Posted on 04/10/2005 3:53:04 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
A pro-evolution group has organized what appears to be a successful boycott of Kansas hearings on intelligent design.
Alexa Posny, a deputy commissioner with the state department of education, told the Kansas City Star that only one person has agreed to testify on the pro-evolution side for the hearings scheduled for May.
"We have contacted scientists from all over the world," Posny said. "There isn't anywhere else we can go."
Harry McDonald, head of Kansas Citizens for Science, charged that the hearings, called by a conservative majority on the state board of education, have a pre-ordained outcome.He said that testifying would only make intelligent design appear legitimate.
"Intelligent design is not going to get its forum, at least not one in which they can say that scientists participated," he said.
Backers of intelligent design, the claim that a supreme being guided evolution, say it is a theory with scientific backing. Opponents believe it is an attempt to smuggle religion into public education.
Only the fool ever stops asking.
Then evidently he is not a RC
No.
Figure out the momentum of the rotating earth. Figure out the momentum of a meteor travelling in an orbit intersecting the earth. Remember momentum is conserved. Ask how much momentum a meteor would need to stop the earth. And ask how the earth started rotating again, at exactly the same velocity.
Would have been nice if that was the post you responded to when you talked about "hunting down posts" wouldn't it?
In his three articles for the section.."The Amatuer Scientist" in Scientific America Mims never mentioned Creationism. Word got out that he had written some speculative articles on the subject in other puplications and the many of the readership screamed. The official line was that his technical writing didn't fit the proper theoretical decorum that the magazine was trying to maintained. There were threats to stop subscriptions, folks wanted the editor's head for allowing Mims to be on staff, ect. So they fired Mims...he certainly knew what Galileo must have felt!
This is the type of anti-religious, anti inquiry nonsense from some scientists that I've been arguing about and against. Even scientists with a religious world view have to keep their heads down.
There are a billion RCs on earth. They're all up to speed on the canonical definition of free will, do you think? Tough path to salvation, if so.
Anyway, all I asked was what you meant. Evidently you're afraid to give a straight answer, Mr. 'depends on what the definition of is , is'.
I guess for the same reason that Religious fundamentalists inject themselves into an unrelated subject, the teaching of biology. Probably both sides see consequenses of remaining silent.
I have no problem teaching controversies in school provided they are taught in an appropriate class. History or philosophy of science, perhaps.
You have been on these threads for years and have not communicated what you believe in a positive way -- by which I mean saying what you believe rather than what you disbelieve. I have no problem at all with textbooks listing unsolved problems. That would be cool. My teachers 40 years ago said science was almost finished because it had gone about as far as it could go. It would be great to tell kids that there were really profound problems left unsolved.
Not the earth. You see, I was entertaining the idea of moving Mars. (merely entertaining)
The day in question has three major points to it:
1)The Sun stopped above Gibeon.
2)The Moon stopped above a nearby valley.
and
3)There was a meteor shower that wiped out Joshua's enemies.
The entertainment was that if a meteor of sufficient size struck Mars, shards of the collision could fall towards Earth.
And as an afterthought (I feel bad it being seperate)
I appologize for having kept them unlinked. I'll keep that in mind next time.
My point is this : If there is a "controversial" scientific theory, the one challenging it should definitely be scientific and rational. You cannot use religious beliefs to challenge scientific principles.
Further, why include the specific Judeo-Christian creationist theory in science text books alone, when there are numerous non-Judeo Christian creationist theories around the world. Since US is a secular country, would you allow all of them to be included in biology text books to counter evolution studies ? Why not ? Isnt US supposed to be religiously tolerant, and the state is supposed to not favor any particular religion ?
I knew you were, I was just making a side comment.
I think the methodologies of science and reason are excellent and they keep one honest. The current accepted scientific method has one over all weakness...it can only function in the here and now and when knowledge is imperfect, say in an emergency, one still makes "educated guesses". We just can't escape those dreaded "leaps of faith"!
I most certainly have. First of all I believe God created the heavens and the Earth. I also believe and know that life is complex. I also know that, despite your protestations, that physical sciences are much more easily tested than any implied theory of biology. Now cosmology and particle physics are practically unconfirmable by the average person, but quantum effects can be easily demonstrated as can most any non-relativistic physical property. Now what importance is what I believe, to you?
" You cannot use religious beliefs to challenge scientific principles. "
However, one CAN use science to confirm aspects of religion. I'm not disagreeing with you, it's just odd is all.
"Further, why include the specific Judeo-Christian creationist theory in science text books alone, when there are numerous non-Judeo Christian creationist theories around the world"
I'm not aware of any IDist in any school pushing for the Zoroastro/Judeo/Christo/Islamic (in order of appearance) stlye of "creationism" merely that the idea of an Intellegent Designer be looked at as a viable answer to where we came from.
"Figure out the momentum of the rotating earth. Figure out the momentum of a meteor travelling in an orbit intersecting the earth. Remember momentum is conserved. Ask how much momentum a meteor would need to stop the earth. And ask how the earth started rotating again, at exactly the same velocity."
First of all, no one said you had to stop the earth. You just need to change its orbit/rotation/precession enough.
If a large enough body (ie. a planet) came in close proximity of the earth, gravitational mechanics would apply. Somewhat like the Apollo missions used the moon as a 'slingshot', the planet approach would have temporarily perturbed the earth.
Do you have evidence the earth is rotating at the exact same speed it was a couple of thousand years ago? what about its precession or orbit?
Do you think the speed of light is constant since time began?
I agree completely.
You can ask all you want. I will answer when I think it important enough to the question at hand. And that question, is whether Junior is Roman Catholic or not. That question is important, since that is always used as "Roman Catholics here believe in evolution". I posed it as a question so that it could have been answered, "I am Roman Catholic, and I do believe in free will, but I don't feel that it is important to the question of evolution." He didn't answer that way in any form and his answers are discordant.
"I agree completely."
Then we've started somewhere :)
Yes. But science can also be dispell some myths that are otherwise perpetrated by wily priests and shamans.
I'm not aware of any IDist in any school pushing for the Zoroastro/Judeo/Christo/Islamic (in order of appearance) stlye of "creationism" merely that the idea of an Intellegent Designer be looked at as a viable answer to where we came from.
The hidden motif behind ID is to further the judeo-Christian creationism agenda. They surely dont have any Buddhist/Zoroastrian/Hindu/Pagan beliefs in mind when they even talk about the concept of God.
Anyway, from a broader perspective, ID is just a first step in an ongoing drive of fundamentalization and persecution of scientific community.
Ward Churchill's dishonorable conduct/speeches gave them a good excuse to pick on entire academia and schools.
Stem Cell research controversy gave them an excuse to pick on medical researchers.
And now, the theory of evolution is being used to target scientists and the basis of scientific establishment in this country.
Looking at the cultural trend and the animosity toward people involved in these disciplines, am afraid the scientific establishment is fighting a losing battle. Its not unfounded pessimism, its a reasonable appraisal of reality.
The hidden motif behind ID is to further the judeo-Christian creationism agenda. They surely dont have any Buddhist/Zoroastrian/Hindu/Pagan beliefs in mind when they even talk about the concept of God.
Zoroastrian beliefs would be of a single unifying God who created the World according to His Will.
All the others do not hold to a "single" god, yet they would be accounted for in an honest ID teaching class.
"Looking at the cultural trend and the animosity toward people involved in these disciplines, am afraid the scientific establishment is fighting a losing battle. Its not unfounded pessimism, its a reasonable appraisal of reality."
Again, this is not a "race" or "copetition" this is an ernest search for Truth.
If people are scaring you into silence, speak louder. If not, what are you talking about?
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.