Churches urged to back evolution

British Broadcasting Corporation ^ | 20 February 2006 | Paul Rincon

[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

[donh]

GUTS: the Grand Unified Theory of Sex (or why the T.o.Evolution HAS to be, at least, partly, wrong).

That was a long essay to wade through, and I still don't understand how this vitiates against evolution. Is your point that truthfulness is a less useful way invest your procreation energy than deceit? If so, I doubt it. It's likely that humans are capable of both, because both have proved to be good strategies in one environment or another. I also am not hugely pursuaded about most of your minor points. I don't think the ability of males to be aroused is a surefire indicator of truthfulness or fidelity. In fact, that sort of strikes me as the kind of misty-eyed science you get from ed-school-trained kindergarten teachers with sheltered, quasi-victorian upbringings.

[donh]

What are we to do?

http://www.c4israel.org/articles/summer2005/html/forgod_soloved.html

http://www.cdn-friends-icej.ca/antiholo/cantisem.html

Your solution so far, appears to be to put these jew-hating Gospel verses front and center, rub them in good and hard, and then say to ourselves "Gosh, it's in the bible, and the bible's innerrant--whatever are we to do?". Have you jumped over to my side of the argument now?

[donh]

but one cannot really find a period in the last 1000 years where Europe has not been filled with hatred wearing the mask of religion.

Consider Elsie's present apparent stance: that we hate jews because God and the Bible calls for it, and gosh darn, much as we love them, there's nothing we can do. Maybe it's not a mask.

[donh]

Does Schicklgruber mean "grubber of shekels"?

I think a literal tranlation would be something like "fortune digger".

[ToryHeartland]

Maybe it's not a mask.

I have to admit I long ago learned to steer clear of scriptural wrangling, which for me ranks as one of the most futile and moronic of pursuits. Normally, I hold with the view of your remarkable Mr. Thomas Jefferson,

"principles of religion are a subject of accountability to God alone. I inquire after no man's, and trouble none with mine."

Alas, this does not mean that one is necessarily spared the inquires, or sermons, or prosletysing zeal of others. I am sometimes assailed (as we all are, no doubt) by Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons on my doorstep, or proponents of various other evangelical sects on soapboxes in the marketplace; I don't generally bother with such folk but, wherever possible, endeavour instead to simply ignore what is either the misguided missionary zeal, or the manifest ignorance, or the simple boorishness that is on display. Ulimately, I begrudge no one their faith or lack of faith--unless it tips into the dangerous political rantings of some of the Jihadi Mullahs, in which cases the criminal law is right to intervene.

If you are asking, if one scratches the surface, does one often find some very dangerous nonsense, then yes, that has certainly been my unpleasant experience.

And if you are asking if that is my experience of some of the profoundly offensive religious doctrines some espouse on these threads, then I must confirm that this is so.

[gobucks]

Is your point that truthfulness is a less useful way invest your procreation energy than deceit? If so, I doubt it.

I don't recall pinging you to that essay; but I'm glad you spent the time on it.

I did reread it and realized I made a small error - I implied 'male arousal' was in play in a different sense than commonly understood. I did not intend for that to be the case; male arousal is pretty predictable regardless of orientation or religious background. I had intended that the wife be seen as the one who is far, far more vulnerable to the aphrodisiacical effects of truth telling. I had not any background or rational reason to look forward to this when I married Mrs. Gb. I had thought it would be ... familiar.

Instead, I discovered a Husband benefits from this unpredictable response of his wife, consequent to his adherence to Christ, and the marriage bond, consequently, cures.

But, given the strength of your doubt, I doubt this clarification makes a difference?

Ah, I almost forgot: In fact, that sort of strikes me as the kind of misty-eyed science you get from ed-school-trained kindergarten teachers with sheltered, quasi-victorian upbringings.

LOL! Right.

Speaking of right, did you ever read this essay that I posted? I just couldn't get over how Wilder, Rand, and Patterson all had the same basic intersections with regards to loveless marriage, if any, but especially, no kids for all three. And recently I learned that Rand even hated dogs ... what an EYE opener.

Our Forgotten Goddess: Isabel Paterson and the Origins of Libertarianism.

[gobucks]

btw, are you a golfer?

[donh]

Instead, I discovered a Husband benefits from this unpredictable response of his wife, consequent to his adherence to Christ, and the marriage bond, consequently, cures.

But, given the strength of your doubt, I doubt this clarification makes a difference?

Well, I still don't see what this has to do with evolutionary theory. Evolution pretty much only cares about getting viable offspring into the future. The comfort of husbands and wives, or whores and tomcats, seems sort of irrelevant, off hand.

[donh]

btw, are you a golfer?

No. My dad took me golfing when I was about 14, and I had an abreaction. I couldn't believe the ratio of dedicated real estate to net sports activity. I still can't. Consider the ratio of table tennis, by comparison.

[gobucks]

No. My dad took me golfing when I was about 14, and I had an abreaction.

Freud popularized that word, abreaction. Unless I miss my mark, it means you relive a truama so vividly, it is not really something experienced as being 'relived'. It is happening, as it were, for the first time, again.

For you to use such a word in connection w/ your Dad? No wonder you pithily typed 'No.'

However, you should be aware that in the world of those great trustworthy fellows, psychologists, abreactions are seen very positively. Abreactions are essential mileposts that must be passed on the road to full health during the psychotherapeutic experience. Essential catharsis moments if you will...

But they use the word incorrectly, I think, while you used it, I believe, quite correctly. For golf is actually designed to produce abreactions in my view. Ping pong, like all reactionary sports, is designed to lull you toward the false joys provided by Zen and its varients.

My understanding of Freud's Dad, and how he treated his son, Sigmund, leads me to think if I had Sigmund's Dad as my own Dad, I would likely be focusing on words like abreaction too, as well as some of the other things ...

The Mosaic religion had been a Father religion; Christianity became a Son religion. The old God, the Father, took second place; Christ, the Son, stood in His stead, just as in those dark times every son had longed to do.

Moses and Monotheism (1938)

It could be that Sigmund never knew any thing other than "dark times" w/ his Dad. And, logically, if all you experience is dark, why, then light itself .... must be a myth.

btw, I found 'abreaction' in this article too:

Knowledge as an emotional and intellectual realization of the unconscious Gnosiology, Psychedelic Drugs and Prenatal Experiences.

One last thing. Darwin had ancestors who were famous in their own right, but he had one descendent, a grandson, who was also famous:

(betty, the Gnosiology stuff is just an fyi for you; thought you'd possibly want to know about it, though obscure)

[donh]

That's way more about the word "abreaction" than I believe I care to know.

since feeling is first
who pays any attention
to the syntax of things
will never wholly kiss you;

wholly to be a fool
while Spring is in the world

my blood approves,
and kisses are a far better fate
than wisdom

...

e.e.cummings

I think I'll defend my use of the word on the basis that I just like how it makes the sentence feel. I don't think I was primally responding to my father, who is a reasonably personable guy--I think I was primally responding to golf. For some reason, this cummings poem seems to be trying to grab my attention at this point.

Also amusing to me, is that "abreaction" as a cathartic reference, and "unconscious gnosiology" came up in your essay, when the most recent thread of this argument was about the christian persecution and murder of it's philosophical enemies, 2nd most centrally doctrinal of whom, after the jews, were the gnostics and the cathars.

And here I thought you were changing the subject, oh subtle one.

[donh]

Uh, and since you brought up a male tendency toward honesty/fidelity/monogamy in marriage as an evolutionary attribute, however doubtful, I couldn't resist digging up another of my old favorites:

jake hates
	  all the girls(the
shy ones, the bold		paul scorns all
ones; the meek				       the girls(the
proud sloppy sleek)		bright ones, the dim
all except the cold		ones; the slim
		   ones		plump tiny tall)
				all except the
					      dull ones
gus loves all the
		 girls(the
warped ones, the lamed		mike likes all the girls
ones; the mad						(the
moronic maimed)			fat ones, the lean
all except			ones; the mean
	  the dead ones		kind dirty clean)
				all
				   except the green ones
		-- e e cummings

[donh]

It just so happens that I remembered this poem because one boozy dormatory evening when I was a student at Berkeley, fresh out of the Air Force, I figured out that if you could get your housemates to chant it, you could dance lindy hop to the rhythm.

The universe made perfect sense to me for weeks afterwards.

[gobucks]

"e.e.cummings" was the son of a unitarian minister.

From Massachusetts.


Hmmmm.....subtle indeed.

[gobucks]

Berkeley? I have a relative who earned a PhD in genetics from there. She is nice ... sort of.

Donh, would you be willing to help me w/ something? I have determined that the increased conflict between the rationalists and non-rationalists (e.g, the Dover trial) is very akin to the tremendous increase in anti-semitism.

Do you have any links to articles which discusses how adopting a posture of anti-science (more broadly, anti-rationalism) inevitably leads someone to anti-semitism?

[donh]

Do you have any links to articles which discusses how adopting a posture of anti-science (more broadly, anti-rationalism) inevitably leads someone to anti-semitism?

That's a bit strong, don't you think? "Inevitably"? At any rate, you need an article for this? I'm inclined to think that racism doesn't go down with rationalism, per se, but with the consequent increase in general wealth not based on the capacity to do violence better than your neighbors. It's pretty handy to be able to despise those whose real estate you covet, or whose economic subjugation underpins your economy.

[gobucks]

"At any rate, you need an article for this?"

No. I have read several of your posts, including the ones to me. You have said several things which indicate Christians, historically at least, .... well. I figured you knew of articles, which would expand upon your point of view.

But no, I don't need them.

[donh]

Berkeley? I have a relative who earned a PhD in genetics from there. She is nice ... sort of.

I had a girl friend who was a grad student in biology there, trying to get a place on the micro-biology staff. She spent a lot of time mutilating rat's penises for reasons I couldn't fathom, but which she did with great deal of relish--put me off my feed sometimes. When her pet pony died, she made a seatcover of his skin for her truck, and used to talk to it while driving. Now where could you get a girlfriend like that, other than at Berkeley?

[donh]

No. I have read several of your posts, including the ones to me. You have said several things which indicate Christians, historically at least, .... well. I figured you knew of articles, which would expand upon your point of view.

10 years ago, it used to be quite a deal to wrestle up documentation, but the recent changes in attitude by the the Vatican, and the decision to open up it's own archives has ushered in a change. For a real sobering perspective on institutionalized anti-jewish christian theology, esp. as it underpinned the nazi rhetoric, you can't beat the Vatican archives. Did you know there was a building at the Vatican whose sole function was the processing of jewish children kidnapped from their parents by church authorities and destined to be raised as christians in foreign lands? Or did you know that the official paper the Vatican published its formal documents in ran virulent anti-jewish tracts on a weekly basis up until close to the formation of the nazi party? Like most people, I didn't, until I read about it in the Vatican archives. I think there are a couple of books on the subject published recently. At any rate, you don't really need my help, google and the internet make it duck soup to find this stuff now.