This is the draft standard in Texas.
Posted on 10/17/2008 7:59:18 AM PDT by Soliton
Three antievolutionists have been appointed to a six-member committee to review the draft set of Texas state science standards, and defenders of the integrity of science education in the Lone Star state are livid. "The committee was chosen by 12 of the 15 members of the board of education, with each panel member receiving the support of two board members," as the Dallas Morning News (October 16, 2008) explains. Six members of the board "aligned with social conservative groups" chose Stephen C. Meyer, the director of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture, Ralph Seelke, a biology professor at the University of Wiconsin, Superior, and Charles Garner, a chemistry professor at Baylor University.
Meyer, Seelke, and Garner are all signatories of the Discovery Institute-sponsored "Dissent from Darwinism" statement. Meyer and Seelke are also coauthors of Explore Evolution: The Arguments For and Against Neo-Darwinism (Hill House, 2008), which, like Of Pandas and People, is a supplementary textbook that is intended to instill scientifically unwarranted doubts about evolution. A recent review by biologist John Timmer summarized, "But the book doesn't only promote stupidity, it demands it. In every way except its use of the actual term, this is a creationist book." Garner reportedly told the Houston Press (December 14, 2000) that he "criticizes evolutionary theory in class."
Meyer and Seelke also testified in the 2005 "kangaroo court" hearings held by three antievolutionist members of the Kansas state board of education, in which a parade of antievolutionist witnesses expressed their support for the so-called minority report version of the state science standards (written with the aid of a local "intelligent design" organization), complained of repression by a dogmatic evolutionary establishment, and claimed to have detected atheism lurking "between the lines" of the standards..
(Excerpt) Read more at ncseweb.org ...
Some preexisting genes within a species can become more common than other preexisting genes within a gene pool. You dance so awkwardly.
Well said.
lol
Correction. These are scientists who don't follow your religion.
I wouldn’t have thought it was possible to set the ignorance-meets-arrogance bar higher than it already had been in these discussions, but you’ve managed to surprise me. Congratulations.
Pure ad hominem hypocrisy. Congratulations to you.
The resident “scientists” are amazing, aren’t they?
“What creationists and creation "scientists" do is the opposite of the scientific method. They start with an a priori belief and twist, manipulate, or ignore the data to make things fit that belief.” [excerpt]Do scientists look for hemoglobin in dinosaur bones?
Calling you ignorant and arrogant is not an ad hominem. Claiming that your arguments are worthless because you’re ignorant and arrogant, would be. But I didn’t say that. Perhaps if you actually made some arguments rather than simply sniping, I could work something up.
An ad hominem attack is "marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made..."
Get a dictionary.
Bullseye.
Wrong. “Truth will out.”
These men studied, earned their degrees. They will most likely ensure that the facts are reported, and keep the philosophical out of the guidelines. Call them to task on any factual error, but not for their world views.
As to your own error: most religions have a creation narrative. The Judeo-Christian and Islamic traditions share the same one.
That “Dissent” reads “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”
http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/
Wow. Scary
Got several, thanks. Ad hominem is an adjective that refers to a type of argument. I did not make an argument.
Dictionaries don't help people who can't understand what they're saying.
This is where the hidden agenda comes in. These three people have written for The Discovery Institue. The Discovery Institue published a text book on "Creation Science". Teaching "Creation Science" in PUBLIC schools was found to violate the Constitution by SCOTUS so they deleted "Creation Science" and substituted "Intelligent Design" in its place. State courts have found that "Intelligent Design" is just another name for "Creation Science", so the Discover Institute has changed tactics again. The tactics may have changed, but their purpose has not. This innocuouse sounding proposal is designed to allow teachers enough wiggle room to sneak creationism in the back door. Teachers, by the way, can already discuss the percieved weaker points of the ToE.
Nothing like poisoning the well of rational criticism...
But they only want to teach the literal interpretation of Genesis. Creationists do not push for the Norse or Hindu creation "narratives" (did you have to retype this after you typed "myth" the first time?). The truth is that many Jews and Christians have no problem with evolution. It is fundamentalists that do. For some reason they apparently can't get their kids to go to Sunday school, so they want to turn public schools into Sunday schools to teach their one subset of Judeo Christian beliefs to ALL children regardless of their faiths.
I believe they prefer this. If you call them what they are, creationists, it undermines their hidden agenda.
This is the draft standard in Texas.
Yep. You were incompetent to formulate one, so you resorted to an ad hominem attack. I don't blame you for being afraid.
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.