory last month after the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST) revealed that many of the publishers would produce revised editions that exclude examples of the evolution of the horse or of avian ancestor Archaeopteryx. The move has alarmed biologists, who say that they were not consulted. “The ministry just sent the petition out to the publishing companies and let them judge,” says Dayk Jang, an evolutionary scientist at Seoul National University. 
 
 The campaign was led by the Society for Textbook Revise (STR), which aims to delete the “error” of evolution from textbooks to “correct” students’ views of the world, according to the society’s website. The society says that its members include professors of biology and high-school science teachers. 
 
 The STR is also campaigning to remove content about “the evolution of humans” and “the adaptation of finch beaks based on habitat and mode of sustenance”, a reference to one of the most famous observations in Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species. To back its campaign, the group highlights recent discoveries that Archaeopteryx is one of many feathered dinosaurs, and not necessarily an ancestor of all birds2. Exploiting such debates over the lineage of species “is a typical strategy of creation scientists to attack the teaching of evolution itself”, says Joonghwan Jeon, an evolutionary psychologist at Kyung Hee University in Yongin. 
 
 The STR is an independent offshoot of the Korea Association for Creation Research (KACR), according to KACR spokesman Jungyeol Han. Thanks in part to the KACR’s efforts, creation science — which seeks to provide evidence in support of the creation myth described in the Book of Genesis — has had a growing influence in South Korea, although the STR itself has distanced itself from such doctrines. In early 2008, the KACR scored a hit with a successful exhibition at Seoul Land, one of the country’s leading amusement parks. According to the group, the exhibition attracted more than 116,000 visitors in three months, and the park is now in talks to create a year-long exhibition. 
 
 Even the nation’s leading science institute — the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology — has a creation science display on campus. “The exhibition was set up by scientists who believed in creation science back in 1993,” says Gab-duk Jang, a pastor of the campus church. The institute also has a thriving Research Association for Creation Science, run by professors and students, he adds. 
 
 Antipathy to evolution 
 
 In a 2009 survey conducted for the South Korean documentary The Era of God and Darwin, almost one-third of the respondents didn’t believe in evolution. Of those, 41% said that there was insufficient scientific evidence to support it; 39% said that it contradicted their religious beliefs; and 17% did not understand the theory. The numbers approach those in the United States, where a survey by the research firm Gallup has shown that around 40% of Americans do not believe that humans evolved from less advanced forms of life. 
 
 “The ministry just sent the petition out to the publishing companies and let them judge.” 
 
 The roots of the South Korean antipathy to evolution are unclear, although Jeon suggests that they are partly “due to strong Christianity in the country”. About half of South Korea’s citizens practice a religion, mostly split between Christianity and Buddhism. 
 
 However, a survey of trainee teachers in the country concluded that religious belief was not a strong determinant of their acceptance of evolution3. It also found that 40% of biology teachers agreed with the statement that “much of the scientific community doubts if evolution occurs”; and half disagreed that “modern humans are the product of evolutionary processes”. 
 
 Until now, says Dayk Jang, the scientific community has done little to combat the anti-evolution sentiment. “The biggest problem is that there are only 5–10 evolutionary scientists in the country who teach the theory of evolution in undergraduate and graduate schools,” he says. Having seen the fierce debates over evolution in the United States, he adds, some scientists also worry that engaging with creationists might give creationist views more credibility among the public. 
 
 Silence is not the answer, says Dayk Jang. He is now organizing a group of experts, including evolutionary scientists and theologians who believe in evolution, to counter the STR’s campaign by working to improve the teaching of evolution in the classroom, and in broader public life. ||||| With the courts repeatedly finding that creationism is a religious view rather than a scientific theory, creationists re-branded their belief as "intelligent design" in an effort to divorce the Christian overtones of creationism from the belief in a universe designed by a creator. The 2005 case, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, struck down the teaching of intelligent design in classrooms in York County, Pa., with Judge John E. Jones III issuing 139-page decision finding that intelligent design was just creationism by another name and violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Despite the history of court rulings and the increasing acceptance among Americans of the theory of evolution, state legislatures across the country are continuing to push through bills advocating the teaching of creationism, or some derivative, in public schools. As of April 2011, nine bills concerning the teaching of evolution in seven states have been proposed. These bills often seek for classrooms to discuss "non-scientific alternatives" to evolution rather than out-rightly advocating the teaching of creationism. 
 
 A petroglyph in a Utah cave that resembles a dinosaur has also been used by creationists as evidence of coexisted between humans and dinosaurs. An examination by researchers has shown that the drawing is in fact a composite of two non-dinosaur drawings as well as a mud stain, although at least one creationist has taken issue with the method the scientists used to examine the petroglyph. 
 
 With courts continually striking down the teaching of creationism as espousing a religious perspective in public education, creationists have worked to develop their belief as a legitimate alternative to evolutionary theory. Some creationists have even documented what they describe as scientific proof of young Earth creationism. On this site in Glen Rose, Texas, creationists claim that human footprints can be seen right beside dinosaur tracks, proof that both dinosaurs and humans coexisted. Further scientific study, however, has shown that the purported human footprints are in fact the result of a combination of elongated dinosaur tracks, erosion, and some doctored specimens of loose rock. 
 
 The debate between evolutionary theory and creationism is not only about a rivalry between two competing theories; there's also a dispute among creationists about the proper interpretation of the book of Genesis. Liberal creationists argue that Darwin's theory of evolution, and subsequent scientific followups relating to the age of the universe, are true and accurate. They believe that the universe and all of creation formed and evolved over time, but that God was the mechanism through which the process began. These are called old Earth creationists. There are also progressive creationists, who believe that evolution did play a role in the formation of life today, but that God intervened periodically to create new life, rather than all at once some 13 billion years ago. Finally, there are the young Earth creationists, who date the origins of the universe from anywhere between 6,000 years ago and 10,000 years ago. Young Earth creationists are those typically identified with the creationist movement in general. Their beliefs essentially have nothing in common with Darwin's theory. In this photo, a visitor surveys the exhibition at the Museum of Creation and Earth History in Santee, Calif. It is one of several creationist museums around the country that openly educates the public about young Earth creationism. 
 
 Prior to the Scopes trial, creationism was widely taught in schools and accepted as fact. Even in the aftermath of the Scopes trial, it remained illegal to teach evolution in Tennessee. In the 1968 case of Epperson v. Arkansas, the Supreme Court ruled that banning the teaching of evolution was unconstitutional since it meant public education would be tailored to religious preferences. Since evolution had to be taught in public school following this decision, a new effort was underway in states across the country: affording equal time to the teaching of evolution and creationism in classes, which almost suggests an equal sense of scientific viability with the two sides. In several subsequent cases, such as McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education and Edwards v. Aguillard, courts ruled against efforts to force public school teachers to offer "balanced treatment" to evolution and creationism. 
 
 Although the Scopes trial was one of the most famous challenges to evolution, it was by no means the first or the last word in the debate between theologians advocating creationism and scientists who support the theory of evolution. In fact, even before Darwin published the "Origin of Species" in 1859 (and his follow-up, "The Descent of Man," wherein he tracks the evolution of humans specifically), critics, primarily driven by religious interpretations of the origin of the universe and specifically humankind, have challenged any views outside of the Biblical interpretation of creation. The notion that humans had descended from "a hairy, tailed quadruped, probably arboreal in its habits, and an inhabitant of the Old World," as Darwin wrote, was deemed radical in its time and met with strong resistance. Anti-evolution critics and prominent theologians frequently accused evolution supporters of denying the existence of God or the human soul, despite the fact that Darwin had described himself as an agnostic -- a term coined by one of Darwin's earliest supporters, Thomas Huxley -- and not an atheist. There were, however, early attempts to reconcile the religious view with the scientific one. Published in 1860, "Essays and Reviews" is a collection of seven essays that collectively opposes a literal interpretation of Scripture in response to Darwinism while holding God as the highest authority in the universe. Even with this seemingly conciliatory argument, a couple of the authors were accused of being heretics in 1960. 
 
 Long before the Scopes trial caused a stir in the United States and brought the public attention to the theory of evolution, a debate at the British Association of Oxford in 1860, which featured Huxley and Bishop Samuel Wilberforce, an long-time opponent of Darwinism, caused an uproar among educated elites in the United Kingdom. During the debate, Wilberforce famously asked Huxley whether it was through his grandmother or grandfather that he claimed to be descended from a monkey. Huxley famously retorted that he is more ashamed to be connected with a man who used his talents to hide the truth than he would with a monkey. The debate served to popularize Darwin's theory of evolution within academic and scientific circles. 
 
 In this photograph, Darrow questions Bryan directly, wherein Darrow repeatedly pressed Bryan to apply scientific standards to Biblical scripture. Prior to this exchange, Judge John T. Raulston, who appeared to favor the prosecution throughout the trial, had deemed all of the defense's scientific witnesses inadmissible. After several heated exchanges, Bryan's testimony was also expunged from the record by Raulston the following day. On July 21, Scopes was pronounced guilty, and fined $100. Although the prosecutors had upheld the Butler Act, the decision would be reversed in appeal, and the case turned the tide against government efforts to restrict the teaching of evolution in public schools. In 1967, Tennessee repealed the Butler Act. 
 
 The trial was not about a simple violation of a law, or even a debate about free speech and First Amendment rights. Rather, the proceedings were about the clash between two seemingly diametrically opposed worldviews: creationism and evolution. On the one side, there were the fundamentalists, who espoused the Biblical view of creation and were firmly anti-evolution. This group found a champion in William Jennings Bryan (right), a skilled orator and former presidential candidate. Bryan had long been involved in the anti-evolution movement and had given several speeches and lectures against Darwinism. Modernists, as they were called, advocated Darwin's theory of evolution. Clarence Darrow (left), a fierce litigator with a reputation of fighting for the underdog, represented this side. 
 
 Eighty-six years ago, high school coach and occasional substitute teacher John Scopes went on trial for violating the Butler Act, a law passed in Tennessee in 1925 prohibiting public school educators from teaching their students about the theory of evolution. The case, The State of Tennessee v. Scopes, drew intense national scrutiny. Prior to the trial, the American Civil Liberties Union offered to defend any schoolteacher that violated the act. After reading instructing his class in Darwin's theory of evolution, Scopes proved a willing defendant. (Scopes even encouraged his own students to testify against him.) Dubbed the "Monkey Trial" by H.L. Mencken, who covered part of the proceedings for the Baltimore Sun, the case attracted a media frenzy, and led both the prosecution and the defense to recruit high-profile representatives for their side. In this photo, Scopes awaits the verdict on the final day of the trial, July 21, 1925. 
 
 A selection of pages from "Harmonia Macrocsmica" by Andreas Cellarius, printed in 1708 depicting the Copernican sun-centered (heliocentric) system of the universe. Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus discovered that the Earth orbits the sun way back in the 16th century. 
 
 Dear Science Communication Professionals: We have a problem. 
 
 Earlier this month, the Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham creationism “debate” received a disproportionate amount of press coverage. Considering that there really is no debate to be had when it comes to the science of evolution, for bad or for worse, Nye faced a hostile audience at the Creationist Museum in Kentucky. He hoped to score some scientific points against Ham’s literal translation of the Bible and his absurd assertion that the world was created in 6 days and that the universe is 6,000 years old. 
 
 In my opinion, (an opinion shared by other science communicators), the Nye vs. Ham debate did little for science outreach. It was all about who sounded more convincing and only gave creationists some free advertising. 
 
 VIDEO: Should Bill Nye Debate a Creationist? 
 
 And then, today, the National Science Foundation (NSF) delivered news of a pretty shocking poll result: around one in four Americans (yes, that's 25 percent) are unaware that the Earth orbits the sun. Let’s repeat that: One in four Americans — that represents one quarter of the population — when asked probably the most basic question in science (except, perhaps, “Is the Earth flat?” Hint: No.), got the answer incorrect. Suddenly I realized why the Nye vs. Ham debate was so popular. 
 
 But wait! I hear you cry, perhaps the NSF poll was flawed? Perhaps the poll sample was too small? Sadly not. The NSF poll, which is used to gauge U.S. scientific literacy every year, surveyed 2,200 people who were asked 10 questions about physical and biological sciences. On average, the score was 6.5 out of 10 -- barely a passing grade. But for me personally, the fact that 26 percent of the respondents were unaware the Earth revolves around the sun shocked me to the core. 
 
 Perhaps I’m expecting too much of the U.S. education system? Perhaps this is just an anomaly; a statistical blip? But then, like the endless deluge of snow that is currently choking the East Coast, another outcome of the same poll appeared on the foggy horizon of scientific illiteracy: The majority of young Americans think astrology is a science. 
 
 What the what? Have I been transported back to the Dark Ages? Astrology, of course, is not a science; it is a spiritual belief system at best and at worst a pseudoscience driven by charlatans and the tabloid press. The positions of the stars and planets in the sky do not affect my mood and my horoscope has little bearing on the kind of person I am. Even in China, one of the birthplaces of astrology, 92 percent of the people know that astrology is bunk. Really America, get your act together. 
 
 Unfortunately, if we are to use the “Is astrology a science?” as a litmus test for scientific literacy, things are looking grim. In 2004, 66 percent of the American public said astrology was bunk. Every year since then, that majority has slipped. By 2012, only 55 percent of Americans considered astrology “not at all scientific.” Probably of most concern is the fact that only 42 percent of young respondents aged between 18-24 said astrology is “not at all scientific.” 
 
 ANALYSIS: Is Astrology Rubbish? Don’t Get Me Started 
 
 But there is a small glimmer of hope. According to the same NSF poll, the vast majority of Americans seem to love science. Although they returned woeful test results, it seems America is hungry to learn about science and think that science funding is essential for the well-being of the nation. But I’m now concerned about what America thinks science really is, especially in light of that astrology result. Also, just because the U.S. public wants to learn, can they find the institutions that will actually teach real science? 
 
 Schools across the nation are currently facing the unthinkable notion of teaching creationism alongside evolution in science classrooms. The fact that religion is given the same standing as science is not only absurd, it's a fundamental institutional failing where children (who may be excited to learn about science) will grow up with a second-rate education, neglecting decades of scientific knowledge in favor of pseudo-scientific religious agendas. 
 
 For a nation that prides itself on science and discovery, it will be a tragedy on a national scale if fundamental science is undercut by superstition and the bad policies it inspires. 
 
 You can read detailed results of the NSF poll here (PDF).
– A group opposed to the teaching of evolution has won a major victory in the Deep South—of the Korean peninsula. A creationist group has successfully petitioned South Korean publishers to remove several references to evolution from high school textbooks, Nature reports. The group—set up by the US Institute for Creation Research in the '80s as Christianity spread across South Korea—says it wants the "error" of evolution removed from textbooks to "correct" students' view of the world. Biologists complain that the government did not consult them on the issue, but merely forwarded the group's petition to publishers. "When something like this comes to fruition, the scientific community can be caught flat-footed," a director at the National Center for Science Education tells the New York Daily News. "Scientists are not by their nature political." Polls show that some 40% of South Koreans don't accept the theory of evolution, about the same proportion as in the US, but much greater than in Canada and in many European countries, io9 notes.