Education and Evolution

M

MaTTo

Registered Senior Member
TOPEKA, Kan. - The Kansas Board of Education has approved new standards for teaching science in public schools that critics say strips evolution from its accepted place at the center of biological studies.

What have we done!?!?!

Is any body else here (blessed with some intelligence) troubled to hear this?

MaTTo
 
To be honest, I think it is the beginning of the end, once you cross the line between church and state the way to the churche-state lies open ! What they are doing in effect is preferring the teachings of one religion above all others and thus undermining the fundamental principle of freedom of religion.
Evolution theory is based on facts only and admids that there are some parts that still need further examination like any scientific theory. Creationism is mainly based on the bible which is a religious book and speaks of a certain truth that is now hold (in Kansas) in more esteem then the truth found in Boeddism for example.
I hope that this dissision can be turned on federal level. In Europe the American school system isn't looked upon with high regards but if we hear things like that our opinion drops even lower !

------------------
we are midgets standing on the backs of giants,
Plato
 
As much as I hate to come to their defense, the decision of the board of education does not directly impact the schools. Evolution was merely removed from required state-administered proficiency tests. This does not stop evolution from being taught in the classrooms, nor does it ban textbooks that include chapters on evolution from public schools. In fact, Texan schools would be rather stupid to exclude evolution from their curricula, since it would put their graduates at a disadvantage in higher educational institutions.

That said, the entire incident is rather sordid, and I heartily agree that it drops the image of American primary education down to unprecedented lows. But, I am sorry to lament, this is a decade of conservative triumph in a country that has always been at the avantgarde of innovation. The growing pace of change must be too much for the staid old coots in power.

What bothers me even more about the present American situation is that the political forces at large are defocusing social welfare and beginning once again to overemphasize egotism and the supposed virtues of Laissez Faire capitalism. It is the growing social inequalities and disproportionalities in allottment of power, and most importantly, opportunity, that especially concern me at this time.

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

[This message has been edited by Boris (edited August 17, 1999).]
 
Geez, get a clue. You guys think that religious people are so bad. Listen to yourselves. You're freaks! How about this theory...that evolution, as a theory for creation, should not be taught as "religion", or as fact, because it can't be proven??????????????????? Excuse me Boris, but aren't you the one who's sooooooo into proving everything? Then prove that humans came out of a pool of slime then. They're smart for not teaching it, because it hasn't been proven. Could be taught as a theory, though. And what are you guys freaking out about anyway. It's not like they are teaching Divine creation in the schools, they're just not refuting it now. Wimps...can't take any of your own damn medicine can you?

------------------
God loves you and so do I!
 
My dearest Lori,

Allow me to pause a minute while I roll-up my sleeves. The hypocritical statements of your last post are way beyond reason.

Number one. You challenge the validity of evolution and call it only a theory. However, the criticisms you put forth are the same tripe that many churches put forth. Did you swallow these ideas whole-or did you think about them at all?

Number two. Fact: evolutionary biology has been observed at many levels by many independent and seperate groups. The fact that you wish someone to 'prove' something not only shows your complete misunderstanding of science and scientific philosophy, but is also hypocritical because creationism (by definition) must accepted on faith.

Number three. While evolution is a fact, the origin of species is still quite a matter of hot debate. Therefore, whether humans evolved from slime is not a question of evolution, but of speciation.

Lastly. For someone whose signature is 'God loves you and so do I', you show little respect for opinions that differ from your own. Is this following the tenets of your respective religion?


------------------
Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.
-Mark Twain
 
Last time I checked, Evolution has never been taught as religion. It has always been explicitly cast as a scientific theory, on par with Newtonian mechanics or inorganic chemistry which are also part of grade school curriculum.

The fact that some Texan board of education dropped evolution does not phase me a bit; it is certainly no threat to the science. However, I am quite ashamed that a group of supposedly educated citizens of my country would pull such a politically-charged and exquisitely boneheaded move when it comes to public policy at the core of our country's future.

I think Plato has a very important point about separation of church and state, and freedom of religion. Both of these principles have been trampled in this case.

------------------
I am; therefore I think.
 
Hey Pookums,

Get a grip, ok? If I had a nickle for everytime I had to convince someone on this board that, YES, I actually DO put thought into what my beliefs are, I'd be able to retire by now. How arrogant of you to assume that I don't. Not every Christian is spoon-fed. As a matter of fact, most are not. You're being incredibly naive.

Now, as far as the teaching of evolution is concerned, yes, evolution does exist, and it does take place every single second of every day of life on this planet. Natural selection and survival of the fittest and all that good stuff are very valid concepts to be teaching in school. So let me ask you, what the hell does that stuff have to do with religion at all????? What does that have to do with creation???? Nothing. All of that happens AFTER creation. All I'm saying is this. FACT: THE MISSING LINK HAS NOT BEEN FOUND, AND NEVER WILL BE FOUND, SO QUIT TEACHING OUR KIDS THAT WE EVOLVED FROM MONKEYS, WHEN YOU KNOW DAMN WELL YOU CAN'T PROVE IT. Just like you say, don't go teaching my kids that we were created by God if you can't prove it. GET IT??????????? DUH!!!!!!!!

------------------
God loves you and so do I!
 
Dear Lori,

If I had a nickel for every time somebody had such a weak stance that they had to revert to direct attacks of the person and not the issue, I could also retire. From your previous post, as well as your reply, I see that there is little use discussing with you further since your anger and aggresive behavior are counterproductive to a useful discussion.

Have fun storming the castle!

-Pookums


------------------
Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.
-Mark Twain
 
Pookums,

May I ask what the hell you're talking about??? What personal attacks??? Don't be such a wimp. If you can't stand the heat...you know what they say...

------------------
God loves you and so do I!
 
Pook,

don't let yourself be taken by Lori's way of arguing, that is just her but in time you will come to see what a darling she really is.

Lori,

you 're rocking again, aren't ya ? Ok, you are right that the so called missing link is not found, to clear away all opposition of evolutionism. But you must agree that this decision is against freedom of religion. Suppose a buddist wants to send his/her children to school then these will learn the christian version of how humans came to walk the face of this planet. This would make it more difficult for him to raise his/her children to be good buddists.
Ok, in the US live more then 99% christians and perhaps in Kansas even more, but there is still something like the constitution, isn't there ?

------------------
we are midgets standing on the backs of giants,
Plato
 
A darling? How sweet! Thanks, honey-bun. Maybe I misunderstood, but all they're doing is taking out Darwin's theory. They're NOT replacing it with the Christian creation. I mean, Darwinism wouldn't be anymore helpful to the Buddist parents, would it? So, it's not like they're cramming creation down kids throats, they're just not cramming Darwin down kids throats anymore. What's wrong with the school saying "we just don't know at this point, since nothing has been PROVEN. Here are the different theories...blah, blah, blah"? It just cracks me up, the paranoia regarding religion. What are you people afraid of anyway? Oh yea, that's judgement, right. LOL! Don't worry. TRUE Christians know very well that judging is not for US, but only for HIM. And besides, the Bible tells us that Christians are in no way, shape , or form going to "take over". As a matter of fact, the Antichrist is going to take over, with support from the aliens and all of the new age hippies. We Christians are going to disappear, remember? And you guys will be stuck here having to make a choice. Antichrist or Christ? Hmmmm....seems easy enough to me, but then again, some new age bufoon may have a gun to your head while you're trying to make it. My advice...be a martyr.

------------------
God loves you and so do I!
 
I'm not a pure "Creationist" as the Evolutionists would define it.I have hno problem with God producing man through the process of evolution. I have spoken to this issue before. It's not any mortal's place to tell God how to do His work.
But I will say this: I will protest the teaching of Creationsim in the schools the very nanosecond that people like some of the above stop using their false god "Science" as a means and excuse to aggressively promote atheism to vulnerable children in our schools.
 
Lori,
First thing, you are the hypocrit--you mock science, and you can't even prove God created the earth. There is no proof that he did except for some old papers written by the ancient man.

And science is NOT a religion. It is based on facts and not on faith on ancient old scriptures by our brainless ancestors.

Observation: In some weird way all who oppose the theory of evolution have a bizarre way of promoting their ideas through their own ignorance.

And Lori, even if God did make "chosen people", do you really think he'd make people like you, who hurl away all blessed logic at every chance they get? I don't think so.

MaTTo
"God may love you, but I don't."

[This message has been edited by MaTTo (edited August 19, 1999).]
 
There is no freedom of religion, how can there be.
If there is only one god there can be only one religion, so simple, even someone as stupid as I can understand that one.
All other religions are false, ask Babylon, he/she knows.
What was it your god said - Thou shalt not take up any other god but I. Something like that.
Anyway, who gives a toss, god does not exist.
 
Wow, Matto. Struck a nerve, huh? I can't for the life of me figure out what you're so all-fired pissed off about? Oh well, maybe you're just an asshole???? I want you to explain yourself though, Mr. Asshole, in that how am I being a hypocrit exactly? All I said is that until you can find the missing link, then don't ASSUME that the theory of evolution is valid. How can you possibly argue with that? You know as well as I do, that it hasn't been proven, so what's the problem? It seems that YOU are the one being a hypocrit, as you are sooooooo down on Christians for believing creation without being able to prove it. You are doing the same thing with Darwin's theory. That very well may get to your ego, but I think I speak for everyone here when I say, please try to keep your temper tantrums to a minimum. Second question...how am I "mocking" science? I am a big fan of science. I've always taken an interest in it, and to me, it is basically the study of what God already knows and created. I'm not mocking science by simply stating that Darwin's theory hasn't been proven. And you're acting like I've cut your penis off or something. Wassup with that???? You say that I can't prove that God created earth? You're right. And you can't prove that He didn't can you? Oh, would that make you a hypocrit by chance? 3rd question, how am I promoting ideas through ignorance? Here's the idea...Darwin's theory has NOT been proven. Do you know something that the rest of the world doesn't??? What "chosen people" are you talking about? The only "chosen people that God has are the Jews, and obviously I'm not Jewish, so what the hell are you talking about? All God's children are "chosen", it's just that most are too ego-fied to realize it. *S*

------------------
God loves you and so do I!

[This message has been edited by Lori (edited August 20, 1999).]
 
Lori, it's obvious from M's last post he/she is not a rational adult capable of constructive discourse or debate. Ad Hominem is, as it is with all who can't reasonably persuade, his/her tactic of last resort. M is not an asshole. Just a person who can't handle the heat of honest debate without resorting to getting nasty.A lot of them on the other side. That's why they tend to shy away from things that challenge their myopic preconceived ideas, like (my other post, "Occam's Razor and the Shroud of Turin") taking an honest look at the evidence for the miraculous origin and authenticity of the Turin Shroud. They can't explain it, it threatens to disembowel their prejudices, so they ignore it.
 
Maybe the topic should be clarified...

As Lori even stated in a previous post, evolution has been observed to exist in many studies. However, the sticky point is the origin of the species (which is a theoretical extension of the observations).
Specifically, can the observed evolutionary events lead to speciation and the diversity currently seen in the world? This is a hard pill even for evolutionists to swallow and is the subject of many debates.

For the record also, Darwinism (in its original state) is generally not accepted. The current evolutionary theory is coined 'neo-Darwinism'; actually a compromise between the theories of Darwin and LeMarck with modifications.

However, science is based on hyptheses that may be further supported by experiments or not. The current hypothesis is the best answer we have going (at this time) for the origin of the species. However, Lori is correct that there are little data directly supporting this hypothesis. This why this is a 'theory' and not a law (such as the law of gravity).

I think it is irresponsible not to teach the current hypotheses in science of how science works. However, it should be emphasized that these are theories and not laws. Perhaps this is a healthy compromise?

-Bitsy

------------------
Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.
-Mark Twain
 
Science does not consist of compromises. An idea or theory must be subject to controlled tests. I'm sure Darwin would be more than willing to put his theory to the test. Where is god to put his to the test? No divine guts?

Science is not about faith, either. Science is about finding the facts, You ask a question, come up with an answer, then test that answer. If your answer doesn't hold up, then it's back to the old drawing board.

I would like to propose this, and hopefully we can keep the name-calling out of it: Let the evolutionists post their arguments and evidences, and let the creationists post theirs. Both sides should be prepared to cite sources. Only empirical evidence would be allowed, i.e., something that can be proven by anybody with the proper resources. No mysticism, no "because god said so", and no "I saw a friend who did this once". State your case and be prepared to prove it. Of course, we'll need a panel of judges. It would be preferable to have three judges of neutral disposition who aren't just trying to be peacekeepers.

If anybody wants to set this up and see what happens, let me know. I'm pretty good at organizing these things and I will not be automatically posting myself as a judge.

Feel free to e-mail me at eagleone@california.com and let's try to settle this like civilized human beings.
 
Good post Oxygen.

Be careful Odysseus, free thought is a sure way to kill religious belief system. Once you start compromising the exact teachings of your religion and turn from faith, it is a short path to having no choice but to not believe. This comes from someone raised Roman catholic, with all 12yrs of CCD, and was up to date on his sacraments. It is a tough and unsettling path to realize no matter how hard you try to believe you can't force yourself back into it once you take a rational look at the claims of religion and the obvious inaccuracies contained within. I'm still scouring these places for a ray of light that I may be wrong, however from my experience it's not a promising future.
 
The greatest problem I see with the posts I have been reading, is the vast amount of mis-information, on both sides of the fence. It seems as though everyone talks alot about how they "feel" about their own point of view, or throw out debunked or disproven theories as fact. As Oxygen suggested, it would be an interesting idea (for a change) to enter a debate with actual facts and evidences.

Of course, this would put those who are convinced of a benevolent creator at a disadvantage. Any evidences of supernatural or personal experiences would be highly subjective and their very nature makes them open to dispute and casts doubt on their veracity.

The key here seems to be in the dissention between:
1)those who believe that life as we know it "evolved" from a chaotic universe instigated from a "big bang" of cosmic material and
2)those who believe that life as we know it came into being form a "special creation" at the direction of "prime mover"(call it God if you will)

It has long been the contention of the "evolutionists" that there is sufficient evidence to show that the probability of life(and the knowable universe) emerging naturally and constratined by the laws of physics is much greater than the probability that it was wished into being by some great power. And the great debate is centered about these two points:

Evolutionists: Based on facts and evidence, any logically thinking individual can't help but see this and if they don't, it's because of some blind, religious fervor that has completely crippled their ability to comprehend rational ideas and communicate on an intellectual level.

(Special)Creationists: Seeing the complexity of life in all of it's forms, it is ludicrous to think that it all happened by accident. If people could only look beyond their own intellectual limitations and explore their spiritual existence, God could easily be seen.

So the question still remains: does one have a greater probability than the other. I believe there is ample evidence that one DOES have a greater probability than the other.

The two things that would have to be avoided in a debate of this nature is:

1)Evolutionists must accept facts as they are, and not avoid any fact which does not support their position.
2)Creationists must not invoke emotionalism or submit subjective evidence as fact.

Any takers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top