[PatrickHenry]

This is a follow-up on a thread from two days ago:
Details set for debate on science standards [Evolution in Kansas?]

Bold and underlining added by me, and occasional bracketed comments. Everyone be nice.

[PatrickHenry]

EvolutionPing

A pro-evolution science list with over 260 names. See the list's description at my freeper homepage. Then FReepmail to be added or dropped.

[King Prout]

well, this thread'll be interesting reading by the time I get home from work.

[Non-Sequitur]

Fortunately my daughter will have completed high school biology before the new 'standards' kick in.

[sirchtruth]

All anyone should care about is that evolution be taught as a true theory that is not fact, but belief. Science is an invaluble part of education and needs to be taught with the honesty and credibility it affords.

It's too bad zealots have infested the scientific community and turned evolution into a religion.

[GarySpFc]

"There is no conflict between evolution and the Christian faith," said the Rev. Peter Luckey, the senior pastor of Plymouth Congregational Church, 925 Vt.

Oh! There is a MAJOR CONFLICT between the teaching of an implied atheistic evolution as found in our classrooms and theistic evolution.

In 1995, the official Position Statement of the American National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT) accurately states the general understanding of major science organizations and educators:

The diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable, and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and changing environments.

Or in the words of the famous evolutionist, George Gaylord Simpson, "Man is the result of a purposeless, and natural process that did not have him in mind."

How do they know the process was unsupervised?

How do they know the process was mindless?

How do they know the process was purposeless?

Their statements are problematic in that they are UNSCIENTIFIC. It cannot be proven that evolutionary processes are "purposeless" or that humans were "not in mind." Science cannot demonstrate these assumptions either way ... and that's the problem with their position. They become proponents of a religion of atheism; I say religion because their conclusion is NOT science, it is faith ... just as much as OUR conclusion is faith. Clearly, their definition is diametrically opposed to any concept of a personal creator being involved in the evolutionary process.

To be fair, as was reported by Brendan Sweetman, Ph.D. in a letter to The Kansas City Star August 21, NABT removed the language after it was pointed out by the philosopher, Alvin Plantinga, and the theologian Huston Smith, that their guideline was really an implied atheism and went beyond what the scientific evidence for the theory could show. However, the concept of natural selection (absent a creator) remains the central tenant of evolution as taught in the classrooms. The definition of natural selection includes unsupervised, mindless and purposeless. Clearly, in defining evolution THEY HAVE LEFT THE WORLD OF SCIENCE and entered the world of philosophy and theology, and established atheism (a religion) in our classrooms.

A 1991 Gallup Poll found that 87% of the public believes in God. According to the poll, of the 87% who believe in God, 44% accept the Creation model, and 43% the theistic evolution model. This implies that only one in ten Americans accepts NABT’s purposeless, mindless atheism, which is being taught in our classrooms. Teaching intelligent design differs from literal Biblical creationism in that it is silent regarding who the designer might be, when the designing took place, how it was done or for what purpose. It simply purposes that life was designed.

[narby]

Carol and Tom Banks, of Prairie Village, attended the forum, saying they were getting tired of conservatives [AARRGGHH!!] controlling the political agenda.

This co-mingling of "conservative" and "ID/creationism" will seriously damage conservative politics.

Conservatives have had the facts behind them in many recent political issues. 1) Welfare does more harm than good. 2) Monogamous, hertosexual couples are a superior way to maintain a culture that raises productive children. 3) Environmentalism isn't needed to "protect" the earth.

The examples can go on and on where conservatives have the facts on their side. But not this time. Evolution is an easily established fact to anyone with an open mind. We will lose this battle. And the worst part is that it's a complete waste because fighting against science will not advance school vouchers or good judges or stop the appeasement of tyrants overseas.

If we conservatives allow this issue to be pressed forward, will be shooting ourselves in the foot.

Over the next two years, if the MSM can successfully hang the albatross of anti-science around conservatisims neck, look for a full court press from the science channel and other outlets during the 2008 election, with entire TV series about evolution that will make conservatives look like idiots.

The only good part of this Kansas thing is that I'm from Oklahoma. I've lived with the legacy of the book and movie "Grapes of Wrath" all my life. The "Okie" label was instantly hung around my neck every time I met someone outside of the state and I told them where I was from. I don't think there was a single time I told someone where I was from in the 1970's that I was instantly laughed at with the response "Oh, you're an Okie from Muskogee". I wasn't laughed WITH, I was laughed AT. With these bozos in Kansas who don't know where and when to practice their faith, Kansas kids traveling outside the state will now get the treatment that we Okies got.

[Dust in the Wind]

bump to read later

[dread78645]

[AARRGGHH!!] ...

Channeling Sam Kinison ?

hehe.

[AndrewC]

Japanese company, and the company officials made fun of Kansas and questioned whether good scientists could come from there.

The Nobel Prize in Physics 2000

"for basic work on information and communication technology"

"for developing semiconductor heterostructures used in high-speed- and opto-electronics"

"for his part in the invention of the integrated circuit"

Zhores I. Alferov	Herbert Kroemer	Jack S. Kilby
1/4 of the prize	1/4 of the prize	1/2 of the prize
Russia	Federal Republic of Germany	USA
A.F. Ioffe Physico-Technical Institute St. Petersburg, Russia	University of California Santa Barbara, CA, USA	Texas Instruments Dallas, TX, USA
b. 1930	b. 1928	b. 1923

Jack S. Kilby – Autobiography

The Nobel Committee has asked me to discuss my life story, so I guess I should begin at the beginning.

I was born in 1923 in Great Bend, Kansas, which got its name because the town was built at the spot where the Arkansas River bends in the middle of the state. I grew up among the industrious descendents of the western settlers of the American Great Plains.

---

Japanese history

Graphic --beware ... People who live in glass houses, etc.

[Central Scrutiniser]

Creation "Science" has no place in the schools, let them teach that fantasy in church.

[esquirette]

"Time to be determined later."

When you have forgotten about this.

[rwfromkansas]

"I don't want to see other countries pass us by."

That isn't going to happen. Anybody going into biology needs a little something called college, and guess what, evolution is taught in college.

Students won't be hurt at all, regardless of what happens at lower educational levels.

Evolution is not a critical thing you need to succeed in life, unlike adding or reading and writing.

If you are going into science, you need to know it. But, no college...or hardly any..., not even conservative Christian ones, will refuse to teach evolution.

"Kansas will be tarred and feathered by the media as the hayseed state."

Maybe I am just silly, but I am proud when my state gets attacked for standing up for principles. I really don't care what the media thinks about it. I like pissing them off.

"Manweiler said he was put off by the forum speakers' "lack of humility.'"

This is exactly why I don't listen to evolutionists much.

They treat non-evolutionists like children or ignorant boobs rather than human beings. There are a few good evolutionists on FR, and because they were willing to treat me like a human being, I listened to what they had to say. I have been impressed by their arguments. I have not jumped ship to evolution yet, but I have more of an open mind because of those who don't condescend to me or call me a religious wacko etc.

If evolutionists think arrogance wins over people, they are sadly mistaken. Treating people as individuals worthy of respect and appealing to reason and logic wins people over.