GUESS THEY WERE WRONG!
There are probably quite a few reasons for this phenomena. Primarily the availability of any type of information we are interested in is now at our fingertips due to readily available internet access.
But, guess what else has been on the rise since 1995? Conversations about the intelligent design movement! Michael Behe’s book, Darwin’s Black Box was first published in ‘98, and it certainly shook up the scientific community.
Luckily, the internet has helped us search for the answers to our questions in regard to the many issues in this debate. This is an emotionally stirring controversy that drives a person to search out answers, and while searching for answers, it’s very hard not to get really excited about science and all the fascinating topics surrounding this debate. The controversial issues include so many different fields of science.
I’ve mentioned this quote in a comment section somewhere, but it is worth repeating. Richard Alexander, an evolutionist, once made an outstanding point that:
“No teacher should be dismayed at efforts to present creation as an alternative to evolution in biology courses; indeed, at this moment creation is the only alternative to evolution. Not only is this worth mentioning, but a comparison of the two alternatives can be an excellent exercise in logic and reason. Our primary goal as educators should be to teach students to think and such a comparison, particularly because it concerns an issue in which many have special interest or are even emotionally involved, may accomplish that purpose better than most others.”I know that is a fact in my case. The statistics show that women are less interested in scientific issues than men, which I would have to agree with. I never found science terribly interesting until I came upon these debate topics. Since that time, I’ve given up my romance novels and replaced them with science books and articles. Seriously...
-Richard D. Alexander, “Evolution, Creation, and Biology Teaching,” American Biology Teacher, Vol. 40, February 1978, p. 92.
To bad teachers can’t use this controversy to stir some interest in their students.
[Hat tip to Dave Scot at Uncommon Descent for pointing out the article.]