Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dispute over evolution goes on trial in U.S. court
Baltimore Sun ^ | September 26, 2005 | Arthur Hirsch

Posted on 09/26/2005 1:53:21 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

A Pennsylvania school district's use of "intelligent design" in its high school biology curriculum goes on trial in federal court today in the nation's first legal challenge to the idea, which contends that evolutionary theory alone does not explain how life on Earth took shape.

The lawsuit, brought by 11 parents in the Dover Area School District, attacks as unconstitutional the year-old policy of telling ninth-grade biology students that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution "is not a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no evidence." School officials also recommend a book on intelligent design, or ID.

The plaintiffs, including the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, argue that the policy -- which does not require students to study intelligent design -- serves religious, not secular ends, violating the First Amendment.

ID proponents say scientists can look at life forms and identify the work of a controlling "intelligence," although ID advocates are not specific about the nature of that force. While they do not reject all evolutionary theory, ID proponents argue that it incorrectly insists life took shape purely through a mindless process.

(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: allcrevoallthetime; anothercrevothread; crevolist; crevorepublic; education; enoughalready; evolution; id; lawsuit; religion; scienceeducation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 401-404 next last
To: anguish

That was a pretty stupid remark, don't you think?


161 posted on 09/26/2005 10:18:18 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: furball4paws

Why would I be frustrated? If you don't believe God created the heavens and the earth, why would that frustrate me? Seems you may be a little frustrated that so many don't believe evolution.


162 posted on 09/26/2005 10:19:10 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: malakhi

Damn! Forgive me GWB whereever you are.


163 posted on 09/26/2005 10:19:32 AM PDT by furball4paws (One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Just don't try to define "theory" out of the dictionary. You'll get flamed for that. Scientists, I have been repeatedly told, have their own special version of the definition. (so as to accuse creationists of semantics.)

Actually, if you look up theory in the dictionary you will find definitions for both the lay use and the scientific use. When discussing a scientific topic it is logical to use the scientific definition.

Unless, of course, the other definition would make a good weapon for your side, in which case a little deliberate misconstruing is forgivable since it is more important to win than to be truthful, right?

164 posted on 09/26/2005 10:20:09 AM PDT by Antonello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
That was a pretty stupid remark, don't you think?
Nope. After all, when you claim not to be a part of one group we use to classify species, I wouldn't be surprised to hear you denounce membership in a wider classification.
165 posted on 09/26/2005 10:20:48 AM PDT by anguish (while science catches up.... mysticism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
Evolution is a greater statement of faith than the Bible

Science only requires faith if you don't take the time and effort to understand it. (It takes a lot of time and effort indeed...)

166 posted on 09/26/2005 10:20:51 AM PDT by Quark2005 (Where's the science?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

Actually, I know of no one who believes in Evolution.

I said frustrating since your posts seems to be getting "testier".


167 posted on 09/26/2005 10:21:12 AM PDT by furball4paws (One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: furball4paws

If you believe my posts are getting "testier", then you aren't familiar with my posts on this subject.


168 posted on 09/26/2005 10:22:15 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: furball4paws
Don't have her mentally crossed off. I think she's out there, somewhere.
169 posted on 09/26/2005 10:22:30 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

Oh, I am familiar. I was born noticing things - comes in handy being a scientist.


170 posted on 09/26/2005 10:24:55 AM PDT by furball4paws (One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
Informal. A clumsy or boorish person.

So, why do you insist you are not an ape?

171 posted on 09/26/2005 10:25:31 AM PDT by shuckmaster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: ml1954
Wow, that was John West of the Discovery Institute saying that! They used to use the "S" word right on their website for the first few years of their ID crusade but had since backed away from such forthright words.
The Discovery Institute, the chief proponent of ID, does not advocate teaching the concept in school,
This is a recent change, incidentally. I think they changed their tack after the Ohio fiasco in 2002. Or maybe it was last year's Georgia sticker ruling that went completely against the IDC's. But I digress...
but it would revise the definition of science and nature.

"How do we understand nature? Is it matter and energy? Or is it matter and energy and information?" said John G. West, the associate director of the institute's Center for Science and Culture. "We object to the distinction between naturalism and supernaturalism."

IOW, information is not a natural phenomenon; it must be supernatural. Another interesting passage...
In its pretrial memorandum, the defense says it will argue that openness to a what might now be considered a "supernatural" explanation for creation does not place ID "beyond the bounds of 'science.'" Nor does this make ID "inherently religious," the memo says.
It will be fascinating to see if the ACLU lawyer asks any ID witnesses how they expect a scientist to go about detecting or measuring a supernatural act that happened in the distant past.

You creationists: How would you expect a scientist to distinguish between a supernatural act that happened in the distant past vs. a natural occurrence that we just don't understand yet?

172 posted on 09/26/2005 10:27:21 AM PDT by jennyp (WHAT I'M READING NOW: my sterling prose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: shuckmaster

You are the one who claims to be an ape - I just provided the definition to help in your identity crisis.


173 posted on 09/26/2005 10:27:57 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: anguish
Nope. After all, when you claim not to be a part of one group we use to classify species, I wouldn't be surprised to hear you denounce membership in a wider classification.

Imagine if you had asked if she was a Homo. ;o)

Human
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primata
Family: Hominidae
Genus Homo
Species: Sapiens

174 posted on 09/26/2005 10:28:59 AM PDT by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Order is restored to the universe.

Thanks PH!


175 posted on 09/26/2005 10:29:14 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Thatcherite; Vaquero; mlc9852
has been shown the evidence before

Over and over and over.... Even here on this thread.

176 posted on 09/26/2005 10:31:12 AM PDT by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: malakhi

I suppose you consider yourself clever.


177 posted on 09/26/2005 10:33:24 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Fossils show that something was once alive and now is dead. Placing them in a certain order to support your point of view is man's idea. Talk about making the data fit your theory.

What a bunch of flapdoodle!

178 posted on 09/26/2005 10:34:33 AM PDT by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

BTW, chimpanzees are in the Hominidae Family, and some argue that they should be classified in the same genus, Homo, as humans.


179 posted on 09/26/2005 10:37:54 AM PDT by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: malakhi

Some argue? It isn't unanimous? Some scientists disagree? Is that what you are saying?


180 posted on 09/26/2005 10:39:54 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 401-404 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson