Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evolution Disclaimer Supported
The Advocate (Baton Rouge) ^ | 12/11/02 | WILL SENTELL

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."


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: crevolist; evolution; rades
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 2,541-2,5602,561-2,5802,581-2,600 ... 7,021-7,032 next last
To: nanrod
I'd me more impressed with the numbers of people posting this stuff if they weren't turning out to all be the same person.
2,561 posted on 01/03/2003 1:27:23 PM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2517 | View Replies]

To: usastandsunited
Please describe describe the "big bang" occurrence using a well understood formula.

Heheh, well understood by whom? That level of calculation is beyond my expertise, and, I suspect, beyond yours as well. However, if you are interested, you might like to examine Big Bang Chronology.

2,562 posted on 01/03/2003 1:30:30 PM PST by Condorman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2543 | View Replies]

To: Junior
the post-modern morph jungle---juggle age...

king kong---the machine w/o brain/soul...

seeking love/assurrance!

faye-ph-raye/king-junior-kong!

btw...i seek my maker/love---GOD!
2,563 posted on 01/03/2003 1:34:10 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2560 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
Condorman: HCl + NaOH -> NaCl + H2O

Balrog666: Hey, that only works because the Goddess has enough tiny, invisible, assistants to manipulate all of those subatomic particles each and ever time they gather to worship Her through their eternal dance.

My favorite "creationist logic" example from who-knows-where:

You're looking at a beach. Off to your left, footprints come from around the bend down to a concrete boatramp before you. More prints lead away from the boatramp and out of sight around the bend to your right.

Conventional science says someone earlier walked in the sand from your left, crossed the boat ramp, and continued down the beach. Creationism says that up the beach to your right, God created a man who walked down the beach to the boat ramp. At that point he disappears from history. On the other edge of the boat ramp, God created another man ...


2,564 posted on 01/03/2003 1:34:54 PM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2531 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
Sorry Fester, but word games will not convince me of intelligent design.

Intelligent design was created by a lazy scientist, latched onto by creationists as a way to get into science curriculum, and then decided that it was a competitive theory to Evolution.

Sorry, it is NOT science, therefore it is not a competitive theory to evolution.

When you say intelligent designer, or god, or whatever you want to call the designer or whatever, it goes out of the realm of science and into the realm of religion.

End of story.

Evolution is scientific, fossils, DNA evidence, biology etc proves it every day, more and more. Not less and less as G3K and a few others like to claim here.

Intelligent design CANNOT be proven scientifically, this is NOT a philosophy thread, this is not a religious thread, as you all seem to think.

This is about science, PURE and not so simple.
2,565 posted on 01/03/2003 1:35:10 PM PST by Aric2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2556 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7
Creator' or not, still makes perfect sense to me.

That's probably because you haven't thought about it.
What does the endowing?

Our self evident, conscious free will, -- our ablity to reason.

Incidently, that was a bold, thoughtless, comment.

2,566 posted on 01/03/2003 1:35:56 PM PST by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2559 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
When you say intelligent designer, or god, or whatever you want to call the designer or whatever, it goes out of the realm of science and into the realm of religion.

Do you believe that all came into existence by chance? If so, do you believe that "matter" is all there is? Are you a materialist?

2,567 posted on 01/03/2003 1:38:11 PM PST by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2565 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Are you only tring to understand life chemically/mechanically in a junk/grave-yard?
2,568 posted on 01/03/2003 1:38:21 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2565 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Pure 'what'...

globdidit...NO intelligence/design in you---your mind!
2,569 posted on 01/03/2003 1:42:51 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2565 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I'd me more impressed with the numbers of people posting this stuff if they weren't turning out to all be the same person.

As Ted said, his views are reaching "critical mass." Soon everyone posting on FreeRepublic will be Ted clones. Something like the Borg, I guess. (Side issue: I wonder if his clones send freepmai to each other.)

2,570 posted on 01/03/2003 1:44:08 PM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2561 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
I am Tedved of Borg. Prepare to be dissimulated!
2,571 posted on 01/03/2003 1:46:30 PM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2570 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
"That is almost exactly the thrust of what 'scientific heretics' were told. - Read much history, fester?"

You know, I don't read nearly as much history as I should, and that is why I tend to distrust bald statements from fellows who claim to know it well.

One small source I found on the subject reads as follows: "Although the Inquisition was created to combat the heretical Cathari and Waldenses, the Inquisition later extended it's activity to include witches, diviners, blasphemers, and other sacrilegious persons."

It appears to have been both a spiritual and intellectual abberation that grew out of the Catholic church, but I would hardly count this as indicative of religious people as a whole. Do you really think everyone who adheres to a creationist viewpoint is against scientific study or completely incapable of the same? If so, you would have to reject both Newton and Galileo as scientists, that latter of whom suffered under the Roman Inquisition.

"Did you imagine that you made a rebuttal to my post at #2457? - Or perhaps you just concede.

This remark does not exactly advance your cause in establishing evolution as the supremely reigning worldview among men. No. But it exacerbates a discussion that is otherwise worth conducting in a civil way.

2,572 posted on 01/03/2003 1:47:54 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2545 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
borg/bog science...evolution!
2,573 posted on 01/03/2003 1:49:41 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2571 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
What my religious beliefs are, have nothing to do with the science of evolution.

Science and religion are 2 separate entities.

My religious beliefs, I keep totally separate from my scientific views.

One is philisophical, the meaning of life, morals etc. Religion

one is logical and fact based. Science

They are kept separate, because they are like OIL and water, they do not mix. Religion is based on the unproven pretext of god. Science is based on provable facts.

There is a difference, even if most creationists do not wish it that way.

I keep the facts spearated from the emotion and religion. Sure, I have my own theological thinking as far as where the universe came from and how we all got here, BUT, it is NOT scientific, and therefore has NO place in a scientific discussion.
2,574 posted on 01/03/2003 1:53:36 PM PST by Aric2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2567 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Keep telling your therapist...you are convincing me!
2,575 posted on 01/03/2003 1:55:29 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2574 | View Replies]

To: Junior
If rights come from a source external to the individual (God, the State), that source can opt to rescind those rights.

Rights are not inherent. They are endowed, and you are correct that they can be rescinded. Fortunately, it is not the state but God that does the endowing.

Rights, of course, are violated every day -- just as the 10 Commandments are broken every day. But this means is that those who oppress are in rebellion against God. They act so without authority and will one day have to account for it before an angry God.

Because rights are God-given is why we can say that oppression is evil.

2,576 posted on 01/03/2003 1:56:41 PM PST by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2560 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
uni(self)-flux(evolution) polar(stuck) morphing!
2,577 posted on 01/03/2003 1:57:34 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2574 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
Do you really think everyone who adheres to a creationist viewpoint is against scientific study or completely incapable of the same? If so, you would have to reject both Newton and Galileo as scientists, that latter of whom suffered under the Roman Inquisition.

Come on now Fester, let's get real. To say that ALL creationists do this, or ALL evolutionists do that is ridiculous and you know it.

G3K likes to say that we evo's are a bunch of communists, well, if we were, would we be on this board?

Let's get serious here, and stop with the silly rhetoric?

Of course NOT all creationists are a bunch of antiscience whackos, and most evolutionists are not a bunch of antireligious whackos either. SO come on, let's stop the BS and get to it, shall we?
2,578 posted on 01/03/2003 1:59:01 PM PST by Aric2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2572 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Re: 2187: I did examine your post and your comments were limited to the genetic code. I agree that the appearance of algorithms in the code are an interesting phenomenon should they prove to be true, although your comments indicated that this is an area of on-going research.

Should the presence of non-naturally occurring algorithms be confirmed, the next question which will fill 3K-post threads will be "Who put them there?" But my reading indicated that we were far from reaching this stage just yet. Please alert us when a peer-reviewed report of these findings is published.

But to the topic at hand, there is no way for us to tell if the universe was designed or not. We are familiar only with objects created by Earth-bound critters, and our only method for detecting design is subjective and unreliable, being based as it is on personal experience and history rather than an objective measure of design.
2,579 posted on 01/03/2003 1:59:44 PM PST by Condorman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2552 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
where the universe came from and how we all got here, BUT, it is NOT scientific,

let me guess...space/glop spores!

2,580 posted on 01/03/2003 1:59:48 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2574 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 2,541-2,5602,561-2,5802,581-2,600 ... 7,021-7,032 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