Revelation 4:11
See my profile for info
Posted on 08/02/2005 4:16:26 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
President Bush waded into the debate over evolution and "intelligent design" Monday, saying schools should teach both theories on the creation and complexity of life.
In a wide-ranging question-and-answer session with a small group of reporters, Bush essentially endorsed efforts by Christian conservatives to give intelligent design equal standing with the theory of evolution in the nation's schools.
Bush declined to state his personal views on "intelligent design," the belief that life forms are so complex that their creation cannot be explained by Darwinian evolutionary theory alone, but rather points to intentional creation, presumably divine.
The theory of evolution, first articulated by British naturalist Charles Darwin in 1859, is based on the idea that life organisms developed over time through random mutations and factors in nature that favored certain traits that helped species survive.
Scientists concede that evolution does not answer every question about the creation of life, and most consider intelligent design an attempt to inject religion into science courses.
Bush compared the current debate to earlier disputes over "creationism," a related view that adheres more closely to biblical explanations. While he was governor of Texas, Bush said students should be exposed to both creationism and evolution.
On Monday, the president said he favors the same approach for intelligent design "so people can understand what the debate is about."
The Kansas Board of Education is considering changes to encourage the teaching of intelligent design in Kansas schools, and some are pushing for similar changes across the country.
"I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Bush said. "You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas. The answer is 'yes.'"
The National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science both have concluded there is no scientific basis for intelligent design and oppose its inclusion in school science classes. [Note from PH: links relevant to those organizations and their positions on ID are added by me at the end of this article.]
Some scientists have declined to join the debate, fearing that amplifying the discussion only gives intelligent design more legitimacy.
Advocates of intelligent design also claim support from scientists. The Discovery Institute, a conservative think tank in Seattle that is the leading proponent for intelligent design, said it has compiled a list of more than 400 scientists, including 70 biologists, who are skeptical about evolution.
"The fact is that a significant number of scientists are extremely skeptical that Darwinian evolution can explain the origins of life," said John West, associate director of the organization's Center for Science and Culture.
Ok. Thanks. Did you read what I posted?
Remember Piltdown Man, Eugenics, "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" and all that other discarded cr@p?
It's about time scientists found one story and stuck to it.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to have the demons that are causing this fever driven from me.
Me. Using a time machine and a 10 pack from Taco Bell.
And I demand this theory be taught in schools.
Bush is wrong.
Yes I did. Good post. I don't agree with all of it but it was reasonable.
First, that's not true. Stalin, for example, promoted Lysenko and persecuted evolutionary biologists for decades.
Second, Osama bin Laden is a Creationist. So tell me, when are you going to start hijacking airliners?
Most unfortunately, you are correct. When a nation, or religion, discards objectivity they go the way of modern Islam or communist Russia.
Oe may argue that technlogy is safe even if science is not, but having a set of blinders installed at a young age limits the ability to progress in all areas.
Revelation 4:11
See my profile for info
Apparently scientists were all wrong about electomagnetism and electricity doesn't actually exist, so please stop using it. Kindly unplug your computer.
The Big Bang and Evolution take at least as much faith to believe as Creationism and Intelligent Design do. Why do folks get so upset when people feel that exposure to all the theories is recommended? Doesn't science require a full look at all the information/possibilities available? If you want to prove one, it seems it would be healthy to try to disprove alternates; how can you do that if you don't even allow a look at the alternates?
Evolution has lost precisely zero ground.
The teaching of scientific thought and methods has.
Not the same thing at all.
As a complete side note, I really appreciated your tag line...:; i went to the blog, and found your report on Al Franken.
He is 5 foot 3 Inches Tall? I'm going to work now, but I just wanted to let you know, I really appreciated learning this.
I really did. I'm still laughing....
Yeah, but this'll have less impact than his other very occasional boners (e.g. steel tariffs).
If evolution IS the Truth let it experience competition. Let the weaker theory fall. It works in economics. It works in the political sphere where conservative ideology is slowly becoming dominant.Do you mean competition among the knowledgable and educated in the appropriate field? Then evolution wins, hands down. If you want to count the opinions of the bible-thumping, snake-handling, mouth-breathing moron group, then creationism might make some kind of showin'. But then you aren't talking about science...
Dead end subordinate schools of thought and intermittent frauds are reason enough to abandon the whole of it? Then we'll have to get rid of any field of knowledge or beliefs, even religion.
Repeat all you like.
Just don't call it science.
When our biologists stand back in awe and say "Its a miracle, just like we were taught in school" and Chinese scientists say "Let's see if can use this evolutionary principle that we learned in school to create a nifty new bio-weapon" we're the ones who get the Darwin award.
Yeah, Al Franken is a little bitty guy. He never stood right by me so I can't say for sure that he's not a little taller than me, but if he is, it's not by much. He's very short and dumpy and waddles a bit when he walks. I got quite a kick out of seeing him "in person!"
That's not what the evidence shows.
If you have a strong faith you do not need to misrepresent the facts. Does you and your position no good.
How can you expect anyone to take you seriously when you can't even get the kindergarten level physics correct. When water freezes it does not lose mass, it loses density because it's volume expands while it's mass remains constant.
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.