Posted on 08/16/2004 9:40:47 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
Samuel Chen was a high school sophomore who believed in freedom of speech and the unfettered pursuit of knowledge. He thought his public high school did, too, but when it came to the subject of evolution -- well, now he's not so sure.
In October 2002, Chen began working to get Dr. Michael Behe, professor of biological sciences at Lehigh University, to give a lecture at Emmaus High School in Emmaus, Pennsylvania.
Chen, who was co-chair of a student group that tries to stress the importance of objectivity on controversial issues, knew that Behe would be perfect, since the group was examining evolution as a topic. The author of Darwin's Black Box, a critique of the foundational underpinnings of evolution, Behe had presented his work and debated the subject in universities in the U.S. and England.
Behe agreed to come in February 2004 and give an after-school lecture entitled, "Evolution: Truth or Myth?" As the school year drew to a close in 2003, Chen had all the preliminaries nailed down: he had secured Behe's commitment, received approval from school officials, and reserved the school auditorium.
Then he found out just how entrenched Darwinist orthodoxy was in the science department at Emmaus. By the following August, Chen had entered into a six-month battle to preserve the Behe lecture.
As the struggle unfolded, it became obvious that those who opposed Behe coming to Emmaus didn't seem to care about his credentials. In addition to publishing over 35 articles in refereed biochemical journals, Darwin's Black Box was internationally reviewed in over 100 publications and named by National Review and World magazine as one of the 100 most important books of the 20th century.
Instead, it was Behe's rejection of Darwinism -- in favor of what is called "intelligent design" -- that drove opposition. According to the Discovery Institute, of which Behe is a fellow, this theory holds "that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."
The head of the science department, John Hnatow, sent a statement to every faculty member in the school stressing that Emmaus held to the official policy of the National Science Teachers Association. That policy states: "There is no longer a debate among scientists about whether evolution has taken place."
It appeared there would be no debate at Emmaus, either. Some of the science teachers would not even allow Chen to address their classes and explain to students what Behe's lecture would be about.
Chen said various tactics were apparently used to undercut the event, including an attempt to cancel the lecture and fold the student organization without the knowledge of Chen and other members; requiring that the necessary funds for the lecture be raised much faster than for other student events; and moving the lecture from the auditorium to the school cafeteria.
One science teacher in particular, Carl Smartschan, seemed particularly riled about the upcoming lecture. Smartschan took it upon himself to talk to every teacher in the science department, insisting that intelligent design was "unscientific" and "scary stuff." He asked the principal to cancel the lecture, and then, when the principal refused, asked the faculty advisor for the student group to halt the lecture. Smartschan even approached Chen and demanded that the student organization pay to have an evolutionist come to lecture later in the year.
Smartschan's campaign to get the Behe lecture canceled was surprising to Chen because the event was scheduled after school, and not during class time, and was sponsored by a student group, not the school itself. Nevertheless, Chen persevered. The lecture was a success, attracting more than 500 people.
In the process, however, Chen's struggle took its toll. His health deteriorated over the course of the controversy, to the point where he collapsed three times in one month, including once at school. "My health has been totally junked," he told AFA Journal.
Brian Fahling, senior trial attorney and senior policy advisor for the American Family Association Center for Law & Policy, is advising Chen on his options for the coming year. Fahling said, "Schools are not allowed to interfere with viewpoints with which they disagree, and schools cannot disrupt the right of the students to participate in the academic and intellectual life."
Despite the hardship, Chen said he would do it all over again because the issue is so important. "I feel that there's a dictatorship on academic freedom in our public schools now," he said, adding, "I refer to evolution education as a tyranny .... You can't challenge it in our schools. Kids have been thrown out of class for challenging it."
That tyranny can be intimidating to students. "Some of the students who support me are afraid to speak out, especially because they saw how the science department reacted," Chen said. "They have a fear of speaking out against it in their classes."
On the other hand, he added that some students "are now questioning evolution, some for the first time."
That may be the first step in the overthrow of Darwin's dictatorship.
Once more, this time with feelwing: "there are no other theories."
A theory has to explain the evidence, be falsifiable and make predictions. Only evolution meets these criteria. If you have something else that does, put up or shut up.
I can't explain how you are wrong if you make no statements. Make a point, invoke the SLOT, say something. Then you will get a response.
Hmmm...
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
Main Entry: 1gos·pel
Pronunciation: 'gäs-p&l
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English gOdspel
4 : something accepted as infallible truth or as a guiding principle
I won't belabor the point.
And 'there was nothing, then it exploded', is just a wee bit of a simplification.
Indeed.
If you have one, I would very much appreciate a "link of enlightenment" which provides a theory explaining the origin of matter in the universe.
Regards,
Please post the "many" problems that the second law of Thermodynamics poses to the theory of evolution.
Please be succinct.
Don't. People who quiote dictionary definitions are usually trying to argue themselves out of a hole. We both know what it means to accept something 'as gospel'.
This page (and the preceding one) looks like a fair introduction, though I'm not an expert. I'm pinging one, however.
I'm gonna need more nourishment than popcorn to survive the wait...
I agreeably disagree!
A jar of peanut butter, not unlike the millions of other jars of peanut butter sealed in a factory. We noticed that the jar is made of glass which has minimal thermal resistances. Heat can come into the jar, and heat can leave the jar, all without unsealing it.
The organic material within the jar, peanut butter, is such that if information is exposed to it, it is highly usable as fuel and building materials.
The preexisting highly sophisticated information, i.e. bacteria, can order the use of the organic material only based on its design. Without the marvelous bacterial systems designed to assimilate the material, the organic material just erodes away into useless matter. Poring a chemical alphabet into a jar of peanut butter has been demonstrated to not lead to life either. A prearranged grouping of intelligently designed code is required to promulgate life, otherwise the food industry couldn't bank on untainted peanut butter on our shelves.
Absent a prearranged, reproducing, self-healing, self replicating, adaptable and designed grouping of information, there would be no life. And the life we see today is winding down and being corrupted by the SLOT. The extinction rate is climbing daily, while new species is stuck at zero. We did not use to have genetic degenerative diseases, AIDS, Sickle Cell Anemia, Polio, M.S., Parkinson's, Alzheimer's ...
We are Devolving just like the universe clearly dictates to us via observation. Its in the genes!
Woops, sorry RWP, missed that post, well, I'll just wait with everyone else and let you deal with it.
Ok - so you want to belabor the point. My opinion is that when corrected, some people will obfuscate and redirect - rather than accept the correction. If you don't like the term "the Gospel of evolution", don't use it - but I think it provides an apt description. To wit: I asked for a link that provides a theory on the origins of matter. It seems like a basic question - the foundation on whcih to build your evolutionary theory. However, the author of your link appears clueless:
But what about questions like "What caused the big bang?" "What happened before the universe was created?" "Are there other universes, and if so what are their properties?" "Why do the laws of physics have the structure that they have?" While some questions are ill-posed (such as what happened before time was created), others are pretty darn good questions for which there doesn't seem to be a way to obtain an answer (aside from just making one up and believing it). In any case science has progressed by assuming that more and more can be known.
You may not like it - or even want to admit it, But he's talking about faith!. Faith that science will provide an answer. There has to be a better answer than that.
Regards,
I can show the internet to my jar of peanut butter all day long and it just stays a jar of peanut butter.
As for "untainted" jars of peanut butter, shall I quote to you the permissible amount of rodent hairs and bug "parts" allowed in your peanut butter?
This "better" answer, which was in too big of a hurry to wait around for science, will not belong in a science class.
Please excuse this completely self serving bump to the top.
I need to review this when I have more time.
Thanks!
I must strongly disagree with your statement
We did not use to have genetic degenerative diseases, AIDS, Sickle Cell Anemia, Polio, M.S., Parkinson's, Alzheimer's ...
Because there is plenty of fossil evidence from the Australopithecines, to HomoErectus, etc, to Neanderathal, that being the most numerous, besides ourselves of course.
all of these ancestors had degenerative diseases, including arthritis, and other bone degenerative style diseases, which we as modern Humans have as well. The diseases in the fossils are very obvious, and we come to the logical conclusion that most likely, if a member of the species lived that long that Parkinsons and other age producing degenerative diseases were very common among our ancestors.
So to say that degenerative diseases are just our lot in life is patently false, because our forelines had those same degenerative diseases in their genetics as well.
It is nothing new at all.
There may come a day when man will be able to organize information using matter in such a way that life will result. Some serious reverse engineering is in order, which goes to the engineered nature of life.
This is so obvious that I am always amazed how intelligent people look around the elephant in the room. The 2nd Law is killing you as we speak. No amount of ordering of your systems can stop its destructive work. Absent the life preserving information that you pass on to your progeny, your existence would have no significance.
Unless of course you are humble enough to acknowledge a supernatural Creator, who humbled Himself to an extreme that we can't fathom, by becoming like us, demonstrating the lengths He will go to in pursuing people like you. His effective dealing with the payment necessary to remove the curse, becoming a curse for us on the cross. The remedy is available to all who are willing to acknowledge their wicked ways before God, and receiving the pardon offered.
The truth is the Creator made us to relate to Him, imbuing meaning and transforming blessings that come only through belief in His finished work.
He is real, and His salvation is real.
I like your tagline
Get off this thread before you look really foolish.
Just a friendly message from someone who cares.
Nothing's a fact that clashes with your religion, though. Only THEORIES do that. And THEORIES only happen because people insist on connecting dots which are there begging to be connected.
But when you come with guesswork, you'd better have your hat in your hand.
Yeah, I thought it was something like that. I won't waste my time, tonight.
Considering I believe in a perfect orignal creation as described in the Bible, we would have had degenerative diseases after the fall because of the curse. My point is that our genetics are becoming more and more corrupted. In my view this has happened very quickly.
Once we iron out how radiometric dating should be considered, maybe our scientific observations will not be so contradictory. For example, the lack of erosion marks in the layers being exposed in the Grand Canyon.
We are finding the standard interpretations of the fossil record are highly suspect. Much deception has been and continues to go on.
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.