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
Iwould have thought that you knew the correct answer to that one. The Lord does indeed tell his own himself, but he says nothing to those who he knows are not his.
I think you were lying when you said you would point us to the thread. Were you lying, or are you going to post a link?
..and I want specific names of the creatures you claim are "transitional." I want first and last names, family history and blood type. Give me genetic codes for each to prove they are related.
Get a grip. The site I linked to isn't even a Christian site. It's an industry site.
That's unfair. It's so hard to get DNA from fossils.
The word "supported" is absolutely meaningless in this context. There is nothing against which a planet needs support or on which a planet hangs. That's the point. It doesn't even work as an analogy.
So I have looked at the article. Tell me what is wrong with it. Be specific.
Funny, the models of a solar system in classrooms hang from the ceiling with string. I think it's a useful image, hanging between competing forces of gravity and momentum.
Which "innocent" did God kill, according to the concepts of God you are referring?
I know of no such claims.....
If you are referring to Christ, then that is, in fact, the central message of the gospel. The innocent took evil into himself and suffered for it.
IF thatis where you are having a problem, then I commend you for hitting the root of all problems with Xty so quickly. All the other little pecadilloes are silly little nothings. If you are going to have a problem with the gospel, this is the place to do it. How could an infinitely holy and impure God become the essence of evil and die under its curse, only to triumph completely over it, leaving an empty tomb as testimony to the validity of the claim. It is either the most incredulous collection of blasphemous horseshit the world has ever seen or it is the central story of the cosmos.
Thank you for your interaction.
I don't believe you.
You have shown evidence of bad faith--you should not be believed.
The real solar system isn't hanging from a string in a classroom. And if it is "hanging" between gravity and momentum, then it is not "hanging on nothing," as Job states. Which again proves my point that the bible just isn't scientifically prescient.
Great. It is a good start. Let me know how you get on with the rest of it.
Well, duh. Such a sluggish imagination. I don't think I want you teaching children.
Thanks, Jo. Good post. His love is Awesome. I know I'm so undeserving, yet He offers it anyway. There is no greater love.
I'll give it all the consideration that philosophical musings deserve.
It doesn't matter whether my interest is genuine. You aren't debating me. This is a public forum, and so far you have revealed yourself to be an immature twit. You promised to provide a link, and when asked for the link, you made a children's game of it, finally posting the link to a third party.
You made certain claims about the article that I don't find in the article. For example, I don't see a claim in the article that a new species was created. The title suggests that, but headlines are written to sell copies, not argue science.
Here's what the article actually says: "...evolutionary biologists at the University of Chicago replaced a single gene in fruit flies and discovered a mechanism by which two different "races" begin to become different species..."
LOL... I'm sure you wouldn't want me teaching children; I wouldn't teach them your fairy tales and creation myths are true. And I'm sure you'd just hate that.
No, not biological science, but evolution, which like it's cousin astrology, is a boat anchor around the throat of science.
"Which part?"
The heart of evolution is falsehood.
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.