Posted on 09/17/2008 8:43:45 AM PDT by Soliton
The Brunswick County school board is looking for a way for creationism to be taught in the classroom side by side with evolution.
"It's really a disgrace for the state school board to impose evolution on our students without teaching creationism," county school board member Jimmy Hobbs said at Tuesday's meeting. "The law says we can't have Bibles in schools, but we can have evolution, of the atheists."
When asked by a reporter, his fellow board members all said they were in favor of creationism being taught in the classroom.
The topic came up after county resident Joel Fanti told the board he thought it was unfair for evolution to be taught as fact, saying it should be taught as a theory because there's no tangible proof it's true.
"I wasn't here 2 million years ago," Fanti said. "If evolution is so slow, why don't we see anything evolving now?"
(Excerpt) Read more at starnewsonline.com ...
Exactly. Evolution and faith are wholly compatible. Efforts such as this make Christians look silly.
This is scandalous. It is absolute essential that we teach water and methane—presto—becoming complex amino acids and the species evolution despite lack of support from the fossil record!
The theory of evolution through natural selection of genetic variation is NOT taught as a theory? Gee, seems to me that “theory” is the first word used to describe it. As far as “proof”; no theory is Science is ever “proven” but provisionally accepted pending contradictory data or a refinement of the theory that better explains data and predicts phenomena.
You may have reconciled them yourself, but I don’t understand how a strong theory is threatened by pointing out its weaknesses—unless evolution requires more faith than Christianity.
Absolutely absurd.
If death, nature red in tooth and claw, the propellent of evolution, was good from the Beginning, why would we need Christ to triumph over it?
I used to be an evolutionist.
Then I was a theistic evolutionist.
Ultimately, I saw that God Created, just as He said He did.
And the ever shifting landscape of evolutionism and its vast array of hoaxes and false positives is far more silly than that.
I am totally OK with creationism being taught. Just not in science class.
Imagine what public school teachers, who might be appropriately accused of distorting evolution, would do to creationism. And as often as not, not in the favor of creationism.
“This is scandalous. It is absolute essential that we teach water and methane—presto—becoming complex amino acids and the species evolution despite lack of support from the fossil record!”
THE CARBON ISOTOPIC DISTRIBUTION OF MURCHISON AMINO ACIDS
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2003/pdf/1036.pdf
The seem to have shot themselves in the foot before stepping outside.
What type of finding might you accept as evidence against creation?
Even their lawyer seems to be unaware of the constitutional restrictions.
1st hour: Creationism
2nd hour: Sex Education
3rd hour: Flat Earth Geography
4th hour: Sex Education Lab
5th hour: Advanced Numerology
6th hour: Biblical Prophecies
7th hour: Non-Western Mythologies
8th hour: Islamic Studies
I hear they are considering Paula Deen for School Superintendent
This guy's no rocket surgeon
At least he’s not asking why there are still monkeys. Yet.
The point is that I would be willing to evaluate—and as a taxpayer would feel better served—by a critique of all the contending theories. If creationists merely wished to include a unit on the intelligent design community’s critique of evolution, how would that be threatening?
I understand and respect that, but creationism has to actually qualify as a theory first. Creationists will not have an answer to my previous question, so creationism is not a scientific theory. It is entirely consistent, in my view, to believe that God created everything, and that he chose the mechanism of evolution to get us here.
A fine sentiment, but there are no alternate theories contending with evolution. This in not my opinion; it is the opinion of the Discovery Institute and the leading proponents of Intelligent Design.
The desire to believe that intervention occurred in the history of living things is not a theory.
Agreed. They'll do more good teaching it as part of a philosophy curriculum, where the can also expand on a much broader range of topics and how religious philosophies apply to them.
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.