Kathy Martin and Connie Morris
Posted on 06/13/2005 6:23:59 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
Evolution is an "age-old fairy tale," sometimes defended with "anti-God contempt and arrogance," according to a State Board of Education member involved in writing new science standards for Kansas' public schools.
A newsletter written by board member Connie Morris, of St. Francis, was circulating on Monday. In it, Morris criticized fellow board members, news organizations and scientists who defend evolution.
She called evolution "a theory in crisis" and headlined one section of her newsletter "The Evolutionists are in Panic Mode!"
"It is our goal to write the standards in such a way that clearly gives educators the right AND responsibility to present the criticism of Darwinism alongside the age-old fairy tale of evolution," Morris wrote.
Morris was one of three board members who last week endorsed proposed science standards designed to expose students to more criticism of evolution in the classroom. The other two were board Chairman Steve Abrams, of Arkansas City, and Kathy Martin, of Clay Center.
Morris was in Topeka for meetings at the state Department of Education's headquarters and wasn't available for interviews.
But her views weren't a surprise to Jack Krebs, vice president of Kansas Citizens for Science, an Oskaloosa educator.
"Her belief is in opposition to mainstream science," he said. "Mainstream science is a consensus view literally formed by tens of thousands people who literally studied these issues."
The entire board plans to review the three members' proposed standards Wednesday. The new standards - like the existing, evolution-friendly ones - determine how students in fourth, seventh and 10th grades are tested on science.
In 1999, the Kansas board deleted most references to evolution from the science standards. Elections the next year resulted in a less conservative board, which led to the current, evolution-friendly standards. Conservative Republicans recaptured the board's majority in 2004 elections.
The three board members had four days of hearings in May, during which witnesses criticized evolutionary theory that natural chemical processes may have created the first building blocks of life, that all life has descended from a common origin and that man and apes share a common ancestor. Evolution is attributed to 19th Century British scientist Charles Darwin.
Organizing the case against evolution were intelligent design advocates. Intelligent design says some features of the natural world are so complex and well-ordered that they are best explained by an intelligent cause.
In their proposed standards, the three board members said they took no position on intelligent design, but their work followed the suggestions of intelligent design advocates.
In her newsletter, Morris said she is a Christian who believes the account of creation in the Book of Genesis is literally true. She also acknowledged that many other Christians have no trouble reconciling faith and evolution.
"So be it," Morris wrote. "But the quandary exists when poor science - with anti-God contempt and arrogance - must insist that it has all the answers."
National and state science groups boycotted May's hearings before Morris and the other two board members, viewing them as rigged against evolution.
"They desperately need to withhold the fact that evolution is a theory in crisis and has been crumbling apart for years," Morris said.
But Krebs said Morris is repeating "standard creationist rhetoric."
"People have been saying evolution is a theory in crisis for 40 or 50 years," Krebs said. "Yet the scientific community has been strengthening evolution every year."
"Therefore there is a third theory that hasn't been discovered yet, one that explains everything."
Not possible for we in the flesh to comprehend the theory that explains everything.
Hypothetical time heals all statistical wounds.
Ya think?
Sort of amazes me how people have the chutzpah to flat out lie like that, especially when it's people that consider themselves generally holier-than-thou.
Maybe this guy needs to take an English class, literally. All you evo's need to do is let a fair and equal voice be heard. By not allowing it you are no better than a liberal rat.
third theory
political correctness, maybe?
Why not give fair and equal time in school to the folks that think the earth is balanced on the back of a big turtle?
The idea that "All ideas are equally valid" is actually typical of Leftists and political correctness.
To start with I state that I am not a creationist. I am not a christian. To end with, show me an transitional species, one that is viable, that has been identified by ALL scientist to be a transitional speicies. The reason evolutionist went to the punctuated equilibrium theory and neo darwism is because there was a derth of transitional species. The fosil record and the speices today do not support darwism.
As far as holier than thou attitude goes, I am not a christian and do not believe in the bible. I do not believe in evolution either.
The fact that you only read part of my post shows me that you are an idiot. Judge me as you will, evolution is a dead duck and will fade away in a few years. A third theory will eventually come to light, killing both evolution and creationism.
Liberals alway accuse their opponents of their own sins.
Thanks for the post. It's refreshing to see such honesty from creationists. If they get a few "victories" like this, they will become overconfident and they will really start to blab.
No need. You bash yourself quite well without help.
All species are transitional. Welcome to the real world. :-)
Be specific.
---"Mainstream science is a consensus view literally formed by tens of thousands people who literally studied these issues."---
---"Maybe this guy needs to take an English class, literally. All you evo's need to do is let a fair and equal voice be heard. By not allowing it you are no better than a liberal rat."---
You miss the point. Nobody likes their beliefs challenged, not even Evolutionists. Following suit (as most people do when their beliefs are challenged), it is usually the motives of those who challenge the beliefs that get attacked. In the case of evolutionists, they will be quick to actually TELL you what YOUR motives are (see many above posts). You're never going to get a tit-for-tat scientific showdown, so to speak, on the issue. You'll have an easier time challenging the theory of man causing global warming.
To an Evolutionist, typically, there is little to debate because they believe their theology is above reproach based on the idea that it is, of course, immune from the "fallacies" of religion and therefore the only true science. Whether or not that science is actually sound is not a debatable topic because it is "proven." "Proven" in this case simply means that it enjoys a certain percentage of agreement in an acceptable community (say, scientists, for example), while also enjoying the intellectual invulnerability that comes with being (supposedly) a-religious. Scientific challenges abound to said theory (Evolution); but as I said, it is not the merits of the argument that typically get debated, it is the motives of the opposition. Nobody of any faith likes to hear that the science "doesn't add up," if you would.
Most Evolutionists (though not all) you meet, however, hardly qualify as scientists. You will find few who have ever, for example, Carbon Dated a fossil. Yet they, like other believers, would die before they'd have other systems of beliefs held in equal standing.
They can deny it from here until Kingdom Come, but it is still a theory that cannot possibly be appropriately tested or proven/disproven to the extent that it would need to be to end the debate. The Flat Earth debate, for example, ends with the obvious physical proofs of the orbus Earth. No such proof is possible with Evolution or Creation.
---"third theory"---
---"political correctness, maybe?"---
LOL wormholes. Lots of wormholes.......;-)
It has???
Macro evolution has bit the dust due to no transitional fosils in the fosil record and none alive today
I dispute that there are no transitional fossils in the fossil record. However, I agree that no transitional fossils are currently alive!
You may claim that you dispute it but, that does not qualify as a disputation.
All means All. :-)
Data (1) (1)
The head of the Galactic Confederation (76 planets around larger stars visible from here) (founded 95,000,000 yrs ago, very space opera) solved overpopulation (250 billion or so per planet -- 178 billion on average) by mass implanting.
He caused people to be brought to Teegeeack (Earth) and put an H Bomb on the principal volcanoes (Incident 2) and then the Pacific area ones were taken in boxes to Hawaii and the Atlantic Area ones to Las Palmas and there "packaged."
His name was Xenu. He used renegades. Various misleading data by means of circuits etc. was placed in the implants.
When through with his crime Loyal Officers (to the people) captured him after 6 years of battle and put him in an electronic mountain trap where he still is. "They" are gone. The place (Confed.) has since been a desert.
How would you know, unless you could see what the distant descendants will look like? Most species alive today weren't around 100 million years ago. So everything that lived back then was either transitional or went extinct. Besides, what would you expect a transitional species to look like?
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.