Posted on 05/07/2005 1:26:46 PM PDT by followerofchrist
TOPEKA, Kan. - Witnesses trying to persuade Kansas officials to encourage more criticism of evolution in public school classrooms are making statements some scientists say betrayed creationist views.
Witnesses in a State Board of Education hearing on how the theory should be taught also have acknowledged they hadn't fully read evolution-friendly science standards proposed by educators. Nor had two of three presiding board members.
snip
Board member Kathy Martin, of Clay Center, elicited groans of disbelief from a few audience members when she acknowledged she had only scanned the proposal, which is more than 100 pages. Later, board member Connie Morris, of St. Francis, also said she had only scanned it.
Martin said during a break: "I'm not a word-for-word reader in this kind of technical information."
(Excerpt) Read more at home.peoplepc.com ...
Remember Pat, that according to the Creationists, Evolutionary theory is worse than pornography, so we shouldn't be surprised that they don't read such educational proposals.
In the end, the fact that most scientists support evolution may be irrelevant to three Kansas Board of Education members who conducted the hearings. All three said they had doubts about evolution. Each received campaign donations from Calvert [John Calvert of Lake Quivira, who is leading the fight against evolution].
‘Objective approach' urged. Kansas City Star.==========
A committee of three state board members - Steve Abrams, Connie Morris and Kathy Martin - heard all the testimony this week. On Saturday, the three other conservative Republican board members who help control the board also attended.
Many of the pro-intelligent–design witnesses are affiliated with the Discovery Institute think tank in Seattle that was created in 1996 to promote intelligent design, and they have testified in other states. Two of Discovery's senior fellows, Stephen Meyer and Michael Behe, testified here Saturday.
One of the other witnesses was a Turkish newspaper columnist with no science background but a nearly 10-year-old interest in intelligent design. Mustafa Akyol testified that the naturalistic bias in Kansas' science standards contributes to the ill will between the Muslim world and the United States.
He urged the board to adopt the critical approach to help alleviate that ill will. "This is not the only reason for anti-Westernism, but it is an important one," he said.
After the hearings, Irigonegaray dismissed Akyol's testimony. "I think he has very little relevancy to what we do in Kansas," Irigonegaray said.
Kansas school board concludes hearings on teaching evolution. Kansas City Star.=============
Echoing the famed "Monkey Trial" of 80 years ago, three days of public hearings about evolution culminated Saturday in sparring between opposing attorneys. ... John Calvert, a retired Lake Quivira attorney who helped found the Intelligent Design Network and organized the case against evolution, called himself as his own last witness. That led to questioning from Pedro Irigonegaray, a Topeka attorney representing advocates of continuing a state policy in which standards describe evolution as a key concept for students to learn.
Day 3 of evolution trial sees lawyers wrangle. Lawrence Journal Worls.
polka-dot unicorns place mark
And as a matter of faith it's unobjectionable. As a matter of science, it fails the most basic test of science because what the Pope proposes here cannot be tested. And that's why it doesn't belong in a science classroom.
I don't see how the above conflicts with the modern theory of evolution. God works through nature, so natural selection and theistic selection are in reality the same thing.
Heck, Pat! If only we'd known, we'd have started on the trail back to the 9th century before 9/11!
"I appeased about every prominent dictator of my time, but I hardly ever met a thug I didn't like." - Jimmy Carter.
I've heard just about every evil in the world blamed on Darwin -- including things like racism and communism, which long predated him -- but never before have I heard that 9/11 was his fault too. This Kansas "trial" has been a real eye-opener.
No, it's a matter of what can be tested.
At least 9/11 has the advantage of a recognized logical fallacy (Post hoc, ergo propter hoc). How Darwin could have caused racism and Communism, both of which pre-date him, does not even rise to the level of "logical" fallacy.
No doubt you've seen this:
The equation looks scientific, but it isn't. Not because the artist used gibberish for the equation -- he could have used a genuine chemical equation and made the same point. Inserting an agency that cannot be demonstrated or detected is not and cannot be science.
Please be aware that I am not slamming religion. My point is that the nature of religion places it entirely outside of the realm of science.
They would be right, actually. Theistic evolution is not science, but so what? There's more to life than science, and not all truth is scientific.
Hard core materialism isn't science either, so we have a good comeback.
Theistic evolution should be taught in science class, and neither should philosophical materialism.
They are UNWILLING to admit even the possibility of God working in the evolutionary process.
First of all, I think most evolutionary biologists are willing to admit this possibility. Stephen J. Gould certainly was. So is Kenneth Miller, a faithful Catholic and the author of the biology textbook upon which the Kansas schoolboard decided to place the "thoery not a fact" stickers.
At any rate, the denial of God's role in the evolutionary process is just as unscientific as the affirmatinon. of the proposition
Wassa matter? You never heard of ante hoc, ergo propter hoc? You ain't never gonna be a creation scientist.
I understand that theistic evolution is not scientific because it cannot be tested. But surely you do not suggest that a belief in theistic evolution is incompatible with acceptance of modern science?
Woops, typo. Meant to say, theistic evolution should NOT be taught in science class, but neither should philosophical materialism.
100
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.