Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Churches urged to back evolution
British Broadcasting Corporation ^ | 20 February 2006 | Paul Rincon

Posted on 02/20/2006 5:33:50 AM PST by ToryHeartland

Churches urged to back evolution By Paul Rincon BBC News science reporter, St Louis

US scientists have called on mainstream religious communities to help them fight policies that undermine the teaching of evolution.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) hit out at the "intelligent design" movement at its annual meeting in Missouri.

Teaching the idea threatens scientific literacy among schoolchildren, it said.

Its proponents argue life on Earth is too complex to have evolved on its own.

As the name suggests, intelligent design is a concept invoking the hand of a designer in nature.

It's time to recognise that science and religion should never be pitted against each other Gilbert Omenn AAAS president

There have been several attempts across the US by anti-evolutionists to get intelligent design taught in school science lessons.

At the meeting in St Louis, the AAAS issued a statement strongly condemning the moves.

"Such veiled attempts to wedge religion - actually just one kind of religion - into science classrooms is a disservice to students, parents, teachers and tax payers," said AAAS president Gilbert Omenn.

"It's time to recognise that science and religion should never be pitted against each other.

"They can and do co-exist in the context of most people's lives. Just not in science classrooms, lest we confuse our children."

'Who's kidding whom?'

Eugenie Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education, which campaigns to keep evolution in public schools, said those in mainstream religious communities needed to "step up to the plate" in order to prevent the issue being viewed as a battle between science and religion.

Some have already heeded the warning.

"The intelligent design movement belittles evolution. It makes God a designer - an engineer," said George Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory.

"Intelligent design concentrates on a designer who they do not really identify - but who's kidding whom?"

Last year, a federal judge ruled in favour of 11 parents in Dover, Pennsylvania, who argued that Darwinian evolution must be taught as fact.

Dover school administrators had pushed for intelligent design to be inserted into science teaching. But the judge ruled this violated the constitution, which sets out a clear separation between religion and state.

Despite the ruling, more challenges are on the way.

Fourteen US states are considering bills that scientists say would restrict the teaching of evolution.

These include a legislative bill in Missouri which seeks to ensure that only science which can be proven by experiment is taught in schools.

I think if we look at where the empirical scientific evidence leads us, it leads us towards intelligent design Teacher Mark Gihring "The new strategy is to teach intelligent design without calling it intelligent design," biologist Kenneth Miller, of Brown University in Rhode Island, told the BBC News website.

Dr Miller, an expert witness in the Dover School case, added: "The advocates of intelligent design and creationism have tried to repackage their criticisms, saying they want to teach the evidence for evolution and the evidence against evolution."

However, Mark Gihring, a teacher from Missouri sympathetic to intelligent design, told the BBC: "I think if we look at where the empirical scientific evidence leads us, it leads us towards intelligent design.

"[Intelligent design] ultimately takes us back to why we're here and the value of life... if an individual doesn't have a reason for being, they might carry themselves in a way that is ultimately destructive for society."

Economic risk

The decentralised US education system ensures that intelligent design will remain an issue in the classroom regardless of the decision in the Dover case.

"I think as a legal strategy, intelligent design is dead. That does not mean intelligent design as a social movement is dead," said Ms Scott.

"This is an idea that has real legs and it's going to be around for a long time. It will, however, evolve."

Among the most high-profile champions of intelligent design is US President George W Bush, who has said schools should make students aware of the concept.

But Mr Omenn warned that teaching intelligent design will deprive students of a proper education, ultimately harming the US economy.

"At a time when fewer US students are heading into science, baby boomer scientists are retiring in growing numbers and international students are returning home to work, America can ill afford the time and tax-payer dollars debating the facts of evolution," he said. Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/sci/tech/4731360.stm

Published: 2006/02/20 10:54:16 GMT

© BBC MMVI


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: bearingfalsewitness; crevolist; darwin; evolution; freeperclaimstobegod; goddooditamen; godknowsthatiderslie; idoogabooga; ignoranceisstrength; intelligentdesign; liarsforthelord; ludditesimpletons; monkeygod; scienceeducation; soupmyth; superstitiousnuts; youngearthcultists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,501-1,5201,521-1,5401,541-1,560 ... 2,341 next last
To: VadeRetro

Don't you know? Stars are quite large, perhaps the size of an elephant. They are about 100 miles up, and exceedingly bright so that they can be seen at that huge distance. There are about 5000 of them in total, and you can see the half of them that are above the disc of the earth on a clear night.


1,521 posted on 02/22/2006 9:28:52 AM PST by Thatcherite (More abrasive blackguard than SeaLion or ModernMan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1519 | View Replies]

To: donh; Search4Truth
If we are to do that, then look too at the 30 million babies horribly murdered by the contemporary agents of evil in the name of fill in blank

That is in this nation, this age, this time. What have you done against it? What have you said against it?

Is it horrible murder that riles you up so? Or is its mention only a tool for you?

Wolf
1,522 posted on 02/22/2006 9:33:30 AM PST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1515 | View Replies]

To: RunningWolf
If we are to do that, then look too at the 30 million babies horribly murdered by the contemporary agents of evil in the name of fill in blank

So that's your defense of the Perfect Love of God--that God ordered fewer mass murders of innocents than Hitler? Remind me not to hire you as my lawyer the next time I'm in trouble.

1,523 posted on 02/22/2006 9:37:30 AM PST by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1522 | View Replies]

To: donh
Agents of evil are just that, good dodge though.

I did not even mention hitler or God, but maybe you need to. Is this what they call the strawman?

How about 30 million babies horribly murdered by the contemporary agents of evil in the name of abortion since Roe v Wade.

That is in this nation, this age, this time. What have you done against it? What have you said against it?

Is it horrible murder that riles you up so? Or is its mention only a tool for you?

Wolf
1,524 posted on 02/22/2006 9:49:48 AM PST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1523 | View Replies]

To: Thatcherite
It is getting fairly easy to see how Christianity fractures into numerous factions.

I can't see how, when there are so many people available, on these threads alone, who are in direct communication with God and can answer any question you might have.

1,525 posted on 02/22/2006 9:53:56 AM PST by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1508 | View Replies]

To: js1138
I can't see how, when there are so many people available, on these threads alone, who are in direct communication with God and can answer any question you might have.

Unfortunately they don't appear to be in communication with the *same* God as each other. I suspect that all but one of them is a charlatan or deluded. It is just working out which one isn't the charlatan that is proving tricky.

1,526 posted on 02/22/2006 10:01:54 AM PST by Thatcherite (More abrasive blackguard than SeaLion or ModernMan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1525 | View Replies]

To: Thatcherite

Some of them seem to be in direct communication with the lord of misstatement.


1,527 posted on 02/22/2006 10:04:44 AM PST by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1526 | View Replies]

To: js1138

Is he the same entity as the Master of Misspeaking?


1,528 posted on 02/22/2006 10:05:30 AM PST by Thatcherite (More abrasive blackguard than SeaLion or ModernMan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1527 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
As can be demonstrated, early evolutionary theorists confessed that they were not drawn to the idea of secularist evolution because of any scientific merit, but rather because of its implications in morality.

Citations please.
1,529 posted on 02/22/2006 10:10:13 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1416 | View Replies]

To: RunningWolf
Is it horrible murder that riles you up so? Or is its mention only a tool for you?

What is it that keeps you spouting the same irrelevant, finger-pointing gibberish when asked a simple question whose relevancy to the issue of God's infallibility is obvious? Did or did not the christian God countenance the mauling, murder or enslavement of Mideanite children, Egyptian children, and mocking children? Did or did not God's Agents of His Perfect Love carry this teaching through to imprison Galileo, and to horribly murder and plague innocents of virtually every stripe throughout it's sorry 2000 year history? Don't you think a claim of infallibility is a claim that needs to somehow be demonstrated? The makers of Roe v. Wade made no claims to infallibility--and infallibility is the question on the table.

1,530 posted on 02/22/2006 10:10:27 AM PST by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1524 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
" Citations please."

I think this is the Julian/Aldous Huxley junk about, "'I suppose the reason we leaped at The Origin of Species was because the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores." Of course, neither said this. It's an anti-evo meme that gets bantered about with regular frequency.
1,531 posted on 02/22/2006 10:12:41 AM PST by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is grandeur in this view of life...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1529 | View Replies]

To: vimto
when I die I will go to Heaven and meet with my God. You may say I have a problem with evolution. Maybe. Your problem is considerably greater.

Non-sequitur. Why is it that creationists frequently retreat into religious preaching when they run out of facts? Are so many of them of the completely mistaken belief that all who accept evolution are atheists, or that evolution is somehow a religious-themed concept?

1,532 posted on 02/22/2006 10:18:42 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
I know that it looks odd or even dishonest form your vantage point.

For me God's word is final and to disbelieve it is Idolatry.

It is therefore a moral question for me.

I know you may find that baffling but I am simple being honest. Kindest regards.
1,533 posted on 02/22/2006 10:30:58 AM PST by vimto (Life isn't a dry run)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1532 | View Replies]

To: donh
... the virgin children of the Mideanites.

At least their sheep, cattle, and camels got off the hook; unlike the Amalekites in Samuel.

1,534 posted on 02/22/2006 10:32:36 AM PST by dread78645 (Intelligent Design. It causes people to misspeak)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1429 | View Replies]

To: metmom
"All God did to create the universe and everything in it was to speak. God using power natural to Himself is not magic. Magic is what men use in the form of spells and charms to manipulate nature for their own benefit and is expressly forbidden by God in the Bible.

Why is the use of 'supernatural' power by man in a different category than the 'supernatural' power used by God?

"What does it matter if God on occasion manipulates the natural order of things that He set up, from time to time? He has the perogative to do so whenever He pleases. And that is not called magic but miracles, which is not the same thing. Miracles are used to verify the existance and power of God to unbelieving people and, to the best of my knowledge, are almost always beneficial to people.

That wasn't my point. If there is a God, something I find certain, he can do as he will, we are powerless to stop him. My point is that creationists are willing to accept all sorts of magical thinking as pertains to God all based on simple here-say evidence yet completely close their minds when confronted by the well researched and verified evidence used in the ToE. Much of the ToE's conclusions are based on the normal scientific methodology of inferences based on verified mechanisms, yet the anti-evos refuse to accept those inferences, the verifications and indeed the mechanisms themselves. They use their our inferences, which are based on very questionable premises, to 'disprove' the observations of scientists.

Accept the supernatural, deny the observable and its logical consequences by using evidence even more questionable than that found for evolution. This makes no sense to me.

1,535 posted on 02/22/2006 10:34:32 AM PST by b_sharp (Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1363 | View Replies]

To: Thatcherite
Don't you know? Stars are quite large, perhaps the size of an elephant.

I can see then how it'll be the end of everything when they all fall to Earth at once.

1,536 posted on 02/22/2006 10:36:06 AM PST by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1521 | View Replies]

To: RunningWolf

Good point.

Evil is evil, irrespective of what banner it carries, or when it carries it. Evil goes by many names and carries many banners. Not the least of which is the banner of God.

But in all cases, it is the evil of men. Not God. Men who fear God, do not do evil, they do good.

"For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes on Him is not condemned, but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the Light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who practices truth comes to the Light so that his works may be revealed, that they exist, having been worked in God" (John 3:16-21).


1,537 posted on 02/22/2006 10:44:37 AM PST by Search4Truth (The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1522 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
Not quite...

NIV 2 Kings 2:23-24

I see your NIV and raise you a KJV

23And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.

24And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.

The score is 3 'youths' to 5 'children' (or 'little boys').

1,538 posted on 02/22/2006 10:47:15 AM PST by dread78645 (Intelligent Design. It causes people to misspeak)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1430 | View Replies]

To: Search4Truth
/Evil is evil, irrespective of what banner it carries, or when it carries it. Evil goes by many names and carries many banners/

/But in all cases, it is the evil of men. Not God/

Thank you, that is what I try to point out and underline.

Wolf
1,539 posted on 02/22/2006 10:50:43 AM PST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1537 | View Replies]

To: donh

The infallibility of God's word is a topic of discussion wasted on those who view the Bible as simply a book. Much less, those who view it with contempt.


1,540 posted on 02/22/2006 11:13:54 AM PST by Search4Truth (The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1530 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,501-1,5201,521-1,5401,541-1,560 ... 2,341 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
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

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