ping!
I’m sure hte ‘fairnes’ commitee will once again vote to exclude creation science FACTS and vote to keep the pure fantasy of evolution as their official state mandated ‘science’
One such group—Texas Freedom Network (TFN), billing itself as “A Mainstream Voice to attempt to keep people blind to the scientific FACTS behind IC, and influence them to beleive in the fantasy of macroevolution despite hte fact htat the scientific FACTS do NOT support such fantasies”—
There- I fixed the statement
Of course. In libspeak slavery is freedom.
[[However, the validity of a given conclusion should correspond to reality, not to that which is most popular.]]
Sadly, the reality of scientific education today relies on what’s ‘popular’ amoung academics, NOT on reality. Those who bring hte scientific FACTS to the table are systematically ostracized and excluded because by golly the dogmatic religion of Darwin Must persist no matter what the FACTS state. Is there ANY biological evidence linking sea creatures with air breathing land dwellers? Nope- not a shred, and infact hte scientific FACTS argue there is no link, but by golly, the FACTS seem not to matter, and instead it’s taught that animals did arise from the sea, and don’t you or I argue otherwise or else!
Sceintific fact? Or Religious Dogmatic beleif that creatures didn’t need an intelligent designer? You decide.
I think that is a good description. "Crusade" is an apt term, with its religious connotation.
And there is no question that in order to sneak their religion into the schools creationists seek to destroy the scientific method and the findings of many branches of science. They are not doing this for the betterment of science.
The group’s mission to ensure evolutionary indoctrination in the schools belies the fact that evolution is not a scientific observation, but an abstract idea.
False. That is part of the "dumming down" effort right there.
If macroevolution were demonstrable, then surely students could just see the evidence for themselves (such as they can with gravity and entropy and other scientifically observable realities).
The evidence is there; creationists deny it, and are doing their best to ensure that it is not taught. But those denials don't make it go away.
Instead, TFN chooses to use lobbying, campaigning, faulty reasoning, and other peer-pressure ridicule tactics to push its agenda.
They are fighting back against a well-organized effort by creationists to sneak religion into schools in violation of the U.S. Supreme Court decisions.
However, the relevant question is, “Is evolution science or scientifically verifiable?” To assert that evolution is true without demonstrating it (with live examples, plausible mechanisms, or transitional forms) is to commit the logical fallacy “begging the question,” where the conclusion is assumed in the premise.
That's been done. Creationists are the only ones who refuse to see the evidence. That doesn't make the evidence go away.
The survey’s authors seem totally convinced that intelligent design advocates are just cleverly disguised creationists...
Sounds right.
To merely question macroevolution, from those of any religious background, results in systematic exclusion from positions and employment in major universities.
When the denial is made in the face of tremendous evidence that denial shows a contempt for the scientific method and a reliance on divine revelation and other non-scientific sources of information. A person with contempt for science is not the type of person you want for an instructor in an evolution-related field.
TFN claims to be mainstream, yet popular surveys show that the radically dogmatic, evolution-only philosophy that they are laboring to force upon public schoolchildren is actually a minority view as of 2007, when a Gallup poll showed that 66 percent of Americans surveyed favored the concepts of creation.
Science is not conducted by popular opinion. It is conducted in scientific journals, using evidence. Creationists have no evidence to present in those journals, so they are using public opinion in its place. That doesn't make it science, nor does it make it correct.
This whole effort that we see is simply an attempt to push religion back into the classrooms, from which it has legally been excluded.
Unfortunately, the cold, hard facts of science do not support the evolutionary account. Forensic evidence from nature easily aligns with a creation model.
False.
TFN and the evolutionary establishment’s efforts show that in the absence of real scientific evidence, molecules-to-man evolution must be propped up by monopolistic bullying.
There is plenty of evidence. Creationists just close their eyes and refuse to see it. They insist on pushing their religion into the science classes in the guise of science, but that's not going to happen.
The reason that is not going to happen is that the theory of evolution is based on evidence, and those who are not blinded by a priori religious belief can see that evidence and make up their own minds. That is what creationists are trying to prevent or limit with their efforts to get back into the classrooms. They fear that when students see the actual scientific evidence they will understand more about the theory of evolution. That knowledge is truly what creationists fear.
Liberals project alot. The only people that don’t see this are...*surprise surprise*...LIBERALS!