Creating creationists: The influence of 'issues framing' on our understanding of public perceptions of clash narratives between evolutionary science and belief.

Clash narratives relating to evolutionary science and personal belief are a recurrent theme in media or public space discourse. However, a 2009 British Council poll undertaken in 10 countries worldwide shows that the perception of a necessary clash between evolutionary worldviews and belief in a God is a minority viewpoint. How then does the popular conception that there is an ongoing conflict between evolution and belief in God arise? One contributing factor is the framing and categorization of creationism and evolutionism within large-scale surveys for use within media campaigns. This article examines the issue framing within four polls conducted in the United Kingdom and internationally between 2008 and 2013. It argues that by ignoring the complexity and range of perspectives individuals hold, or by framing evolutionary science as atheistic, we are potentially creating 'creationists' - including 'Islamic creationists' - both figuratively and literally.

What science means to me: Understanding personal identification with (evolutionary) science using the sociology of (non)religion.

Within science and technology studies, there is an established tradition of examining publics' knowledge of, trust in, access to and engagement with science, but less attention has been paid to whether and why publics identify with science. While this is understandable given the field's interest in bridging gaps between publics and producers of scientific knowledge, it leaves unanswered questions about how science forms part of people's worldviews and fits into cultural politics and conflict. Based on 123 interviews and 16 focus groups with mixed religious and nonreligious publics and scientists in the United Kingdom and Canada, this article utilises approaches from the sociology of (non)religion to delineate varieties of science identification. It maps out 'practical', 'norm-based', 'civilisational' and 'existential' identifications and explores how these interrelate with people's social characteristics. The article illustrates how science identification is typically dependent on a constellation of cultural/political influences rather than just emerging out of interest in science.

Spirited dispute: the secret split between Wallace and Romanes.

Alfred Russel Wallace's role in prompting the original publication of "On the Origin of Species" is now generally acknowledged. Wallace is now widely recognised as 'Darwin's co-discoverer', but the role that he played in the development and promotion of Darwinism is more often overlooked. From the very beginning of their collaboration in 1858, there were important differences between the works of Wallace and Darwin. Within Darwin's lifetime, the two men also disagreed over several significant evolutionary debates, most notably the role that Natural Selection might play in evolution. Following Darwin's death in 1882, Wallace set about promoting his own version of 'Darwinism', but not without opposition. A rather ungentlemanly debate between Wallace and Darwin's chief disciple George John Romanes throws light on the contested nature of what it meant to be a Darwinian in the late nineteenth century.