ACLU Files Suit in Pa. Over Evolution

FOX News ^

[wkdaysoff]

HARRISBURG, Pa. — The state American Civil Liberties Union (search) plans to file a federal lawsuit Tuesday against a Pennsylvania school district that is requiring students to learn about alternatives to the theory of evolution (search).

The ACLU said its lawsuit will be the first to challenge whether public schools should teach "intelligent design," which holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by some higher power....

[Right in Wisconsin]

Is it not public school books that are the root of this instant problem?

[cynicom]

Absence matter, the void, there is no energy which is necessary to create matter. Scientists that use word parsing as a smoke screen to avoid admitting there is an end to their theorizing ability are fooling only themselves.

[Dataman]

Does "academic freedom" include teaching astrology and alchemy in science class too?

Too often public schools do teach that and Islam too, but you don't find the ACLU suing for it. That's the John Kerry method; don't try to refute the opposition, just sue them. It's a cowardly, unscientific way of avoiding debate. Evolutionists fear ID because their case is dishwater weak.

[Right Wing Professor]

Sounds like the proverbial oxymoron.

Which proverb was that?

[Right in Wisconsin]

I guess I'm ignorant and a liar. Thank you for your open mind. And no, microevolution is a separate concept from macroevolution. Micro is kind into kind and macro is kind into different kind. You need the first four evolution theories to occur before you can have the evolution theory you believe in, otherwise it won't work. They are tantamount to the TOE theory.

[TheForceOfOne]

Neither science or Religion have proof of the creation of life and/or matter. Teach them both or teach none of them and may the best man/woman win.

[anguish]

Evolution of the eye, in QuickTime or RealPlayer :)

[Modernman]

My guess had nothing to do with ID, it had everything to do with my belief that the ant and wasp were created at the same time.

And yet, all the evidence points to a different conclusion.

[Amish with an attitude]

"Evolution, looked at globally, is driven by the flow of energy from the sun"

Just add heat and enough time and a viable living cell is produced. You have great faith.

[Modernman]

I guess I'm ignorant and a liar.

Glad you admit it.

And no, microevolution is a separate concept from macroevolution.

Only in the minds of creationists.

You need the first four evolution theories to occur before you can have the evolution theory you believe in, otherwise it won't work.

Whether or not that's true, it's irrelevant as to whether the TOE is correct. And the first four things you list do not fall under the TOE of evolution under any stretch of the imagination.

They are tantamount to the TOE theory.

They have nothing to do with the TOE.

[Dimensio]

Just add heat and enough time and a viable living cell is produced.

Evolution has nothing to do with producing a viable living cell where none existed before.

[Shryke]

Neither science or Religion have proof of the creation of life and/or matter.

I've never read a single scientific text claiming otherwise. Ever. Now, the Bible, on the other hand...

[Dimensio]

I guess I'm ignorant and a liar.

And here you've been trashing me for weeks because I've been saying what you admit right now.

And no, microevolution is a separate concept from macroevolution.

What prevents a series of "microevolution" changes from becoming "macroevolution"?

You need the first four evolution theories to occur before you can have the evolution theory you believe in, otherwise it won't work. They are tantamount to the TOE theory.

Wrong, and it's incredibly dishonest for you to refer to the first four as "evolution theories" when you have been told that they are not part of evolution.

For evolution to work, you need reproducing life forms and an environment in which they can exist. How those life forms and the environment ultimately came to exist is irrelevant to the theory of evolution. An omnipotent entity could have zap-poofed the earth and the first life forms into existence, and evolution could work from there. The theory of evolution is not predicated upon life originating through any specific method, it does not fall apart if our current understanding of stellar formation is falsified and it will not be disproven if it is shown that the Big Bang theory is wrong. Once you have life forms that can reproduce, you have evolution. Before those life forms exist, nothing at all matters with respect to the theory of evolution.

[Right in Wisconsin]

Again, the first four are tantamount to your evolution theory. Without one of those evolution theories evolving the way they had to, you wouldn't have any evolution of species to worry about. Micro evolution is kind into kind and macro-evolution is kind into different kind.

[Oztrich Boy]

"Can't he be both, like Isaac Newton?"

(Newton: brilliant physicist and mathematician, mediocre chemist, crappy theologian - yet he was proudest of his work in theology)

[Dimensio]

Without one of those evolution theories evolving the way they had to, you wouldn't have any evolution of species to worry about.

Let's say that stellar formation theories are wrong (they are not evolution theories, and you are a liar to keep calling them that) and that our current understanding of how stars are formed is shown to be false -- it's really some other process. How does this falsify the theory of evolution (that is, the theory that all life on earth shares a common ancestor)?

[Amish with an attitude]

"Teach them both or teach none of them and may the best man/woman win."

Words of wisdom, present the facts and allow them to exercise their own critical thinking skills.

Truth is absolute.

[Dimensio]

Teach them both or teach none of them and may the best man/woman win.

Both? There's evolution...what's the other scientific theory? Be specific.

[Oztrich Boy]

For anyone out there that believes in evolution as a fact, could you please explain to me how evolution can get around the second law of thermodynamics?

Horse. Water. (Now comes the hard part)

[ThinkPlease]

Except that evolution is science(and coincidentally explains the universe better than creationism) and creationism and intelligent design isn't.

Really, the latter two should be in a comparative religions class with creation myths from other religions.