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
Well you seem to have a spiritual illness that no one but God can help you with. I'm sorry about that.
What a novel concept!, lol. You can send'em to college, but that don't make'm smart.
No. A cubit varied depending on the person doing the measuring, because it was a body dimension; but if they same person measured two lengths in cubits, the ratio of the two measurements would not contain any error due to that variability. We call this phenomenon covariance.
So it is your who are incorrect, and you're still being a jackass. And all to try to argue tendentiously that the Hebrews did not think pi was 3, something that is attested in the Talmud as well as Kings and Chronicles.
Go away, and troll no more.
Right. Ok, then. Go out into your back yard and mark out 30 cubits on the ground with your arm and then come back and tell me that when you are done your measurement is exactly 30 times the distance between the tip of your elbow and the tip of your finger.
I suggest that the variant will be much greater than 29.89/30.00.
You're a "scientist". Go do the experiment and tell me if I'm wrong.
Go away, and troll no more.
Since you are afraid to give straight answers to my questions, I suppose there's no point in posting to you anymore anyway.
Of course, that's not what I would do. I'd get a piece of string, measure out a cubit length, use it to make divisions on a longer string of 30 cubits, and do the measurement with that string. And the Israelites, not being imbeciles, would have done the same thing. By that method we could get the error in the ratio well under 1%.
In any case, we're not talking about a measurement, are we? We're talking about a book that is supposedly inerrant. The 10 cubit/30 cubits were not measured, they were divinely inspired. And if it's inerrant, there is no error, by definition.
You just said the Israelites were so stupid that they taught that pi=3. Now you are claiming they are so intelligent that they would have measured the circumference using a string. Well the outside circumference would have been roughly 31 cubits and a span. Correct? That is why you guys insist that the bible is in error.
Assuming the bowl was one hand thick, the inside circumference would have measured about how many cubits? Huh Prof?
Can you answer that question?
Will you answer that question?
Fried jello never sticks to the wall.
What would the inside circumference be of a bowl 10 cubits in outside diameter whose walls are one hand breadth thick? How many cubits? :-)
well what are we saying the handbreadth is, about 4 inches?
I wonder if that knucklehead Rick Warren will buy into this like he bought into the global warming scam.
That being said, such rounding introduces or assumes an error, and you claim the Bible is inerrant.
This is the problem with cultists; when their irrational belief run headlong into reality, they become hysterical.
Now go bray at the moon. I'm done.
A hand's breadth is approximately 1/4 of a cubit -- some use 4 inchers and others use 4.5 inches) A span is approximately 1/2 of a cubit or about 9 inches.
So the inside diameter would be approximately 9 1/2 cubits. So mulitply 9.5 cubits by pi and approximately how many cubits do you have?
about 30
Oooohh, a tough guy.
You just can't stand it, can you? You previously denied that the measurement of a hand's breadth even existed in the bible and now you are insisting that it must be used when approximating cubital measurements. You just can't admit that the inside circumference was 30 cubits. You demand a scientific accuracy which did not exist back then. Nearly all measurements in the bible were rounded to the nearest cubit.
This is the problem with cultists; when their irrational belief run headlong into reality, they become hysterical.
You are the one who is hysterical here. You can't bring yourself to say 30. It's just too painful, isn't it?
Now go bray at the moon. I'm done.
Bye.
Now how painful was that? :-)
So you believe the Bible is approximately true?
Pretty painful. I was thinking I needed that old slide rule I haven't seen in 40 years. The trick is we need to know the thickness of the large cast metal container.
I would reply, but you will tell the moderator that I am stalking you.
I gave up complaining to the moderators quite some time ago. I decided that if people want to rumble, I'm happy to oblige.
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.