Very disappointing, considering it takes MORE FAITH, and make no mistake, that is what it is, FAITH, to believe the evolutionary hypothesis than it does to believe in an intelligent designer.
Is this another kook thread?
The "trial" was not a real trial, but a publicity stunt. It was all planned out in advance. The law in question in Tennessee was a dead letter. It is easy to just assume the hinterland is hopelessly backward and ignorant, and stereotypes are so often so comfortable for us. The "truth" is often more complex, as it is here.
Kraut has written a rather superficial piece, so says this near atheist. What is underemphasized in secondary school science classes, is what we don't know, rather than what we do. What is underemphasized, is that often the accepted paradigms are subject to change, as more data comes in. And what is underemphasized is the difference between technology and science. Technology can tell us the properties of electricity and gravity, but not what it really is. Nobody knows, yet.
After much reading and analysis (okay, I don't have much of a life) I've figured out the popularity of the evolution threads.
A)Everyone gets to feel superior. The "believers" are firm in their knowledge that they're going to heaven for a skybox view of those nasty unbelievers spending eternity asking, "Hot enough for ya?" While the evolutionists get to take comfort in their mastery of scientific theory, fact and rational thinking.
B)There is always an adequate number of participants because nobody -- and I mean nobody -- ever seems to change sides on the issue.
So, in the interest of livening things up -- I just want to say that string theory is an abomination in the eyes of god.
"Evolution is one of the most powerful and elegant theories in all of human science and the bedrock of all modern biology."
This guy is such a phony.
Elegant and bedrock, my foot! It's all pseudo science and the author is it's peddler.
oop-oop-oop-oop-oop-oop
Good points by Krauthammer!
The teaching of evolution IS teaching faith as science
Only after awarding scientific diplomas to monkeys has been outlawed.
The main thing is we will all get a chance to ask God what really happened, face to face, on Judgment Day. Right?
SD
Generally, I like to agree with Krauthammer, but I don't on this one.
Intelligent design does not undermine science.
Science means knowledge, and at it's root is about acquiring factual, actual knowledge.
Intelligent design is a mathematical model that demonstrates how improbable it is for inanimate objects to combine into animate ones. Its math says that it very nearly approaches zero, and that, in fact, you have a far better chance of winning the next 280,000,000 dollar Lotto. (And you know how good that chance is for YOU. :>)
One verification of this rarity would seem to be the lack of oodles of alien life forms from the billions upon billions of planets that must exist among the unimaginable number of stars. About the only place you see them are in George Lucas movies with Luke Skywalker & crew.
So...it's awesomely rare....zero for all practical purposes.
Fact. Adds to the body of KNOWLEDGE. Science.
God is powerful enough to create via evolution. Anyone who says otherwise has in mind a little, teeny-tiny God...something other than the Big, real one.
I agree with the premise that evolution is a THEORY and should be taught as a THEORY only.
I believe that religion (and I do attend church 2 times per week) has no place in SCIENCE class, just like I don't want to study dinosaurs in church.
Placeholder. To read later.
There is far more evidence that life begins at conception than there is evidence proving evolution. Try teaching life begins at conception in a public shool and see how fast the left goes insane.