Posted on 12/11/2002 6:28:08 AM PST by A2J
By WILL SENTELL
wsentell@theadvocate.com
Capitol news bureau
High school biology textbooks would include a disclaimer that evolution is only a theory under a change approved Tuesday by a committee of the state's top school board.
If the disclaimer wins final approval, it would apparently make Louisiana just the second state in the nation with such a provision. The other is Alabama, which is the model for the disclaimer backers want in Louisiana.
Alabama approved its policy six or seven years ago after extensive controversy that included questions over the religious overtones of the issue.
The change approved Tuesday requires Louisiana education officials to check on details for getting publishers to add the disclaimer to biology textbooks.
It won approval in the board's Student and School Standards/ Instruction Committee after a sometimes contentious session.
"I don't believe I evolved from some primate," said Jim Stafford, a board member from Monroe. Stafford said evolution should be offered as a theory, not fact.
Whether the proposal will win approval by the full state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education on Thursday is unclear.
Paul Pastorek of New Orleans, president of the board, said he will oppose the addition.
"I am not prepared to go back to the Dark Ages," Pastorek said.
"I don't think state boards should dictate editorial content of school textbooks," he said. "We shouldn't be involved with that."
Donna Contois of Metairie, chairwoman of the committee that approved the change, said afterward she could not say whether it will win approval by the full board.
The disclaimer under consideration says the theory of evolution "still leaves many unanswered questions about the origin of life.
"Study hard and keep an open mind," it says. "Someday you may contribute to the theories of how living things appeared on earth."
Backers say the addition would be inserted in the front of biology textbooks used by students in grades 9-12, possibly next fall.
The issue surfaced when a committee of the board prepared to approve dozens of textbooks used by both public and nonpublic schools. The list was recommended by a separate panel that reviews textbooks every seven years.
A handful of citizens, one armed with a copy of Charles Darwin's "Origin of the Species," complained that biology textbooks used now are one-sided in promoting evolution uncritically and are riddled with factual errors.
"If we give them all the facts to make up their mind, we have educated them," Darrell White of Baton Rouge said of students. "Otherwise we have indoctrinated them."
Darwin wrote that individuals with certain characteristics enjoy an edge over their peers and life forms developed gradually millions of years ago.
Backers bristled at suggestions that they favor the teaching of creationism, which says that life began about 6,000 years ago in a process described in the Bible's Book of Genesis.
White said he is the father of seven children, including a 10th-grader at a public high school in Baton Rouge.
He said he reviewed 21 science textbooks for use by middle and high school students. White called Darwin's book "racist and sexist" and said students are entitled to know more about controversy that swirls around the theory.
"If nothing else, put a disclaimer in the front of the textbooks," White said.
John Oller Jr., a professor at the University of Louisiana-Lafayette, also criticized the accuracy of science textbooks under review. Oller said he was appearing on behalf of the Louisiana Family Forum, a Christian lobbying group.
Oller said the state should force publishers to offer alternatives, correct mistakes in textbooks and fill in gaps in science teachings. "We are talking about major falsehoods that should be addressed," he said.
Linda Johnson of Plaquemine, a member of the board, said she supports the change. Johnson said the new message of evolution "will encourage students to go after the facts."
Ha haha haha ha! Stretch things much?
Again, you are a very simple man. I simply said that making a good argument or asking a question which cannot be answered here on free republic by no means can "prove" or "disprove" something. You are a fool who claims to have "thoroughly disproven" evolution by posting a few questions and some dubious figures on a free republic thread. I am not bashing this site, you are twisting everything around (surprise!).
I have met some of the most intelligent and well read people around here at free republic. Do I think they are THE MOST intelligent people in the world about every subject in the world? Do I believe they are all extraordinarily well studied in evolution and microbiology? I'm sure some are, but most are not. Stumping a surfer on free republic does not prove your theory nor disprove theirs.
And it is this belief that you have thoroughly disproven evolution here on free republic that leads me to conclude you are a simpleton. Now argue against this logic directly. I am making a claim that you cannot refute, therefore any claim you have against being a simpleton is false. I'm you.
By the way, you have never responded to my statement that I have disproven God using your logic...
How old is the earth?
Race-based slavery was practiced for centuries prior to the theory of evolution, and it was Biblically-based. Does "child of Ham" ring a bell?
You spout easily refuted irrelevancies; it is as if the very core of your existence depends upon your being right. Is your psyche that fragile?
Evidently, one should pray and meditate upon the appropriate Bible verses.
Actually I had not noticed your post. Nevertheless, it was proper to ignore it. It is the usual nonsense which evolutionists do of posting a lot of stuff that is true, but is absolutely not to the point being discussed. The post you were responding to, #1276 said:
For a supposed astronomer you do not even know your terms. It is called the LAW OF UNIVERSAL GRAVITATION it is far more than a theory. As I told physicist, by denying something which you know to be true you are being dishonest. If you are a radio astronomer you know that gravity has been observed. If you do not know it, then you are not a radio astronomer, so either way you are being dishonest.
You and your friends are trying to create confusion in order to try to dismiss my posts as nonsense. Specifically that gravity has been observed and evolution never has been observed. I ask all those who do not believe that gravity has been observed or do not believe that it is observable to go on top of a 20 story building and jump. This will have two benefits: one it will prove to you that there are indeed universal scientific laws, and two, it will rid the world of a few people lacking in common sense (and perhaps win you a posthmous Darwin Award!). Gravity is observed everyday by everyone. Evolution has NEVER been observed.
BTW - it is interesting that evolutionists when shown that some scientific statement is true, try to challenge the truth of a scientific theory instead of prove their own evolutionary theory. It shows clearly to me that evolutionists are quite aware that evolution is not a fact, but just rhetorical nonsense.
Your dissertation does not address anything on the above. It is what I call confusionism. Trying to divert from the point of the discussion with irrelevancies. The point was, and both you and physicist should be ashamed to have denied it, that gravity is definitely and absolutely true and observable. The same cannot be said for the phony theory of evolution.
No, it is pseudo-science to make the ignorant think that they know something. It is interesting that when Darwin and Wallace expounded the theory of evolution to the Linnaean society it was completely ignored. It only gained traction when it was published in popular form in the Origins.
You say it again. You truly are a simple, simple man. You calim to have "thoroughly disproven" evolution. You are a nut-case...
I do not see you (or your friends) refuting my statements that disprove evolution. Perhaps the reason is that they are based on scientific facts.
Anyway, thanks for the insults, they show your ignorance, not mine.
This is a brilliant refutation. I am ashamed that I did not use it myself. Well done...
If the figures are dubious then you and your friends should be able to disprove them. They are not, that is why you cannot disprove them.
As I said, there is a wide availability of information on these subjects out there. They are easily available in books and the internet. That none of the evolutionists here can find a refutation shows quite well that my points are valid.
In fact, your descending to insults on every post, Patrick's constant insults and attempt at diversion, as well as the similar posts by other evolutionists for the last 400 posts or so, show quite well that I have hit the nail on the head regarding evolution and all you and the evolutionists here have to counter it is lame insults and rhetoric.
You say it again. You truly are a simple, simple man. You calim to have "thoroughly disproven" evolution. You are a nut-case... -me-
I do not see you (or your friends) refuting my statements that disprove evolution. Perhaps the reason is that they are based on scientific facts. Anyway, thanks for the insults, they show your ignorance, not mine. -you-
Oh to the contrary. Only in your mind does it prove my ignorance. In everyone else's mind it does not. Continue to live in your own world where you are ashamed of your own beliefs and blast others for thinking otherwise. Why should we think like you when you are clearly embarrassed to answer a logical question?
Again I state: I have seen refutations to most of your skewed statistical evidence. Lurkers and the rest of the world are free to read them. However, THE FACT THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU HAVE TOTALLY DISPROVEN EVOLUTION ON FREE REPUBLIC IS INSANE. There is no other way to see it. Even if you have the answer and we are all totally wrong (extreme IF), is that all it takes? Defeat logical (and lovely) people on free republic and win a Nobel Prize? It is absurd.
For everyone else. I am not conceding defeat to this simple man. I am merely trying to show him how absurd his argument is. I have seen on this thread alone people of incredible intelligence and knowledge. No offense taken by anybody I hope...
Back to gore3000. How old is the Earth?
And of course you started that stupid smear campaign due to my daring to ask questions about evolution which neither you nor your friends can answer. As I have stated DIRECTLY TO YOU numerous times, I will not answer your irrelevant question. Your dishonesty in not even addressing your post to me is self evident. You are a lamer gratuitously attacking me because I have thoroughly disproven your atheistic/materialistic, pseudo-scientific evolutionary nonsense. The proof is all over this thread from the inability of any of the evolutionists here in showing that abiogenesis is even remotely possible within what science knows to be absolutely true, to the inability of any of the evolutionists here to refute the following posts made some 400 posts ago:
Neither you nor any evolutionists has ever given proof that a single species has transformed itself into another more complex species. If I am wrong, let's see the proof. Come up with a real arguement that slams evolution can you do it?
There are many. The bacterial flagellum is one. The program by which a single cell at conception turns into a 100 trillion cells at the time of birth - with every single cell of the exactly proper kind in the exactly proper place is another. There are many more which have been scientifically proven, but these two should keep you busy for a while.
988 posted on 12/23/2002 7:07 AM PST by gore3000
'Gradual loss of egg laying' is more easily said than done. You must remember that the you need to provide nutrition to the developing organism throughout its development - as well as after the birth until it can feed itself. To say that all these changes can occur simultaneously is totally ludicrous and you have disproven nothing. Let's see an article describing how this change occurred in detail. Can you find any? I doubt it because this is one of the things evolutionists never speak of.
989 posted on 12/23/2002 7:14 AM PST by gore3000
And where did you debunk the flagellum besides in your own mind?
As to the eye spot, your article only says that because it happened more than once then therefore the eye spot could have occurred. It is not a refutation of the complex mechanism required for an eye spot.
BTW - a blog from Don Lindsay is proof of absolutely nothing. The guy cannot even give references for his nonsense.
991 posted on 12/23/2002 7:28 AM PST by gore3000
That none of you evolutionists can refute these scientific questions central to the theory of evolution, shows quite well that your adherence to this theory has nothing to do with science but to your arrogant atheistic proclivities.
Which is totally irrelevant to my statement. Evolution is racist and Darwin supported the extermination of 'inferior' races as the following shows:
"I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the progress of civilization than you seem inclined to admit. Remember what risk the nations of Europe ran, not so many centuries ago of being overwhelmed by the Turks, and how ridiculous such an idea now is! The more civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world."
Darwin to Graham, July 3, 1881.
Thanks for the insults. Seems all you can do is bash me and bash this forum. Your desperation in the face of scientific facts is evident to all.
BTW - Name ONE (1) species has been observed to have transformed itself into another more complex species. If anyone is insane it is evolutionists who claim that evolution is science. Science is about observations and evolution has never been observed.
The birth of a hammerhead shark was never observed in the wild until very recently. Yet we were pretty sure it gave birth... You are arguing on disturbed premises.
You think that we think that when a new species is born, neon lights light up and a huge sign says "EVOLUTION OCCURRING!!! TAKE A LOOK". New species are discovered daily, we don't know all that there is to know.
We didn't know as an absolute fact that the moon was not made of cheese until we landed there. Nobody had actually observed a piece of the moon up close. But we knew. We really did.
USING YOUR SAME LOGIC, there is no god, as nobody has ever seen him. Go ahead and try to bring up Moses and I will claim that I just saw my dog give birth to a superdog that can talk.
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.