Anti-Creationists Backed Into a Corner?

AgapePress ^ | February 24, 2003 | Jim Brown

[Remedy]

More than 200 evolutionists have issued a statement aimed at discrediting advocates of intelligent design and belittling school board resolutions that question the validity of Darwinism.

The National Center for Science Education has issued a statement that backs evolution instruction in public schools and pokes fun at those who favor teaching the controversy surrounding Darwinian evolution. According to the statement, "it is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible" for creation science to be introduced into public school science textbooks. [See Earlier Article]

Forrest Turpen, executive director of Christian Educators Association International, says it is obvious the evolution-only advocates feel their ideology and livelihood are being threatened.

"There is a tremendous grouping of individuals whose life and whose thought patterns are based on only an evolutionary point of view," Turpen says, "so to allow criticism of that would be to criticize who they are and what they're about. That's one of the issues."

Turpen says the evolution-only advocates also feel their base of financial rewards is being threatened.

"There's a financial issue here, too," he says. "When you have that kind of an establishment based on those kinds of thought patterns, to show that there may be some scientific evidence -- and there is -- that would refute that, undermines their ability to control the science education and the financial end of it."

Turpen says although evolutionists claim they support a diversity of viewpoints in the classroom, they are quick to stifle any criticism of Darwinism. In Ohio recently, the State Board of Education voted to allow criticism of Darwinism in its tenth-grade science classes.

[Remedy]

FOSSIL THUMPERS UNITE WITH THEIR LIBERAL COMRADES IN THE MEDIA.

Media Bias Stifles Creationists' Scientific Findings, Perspective He explains that the secular media -- which he describes as atheistic and anti-Christian -- publishes most anything it can that appears to indoctrinate people and "hits against the Bible."

---

Institute for Creation Research

Christian Answers

Creation Research Society

True.Origin

CARM

Revolution Against Evolution

International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design (ISCID)

[P8riot]

You forgot Answers in Genesis

[RobRoy]

>>In Ohio recently, the State Board of Education voted to allow criticism of Darwinism in its tenth-grade science classes.<<

You mean the vote students were not allowed to criticize Darwinism?

Holy cow that is sleasy science, in any free mans mind!

[atlaw]

Just out of curiosity, what would the curriculum in a Creation Science class consist of?

[staytrue]

Why should anyone study creationism or intelligent design ?
It has no use.

At least evolution (even if flawed or even totally wrong) is useful from the stand point of comparetive anatomy, genetics and population dynamics.

Intelligent design merely says, "god did this", end of discussion. It is just not useful.

[realpatriot71]

I don't think the folks in Ohio wanted a "creation science class" nor did they want creation taught in biology class per se, but rather wanted a disclaimer placed in the textbooks that stated that evolution was only a theory, and not necessarily scientifically established fact.

[MineralMan]

"Just out of curiosity, what would the curriculum in a Creation Science class consist of?
"

First two chapters of Genesis. That's it. Memorize 'em and you get an "A".

[Dataman]

Good find.

[USMA83]

These disciplines are the exclusive realm of evolution??
really.

[mg39]

"Just out of curiosity, what would the curriculum in a Creation Science class consist of?"

It would consist of a textbook entitled, "1001 creation myths from 1001 one-and-only-true-religions throughout the world."

[Dataman]

Hey Atlaw

From the article. it is obvious the evolution-only advocates feel their ideology and livelihood are being threatened.

Just out of curiosity, what would the curriculum in a Creation Science class consist of?

If you haven't got a clue, you are ignorant of the opposition's position. Subject-changing questions are a poor substitute for homework.

[mamalujo]

It is the same study of science but in Creation we know where we came from.

[MoGalahad]

Maybe you should consider changing your handle because you just said something untrue. Creationists do not stop at "god did this". It is simply our philosophical foundation and starting point, just like yours is apparently that there is nothing but sensory experienced nature, i.e., 'naturalism'.

[jimt]

Just out of curiosity, what would the curriculum in a Creation Science class consist of?

"God said it, I believe it, and that settles it. Repeat this five hundred times daily."

[atlaw]

Will this propsed disclaimer apply to all scientific theories, or just evolution?

[Dataman]

At least evolution (even if flawed or even totally wrong) is useful from the stand point of comparetive [sic] anatomy, genetics and population dynamics.

Comparative anatomy needs evolution like a rocket needs a sofa.

Genetics needs evolution like Ted Turner needs Jane.

Population dynamics needs evolution like a pencil needs a steering wheel.

[Ichneumon]

"so to allow criticism of that would be to criticize who they are and what they're about. That's one of the issues."

No, it isn't. The issue is that if you want to try to criticize a scientific viewpoint, do it in the peer-reviewed science journals where it belongs. Don't try to make science classrooms your battleground -- schoolkids don't have the background to be the jury on that debate, which is probably why creationists are trying to drag their challenge there instead of doing it in front of actual scientists.

[f.Christian]

Creation - science . . . reveal a Creator - Designer - - - continously !

[Vic3O3]

ping

[mamalujo]

or as my husband would say,"God said it and that settles it"