State frees teachers to criticize evolution

State frees teachers to criticize evolution (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events

Message

SILVERNAME -> State frees teachers to criticize evolution (6/30/2008 12:46:28 AM)
Global warming, origins of life, cloning also may be scrutinized -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: June 28, 2008 12:30 am Eastern © 2008 WorldNetDaily Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal this week signed into law the Louisiana Science Education Act, which allows school districts to permit teachers to present evidence, analysis and critique of evolution and other prevalent scientific theories in public school classrooms. The law came to the governor's desk after overwhelming support in the legislature, including a unanimous vote in the state's Senate and a 93-4 vote in the House. The act has been criticized by some as an attempt to insert religion into science education and hailed by others as a blow for academic freedom in the face of pressure to ignore flaws in politically correct scientific theories. Robert Crowther, director of communications for The Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank on science and culture, called the act necessary. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=68149

cybrjewls -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (6/30/2008 3:07:03 AM)
Halleluyah! May God be praised! However, the quest for science fact usually restricts itself to the observable phenomenon evident in a laboratory?! I would like to know what caused the Big Bang, but some would call that faith. Some have said that at time t=0, infinite mass existed before the force (f=ma or Energy=mass X speed of light squared ("Let there Be Light")) came to produce the explosion which we have a general prophetic succession of events given through the Holy Scriptures of God Almighty. quote: ORIGINAL: SILVERNAME Global warming, origins of life, cloning also may be scrutinized -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: June 28, 2008 12:30 am Eastern © 2008 WorldNetDaily Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal this week signed into law the Louisiana Science Education Act, which allows school districts to permit teachers to present evidence, analysis and critique of evolution and other prevalent scientific theories in public school classrooms. The law came to the governor's desk after overwhelming support in the legislature, including a unanimous vote in the state's Senate and a 93-4 vote in the House. The act has been criticized by some as an attempt to insert religion into science education and hailed by others as a blow for academic freedom in the face of pressure to ignore flaws in politically correct scientific theories. Robert Crowther, director of communications for The Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank on science and culture, called the act necessary. http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=68149

Veritas -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (6/30/2008 9:43:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cybrjewls Halleluyah! May God be praised! However, the quest for science fact usually restricts itself to the observable phenomenon evident in a laboratory?! I would like to know what caused the Big Bang, but some would call that faith. Some have said that at time t=0, infinite mass existed before the force (f=ma or Energy=mass X speed of light squared ("Let there Be Light")) came to produce the explosion which we have a general prophetic succession of events given through the Holy Scriptures of God Almighty. I would like to know where, in the law of Moses, it is written that animals may not be cloned; though. Only the unblemished flawless ones were acceptable for sacrificial purposes; however. It is written: nothing will be impossible for them; and with God all things are possible by faith which can move mountains in the spiritual and on earth. I think this is deplorable! We are on different sides of the issue, but we both recognize this for exactly what it is -- an attempt to bring creationism/ID into the public school classroom through the back door as it were. This is a violation of the Constitution. There will be a court battle. The ID/creationists will lose yet again. The taxpayers will pay for the court costs. But the real losers will be the children. Louisiana has one of the worst education systems in the country. Instead of trying to make it better, the legislators are wasting their time, fighting a battle that is already lost. Dr. Forrest was an expert witness at the Dover trial. Click HERE for her analysis of the Bill. Note that this is a .pdf file.

turtleman -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (6/30/2008 10:28:45 PM)
It's about time someone brought evolution and other theories into question. For years students have been spoon fed evoluton even though it is just a theory. A theory that has been taught as if it were fact. Actually it takes more faith to believe in evolution than in God. Why explore all possibilities in the classroom. What are critics of this law afraid of? Maybe that their stranglehold on education my be broken.

Marcus. -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 12:44:11 AM)
There is no reason to assume that ID/creationism is being brought in. I was taught the problems with evolution and the various changes to the theory in the attempts to match the fossil record better. Why shouldn't students be taught this?

SavedByGraceMD -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 1:02:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Veritas quote: ORIGINAL: cybrjewls Halleluyah! May God be praised! However, the quest for science fact usually restricts itself to the observable phenomenon evident in a laboratory?! I would like to know what caused the Big Bang, but some would call that faith. Some have said that at time t=0, infinite mass existed before the force (f=ma or Energy=mass X speed of light squared ("Let there Be Light")) came to produce the explosion which we have a general prophetic succession of events given through the Holy Scriptures of God Almighty. I would like to know where, in the law of Moses, it is written that animals may not be cloned; though. Only the unblemished flawless ones were acceptable for sacrificial purposes; however. It is written: nothing will be impossible for them; and with God all things are possible by faith which can move mountains in the spiritual and on earth. I think this is deplorable! We are on different sides of the issue, but we both recognize this for exactly what it is -- an attempt to bring creationism/ID into the public school classroom through the back door as it were. This is a violation of the Constitution. There will be a court battle. The ID/creationists will lose yet again. The taxpayers will pay for the court costs. But the real losers will be the children. Louisiana has one of the worst education systems in the country. Instead of trying to make it better, the legislators are wasting their time, fighting a battle that is already lost. Dr. Forrest was an expert witness at the Dover trial. Click HERE for her analysis of the Bill. Note that this is a .pdf file. How so is this a violation of the constitution ? You do know that separation of church and state is not constitutional right?

cybrjewls -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 1:07:38 AM)
Questioning scientific theory is evolutionary science. If one only takes theories on faith without sufficient supporting evidences to base their reasonings upon; then that is bad science fact; but sound science faith. Keep science faith out of our classrooms; instead; by teaching sound questioning attitudes towards theory so that science theory can evolve as it was meant to; in precept. We are still facing science facts with our eyes clothed with an 'evolutionary' faith viewpoint that disregards any questioning of the theory itself. That, in and of itself, is not what science is about. What a shock, the devout one of the sacred cow of false assumptions and belief that there is no God has a moral Judgment to offer us once more. Separate your faith from science fact is what I propose as an egalitarian approach to what you object to.

Marcus. -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 1:10:16 AM)
The First Amendment prevents the Federal government from establishing a national church such as European monarchies had. Separation of church and state is from Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802 over concerns of interference from the government. Jefferson assured them that the government was prevented from doing that. That is what he meant by separation of church and state.

cybrjewls -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 1:18:35 AM)
Amen. An 1800's theory that was stretched out of proportion and stolen from an underling by Darwin does not preclude one from reasonable discussion to assertain new and emerging theories to explain natural phenomenon and processes. Otherwise, we are no longer doing science; we are performing faith based liturgy of the golden calf of pseudo-science religion (Marx said: 'the opiate of the people is the religion of the people' as is written is revelation the maddening wine of adulteries). This is not what sound scientific reasoning, precepts, and thinking proposes. One must continue to perform one's duties in research to hone arcane theories full of overgeneralizations to fit what is actually there. The Emporer has no clothes on so that one child would not be able to see. Thus, we must evolve our science as Darwin as hypothesized. Further advances in scientific understanding were gained by those who were thinking outside or ahead of the circumstantial time periods that they lived in. Galileo... et al. Even Pythagorus lived like a hermit because of the advant garde nature of the wealth of understanding that he respected more than the soci-politically 'correctness' of the time in which he lived. What hypocrisy is this that someone would propose that things evolve in science; while those who claim faith in evolution as theory do not practice it? quote: ORIGINAL: turtleman It's about time someone brought evolution and other theories into question. For years students have been spoon fed evoluton even though it is just a theory. A theory that has been taught as if it were fact. Actually it takes more faith to believe in evolution than in God. Why explore all possibilities in the classroom. What are critics of this law afraid of? Maybe that their stranglehold on education my be broken.

Veritas -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 2:07:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marcus. There is no reason to assume that ID/creationism is being brought in. I was taught the problems with evolution and the various changes to the theory in the attempts to match the fossil record better. Why shouldn't students be taught this? Did you read Dr. Forrest's analysis of the bill? Even without reading her analysis, cybrjewls realized what the bill was about. It is obvious what they are trying to do. No one is fooled. quote: ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD How so is this a violation of the constitution ? You do know that separation of church and state is not constitutional right? I am aware that the words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the First Amendment or anywhere else in the US Constitution. quote: ORIGINAL: Marcus. The First Amendment prevents the Federal government from establishing a national church such as European monarchies had. Separation of church and state is from Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802 over concerns of interference from the government. Jefferson assured them that the government was prevented from doing that. That is what he meant by separation of church and state. You have your interpretation of the First Amendment. I have a different interpretation. The authors of the Constitution foresaw this and established the system of courts to resolve the differences. It is the courts' interpretations that matter -- not your interpretation nor mine. Promoting religion in public schools is a violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment as interpreted by the courts. The courts have consistently ruled that the teaching of ID/creationism is promoting religion and a violation of the First Amendment. The constitutionality of this bill will be challenged in court, and the ID/creationists will be defeated yet again, at taxpayers' expense.

Jhud -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 3:38:18 AM)
Yes, despite the the atheists and the courts, free speech and free thought will find a way.

Marcus. -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 9:25:12 AM)
To say that allowing science teachers to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of evolution is allowing ID is more than a stretch. I always thought that open debate and exploration of a theory was part of the scientific method. Claiming that the debate is over and no discussion of the weaknesses of the theory is allowed sounds more like it is a philosophy than science. BTW the interpretation I mentioned of the First Amendment is what the Founders believed. It doesn't take very much study to find that out.

Marcus. -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 9:39:29 AM)
Here is the scientific method: Define the question Gather information and resources (observe) Form hypothesis Perform experiment and collect data Analyze data Interpret data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypothesis Publish results Retest (frequently done by other scientists) Seems to me not allowing a discussion of the weaknesses of any theory short circuits the method and destroys the ability to continue any study or research. It prevents us from following through on the last 4 steps of the method.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 10:01:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SILVERNAME Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal this week signed into law the Louisiana Science Education Act, which allows school districts to permit teachers to present evidence, analysis and critique of evolution and other prevalent scientific theories in public school classrooms. . . . "And that's what I like about the South" . . . Obviously the "evidence, analysis and critique" need not scientifically pass muster.

Sophie11 -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 10:10:33 AM)
I am absolutely amazed at the people who take such issue with this. What is the problem? What is it about this that gets you so worried?

tafkam -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 10:14:05 AM)
I agree...what's so bad about teaching BOTH views as theory in the classroom? Or does that make too much sense?

1dblthnk02 -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 10:21:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tafkam I agree...what's so bad about teaching BOTH views as theory in the classroom? Or does that make too much sense? You're right, maybe this idea should catch on. How about other areas as well? How about we teach Ebonics along side of standard grammar in order to present BOTH views of English? Sound good to you, or does that make too much sense?

tafkam -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 10:26:24 AM)
Nice try, but no dice......creationism and evolution are both at their core, theories. Ebonics is an example of bad English so it would hardly qualify as a legitimate course. What is it about the theory of creation that scares the left so much?

1dblthnk02 -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 10:40:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tafkam Nice try, but no dice......creationism and evolution are both at their core, theories. No, creationism is not a theory; it is a theology. quote: Ebonics is an example of bad English so it would hardly qualify as a legitimate course. It is considered by many linguists (granted, most of them are black) to be a sub-language category. Sub-languages are a natural result of any language spoken by isolated groups in disparate locations. It is part of the- dare I say it?- evolution of the English language. quote: What is it about the theory of creation that scares the left so much? Most of us find it frightening, or at least very angering, when our children are taught stupidity.

Marcus. -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 10:45:00 AM)
So you're calling all of us who believe in God stupid now? [;)]

tafkam -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 10:51:27 AM)
quote: No, creationism is not a theory; it is a theology. I've met non-Christians who subscribe to creationism....it cannot be theology if no deity is involved. quote: Most of us find it frightening, or at least very angering, when our children are taught stupidity. So I guess that whole "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth..." part in Scripture is lost on you, right?

Sophie11 -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 11:44:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 quote: What is it about the theory of creation that scares the left so much? Most of us find it frightening, or at least very angering, when our children are taught stupidity. And most of the rest of us find the "big bang" idea to be stupidity. What's wrong with letting different theories be heard? No one is saying they are going to take the other teachings away, so what is it that causes you so much anger?

StephK -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 11:50:20 AM)
What's wrong with advocating critical thinking? It's not just about evolution. Kids should be taught how to look at all sides of an issue and then make up their own minds what they believe is true. It's that simple.

cybrjewls -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/1/2008 12:42:37 PM)
Veritas, the emergence of evolving interpretation is given to one court to decide in this Great Country as you have said. It is a matter of legal weighing given to the seated ones on the Highest Court Governing our Constitutional matters. Why should one accept that science will not evolve to fit the facts in interpretation, also? Therefore, some are motivated by the separation of Mosque or Temple and state precept. Why say that there are no other religions? How ignorant of Jefferson, how myopic!? Then it is apparent that the circumstances that Jefferson and the Signers of the Declaration were facing were somewhat different. Rote memorization of facts and regurgitation of past thinking is not what science and learning is about. In court there is a legal precept known as stare decisis 'let the decisions stand'. However, advances and changes in the construct of our society necessitate that certain decisions be weighed carefully regarding these changes to allow freer exchanges of ideas and theories that can be drawn upon by the scientific community; as a whole. quote: ORIGINAL: Veritas quote: ORIGINAL: Marcus. There is no reason to assume that ID/creationism is being brought in. I was taught the problems with evolution and the various changes to the theory in the attempts to match the fossil record better. Why shouldn't students be taught this? Did you read Dr. Forrest's analysis of the bill? Even without reading her analysis, cybrjewls realized what the bill was about. It is obvious what they are trying to do. No one is fooled. quote: ORIGINAL: SavedByGraceMD How so is this a violation of the constitution ? You do know that separation of church and state is not constitutional right? I am aware that the words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the First Amendment or anywhere else in the US Constitution. quote: ORIGINAL: Marcus. The First Amendment prevents the Federal government from establishing a national church such as European monarchies had. Separation of church and state is from Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802 over concerns of interference from the government. Jefferson assured them that the government was prevented from doing that. That is what he meant by separation of church and state. You have your interpretation of the First Amendment. I have a different interpretation. The authors of the Constitution foresaw this and established the system of courts to resolve the differences. It is the courts' interpretations that matter -- not your interpretation nor mine. Promoting religion in public schools is a violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment as interpreted by the courts. The courts have consistently ruled that the teaching of ID/creationism is promoting religion and a violation of the First Amendment. The constitutionality of this bill will be challenged in court, and the ID/creationists will be defeated yet again, at taxpayers' expense.

iluvatar -> RE: State frees teachers to criticize evolution (7/2/2008 3:47:43 AM)
quote: And most of the rest of us find the "big bang" idea to be stupidity. If that's the case, I suspect you know very little about the Big Bang Theory, which is ok - most people know very little about it. It actually entails quite a number of fascinating line of study (mostly within astronomy and physics) that, when looked at without bias, clearly and sensibly point towards a ~14B year old, expanding universe. quote: What's wrong with letting different theories be heard? No one is saying they are going to take the other teachings away, so what is it that causes you so much anger? It sounds like a great idea, at first, but is it really? The critiques of evolution, big bang theory, and creationism entail many different fields of study (biology, archeaology, geology, astronomy, physics, chemistry, etc) and despite conventional YEC practice, accurate, worthwhile rebuttals often require fairly in depth understanding of these disciplines as well as the associated mathematics. It's unlikely that a high school science teacher would be adequately prepared to properly cover this subject (even amongst us nuts in the Science forum, it's rare that anybody has a grasp on more than two of the related sciences). There's really no way that the two sides could be presented well enough in a high school-level science class that kids could be equipped to decide for themselves which theory is best supported by the evidence. quote: What's wrong with advocating critical thinking? It's not just about evolution. Kids should be taught how to look at all sides of an issue and then make up their own minds what they believe is true. It's that simple. Yes, that's true. But high school is generally used to provide students with an introductory survey of a variety of topics, not to get them embroiled in debates about various fringe theories. Mentioning of the debate is fine, but do any of us believe that's really all this is intended to do - to allow teachers to discuss the debate as a "current event" and not to allow them to promote creationism as a valid alternative? quote: ORIGINAL: tafkam I agree...what's so bad about teaching BOTH views as theory in the classroom? Or does that make too much sense? Aside from the difficulties I've already laid out, creationism really enjoys almost zero supporting physical evidence. I know that sounds like a typical hand-wave-dismissal and I know it'll probably prompt a link to one of the various "top ten reasons to believe in YEC" websites, but it's true. Scientists have known for a long time that the evidence points towards an old earth with creatures sharing common lineage, but they've done a very poor job of educating the public about the reasons why. Certain evangelists, however, have exploited this market, targetting only the scientifically-illiterate public with what seem like perfectly legitimate rebuttals. The problem is that under scientific scrutiny, the vast majority of these arguments crumble. How much time do you want science classes to devote to weakly supported fringe theories? -Dan.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI