Posted on 11/12/2005 4:16:49 AM PST by PatrickHenry
Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius on Friday called the state's new science standards a "step in the wrong direction."
Her comments follow a week in which the Kansas Board of Education adopted new science standards Tuesday that portray evolution as being in doubt and change the definition of science to allow for supernatural explanations.
In her lengthiest public comments yet on the controversy, Sebelius said she worries the changes will undermine science education and send the message that Kansas doesn't welcome high-tech firms and research. She pointed to the state's efforts to recruit bioscience companies, while the board votes to move "away from well-known, proven facts in science class."
Her comments also came as more candidates have stepped forward to challenge Board of Education members who approved the standards earlier this week.
Though the standards make no mention of creationism or intelligent design, they were sought by members of the intelligent design movement, which believes scientific evidence shows that nature was designed by a creator.
Four of the six conservative board members who voted to approve the changes are up for election next November. Moderate Republicans and Democrats are aiming to unseat conservatives, take control of the board and remove the new science standards before they go into effect in 2007.
In a closely watched race in Pennsylvania, voters in the town of Dover on Tuesday did what opponents of the intelligent design standards hope will happen here.
Voters there ousted most of that city's school board, which had voted to put intelligent design in the curriculum.
The latest two people to announce campaigns for state school board are Don Weiss, an Olathe resident, and Kent Runyan, a Pittsburg State University education professor.
Weiss will run as a Democrat against board member John Bacon, an Olathe Republican. Runyan will run as a Democrat against Republican board member Iris Van Meter. Bacon and Van Meter supported the standards.
Olathe resident Harry McDonald has already announced his plans to challenge Bacon in the primary election. Other candidates have popped up in other districts as well.
Bacon, who hasn't announced his re-election plans, said he's not concerned about his challengers and doesn't believe any political lessons from Dover, Pa., are relevant to Kansas. He said the Kansas school standards do not mandate the teaching of intelligent design like the ones in Dover. And he said he believes most Kansans will support the board's decision.
"There are holes in evolution," he said. "Any good scientist will admit to that."
Sebelius said she was "baffled" by the Board of Education's yearlong debate about evolution, and that as a Catholic who attended religious schools, she sees no contradiction between faith and scientific explanations of nature.
"I was taught that God created the universe," she said. "I was also taught science in science class."
Bacon said Sebelius doesn't understand that the board changed the standards to allow students to make up their own minds about evolution. He said worries about the changes' effects on the economy, public education and the state's reputation amount to "scare tactics."
I'm asking myself the same question. 'Course I didn't get to bed till 2 a.m. (just got back from a TSO concert).
Loved her violin concerto and the "Swan of Tuonela."
"Common descent is a fact. Teachers are also required to tell little children that in 1776 the Declaration of Independence was signed, and that matter is made of molecules, and that PI is about 3.14, not 3. They are required to teach facts. Why should they lie to little children and tell them that evolution is not supported by the evidence?"
The only evidence you have is that man and woman are the vehicle by which the child descends. Of course the modern man seeks to replace that "natural" method with his p dishes and turkey basters.
Yes just like that FACT that those RIGHTS endowed by the CREATOR, you nor any other evolutionists have power to TAKE!!!
"Actually, it is your religious ideology that makes you close your eyes to the physical creation. You have been provided the evidence yet you refuse to see. There is no reason we must push your ideologically induced blindness on our children."
Assumption NOT in evidence, this flesh body is what it is and I have no issue in biology classes teaching a child what is required for the flesh to live, and what the flesh is made up of, even those mutating cells that are identified. What I reject is telling a child that he or she is nothing more than a reproduction in a timeless evolution of mutating cells, just another animal among the species.
How did Sebelius get elected in a conservative state like Kansas ?
check to see how thread evolves
Macro-evolution is not fact, nor is it science. It is, at best, history.
Biologists are brain-washed to worship evolution as the unifying principle of biology. In a graduate level class on evolution, my final exam consisted of one essay question - "Why is evolution fundamental to biology?"
My answer was that it wasn't. The professor, a good guy, gave me an A for my final - said he was certain I was wrong, but that I was the only one in the class who had actually thought about the question.
Evolution is taught as fact because the alternative is to admit we don't know. The latter is more intellectually honest, but it doesn't allow a lot of pontification.
The CrevoSci Archive Just one of the many services of Darwin Central "The Conspiracy that Cares" |
CrevoSci threads for the past week:
CrevoSci Warrior Freepdays for the month of November:
2000-11-10 AncientAirs 2000-11-21 AndrewC 1998-11-18 angelo 1999-11-22 Blood of Tyrants 2003-11-26 blowfish 2004-11-08 CarolinaGuitarman 1997-11-28 cd jones 2001-11-30 claptrap 2001-11-16 CobaltBlue 2005-11-10 culturewars 2002-11-21 DannyTN 2004-11-16 DaveLoneRanger 1997-11-30 Ditto 2001-11-16 dmz |
2000-11-11 Ernest_at_the_Beach 2000-11-02 Exit 109 2000-11-22 FFIGHTER 2000-11-12 ForGod'sSake 2001-11-07 FourtySeven 2000-11-10 Godel 2004-11-06 GreenOgre 2000-11-04 harbinger of doom 2000-11-28 HiTech RedNeck 1999-11-05 Ichneumon 1998-11-13 jennyp 1998-11-25 Junior_G 2002-11-17 Just mythoughts 2004-11-11 kaotic133 |
2003-11-18 little jeremiah 1998-11-18 malakhi 2000-11-19 Mike Fieschko 2003-11-09 MplsSteve 2000-11-06 mrjeff 1999-11-05 muleskinner 2003-11-17 Nathan Zachary 2002-11-12 NCLaw441 1999-11-25 Nebullis 2000-11-13 NYer 2000-11-24 old-ager 2004-11-03 PajamaHadin 2000-11-10 Patriotic Teen 1998-11-01 Pharmboy |
2000-11-11 P-Marlowe |
In Memoriam
|
Lost CrevoSci Battlefields (Pulled Threads)
Longest CrevoSci Thread Ever 2002-12-11 Evolution Disclaimer Supported (6,871 replies)
Glossary of Terms
Assumption: Premise: a statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn; "on the assumption that he has been injured we can infer that he will not to play"
Belief: Any cognitive content (perception) held as true; religious faith
Crevo: Creation vs. evolution
CrevoSci: Creation vs. evolution/Science
CrevoSci Warriors: Those who take part on CrevoSci threads
Data: factual information, especially information organized for analysis or used to reason or make decisions
Dogma: a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof
Fact: When an observation is confirmed repeatedly and by many independent and competent observers, it can become a fact
Freepday: The day a Freeper joined Free Republic
Hypothesis: A tentative theory about the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in chemical practices"
Impression: A vague idea in which some confidence is placed; "his impression of her was favorable"; "what are your feelings about the crisis?"; "it strengthened my belief in his sincerity"; "I had a feeling that she was lying"
Law: A generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature; "the laws of thermodynamics"
Observation: Any information collected with the senses
Theory: A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"
The
official beer
of Darwin Central
JMO, FWIW, I don't think this universe or world was created out of random chaos or chance.
People, chimps, gorillas and other great apes are unable to produce ascorbic acid (vitamin C). Almost all other mammals can. Why is this?
Because the *exact same* mutation occurs in people, chimps, gorillas and other great apes, but nowhere else. Guinea pigs are also unable to make vitamin C; but they have a different mutation.
There are "genetic markers" called ERVs (endogenous retroviruses) that are the remains of retrovirus infections.
There are some that are unique to people, chimps, gorillas, and other organisms. However, *every one* that has been found in both gorillas and chimps has also been found in people.
Standard biology *predicts* that this pattern will continue, and explains it by common ancestry; ID and creationism are, of course, unable to make predictions, not being in on the hypothetical designer's plans.
Do you doubt that this pattern will continue? Do you have a better explanation?
Here's a discussion in a Christian forum
Do a google search; I got over 10,000 hits.
This is the same sort of genetics that is used in paternity suits and geneology research. It's considered proof beyond a reasonable doubt in court; surely it rises to the level of evidence in biology class.
Then give me the 100% irrefutable proof on how this world and universe were created.
You don't have it, so in essence you are giving a clintonian like lie in your above italicized passage.
If you don't know the difference between micro and macro-evolution, you don't know enough to belong in the conversation.
While I am now in the military, I started as a biologist. My comments on brain-washing are based on my time getting my BS in biology.
ANYONE who says macro-evolution is a fact is either a liar or ignorant. Facts can be observed. Macro-evolution, if it occurs, takes place over millions of years - making it kind of hard to carry out experiments.
It is therefore a suitable subject of inquiry for historians, not scientists.
Huh could have fooled me, all I hear is that darwin's theory is "god' and not to be questioned.
I am not the one lying about what evolution is about. I am not the one using the Clintonian playbook. Unlike creationists, I don't need to lie.
You were the one in reply #30 who said, " No, to say we don't know is a lie.".
Well since you are implying "you know" 100% irrefutibly, put up or shut up, but since you can't put up, you use clintonian tactics.
That would be wonderful! After all, the ID movement is basically asking for affirmative action, so it fits much better into the D*m*cr*t platform. They are the ones who approve of Afrocentric history, ebonics, etc., bravely standing up to established historians and linguists who are racists only worried about their funding.
I ain't an expert on evolution or creationism nor do I play one on FR.
What I do know is that darwin's theory is considered unrefutable by the liberal scientific community and anybody who speaks against it or brings proof against it is considered "blasphemous".
Again JMO, but I believe this world and universe were not created by random chaos, and that is the heart of darwin's theory.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.