President Confuses Science and Belief, Puts Schoolchildren at Risk

American Geophysical Union ^ | 2 August 2005 | American Geophysical Union

[Right Wing Professor]

WASHINGTON - "President Bush, in advocating that the concept of 'intelligent design' be taught alongside the theory of evolution, puts America's schoolchildren at risk," says Fred Spilhaus, Executive Director of the American Geophysical Union. "Americans will need basic understanding of science in order to participate effectively in the 21st century world. It is essential that students on every level learn what science is and how scientific knowledge progresses."

In comments to journalists on August 1, the President said that "both sides ought to be properly taught." "If he meant that intelligent design should be given equal standing with the theory of evolution in the nation's science classrooms, then he is undermining efforts to increase the understanding of science," Spilhaus said in a statement. "'Intelligent design' is not a scientific theory." Advocates of intelligent design believe that life on Earth is too complex to have evolved on its own and must therefore be the work of a designer. That is an untestable belief and, therefore, cannot qualify as a scientific theory."

"Scientific theories, like evolution, relativity and plate tectonics, are based on hypotheses that have survived extensive testing and repeated verification," Spilhaus says. "The President has unfortunately confused the difference between science and belief. It is essential that students understand that a scientific theory is not a belief, hunch, or untested hypothesis."

"Ideas that are based on faith, including 'intelligent design,' operate in a different sphere and should not be confused with science. Outside the sphere of their laboratories and science classrooms, scientists and students alike may believe what they choose about the origins of life, but inside that sphere, they are bound by the scientific method," Spilhaus said.

AGU is a scientific society, comprising 43,000 Earth and space scientists. It publishes a dozen peer reviewed journal series and holds meetings at which current research is presented to the scientific community and the public.

[Charlespg]

WASHINGTON - "President Bush, in advocating that the concept of 'intelligent design' be taught alongside the theory of evolution, puts America's schoolchildren at risk," says Fred Spilhaus, Executive Director of the American Geophysical Union.

yah yah yah ,whatever Homer

[The_Repugnant_Conservative]

"Intelligence is the DNA of the universe. "
But that is a Philisophical argument.

While tests of Evolution as Oragin of the Species
may be flawed. The absence of any on the part of ID is deafening.

This is not a debate about which of these is right or may eventually prevail. This is about protecting the integrity of the scientific process. Keep ID in Philosphy where it belongs.

[Dimensio]

I take it you've got some reason to view evolution as something other than a religion??

What, you mean apart from the fact that it isn't religion?

If you disagree, please explain why, but don't try any stupid dictionary games. I've dealt with those before.

[Dimensio]

Wrong, they need basic understanding of how to count and spell and speak.

"Would you like fries with that?"

[bray]

Weren't about half those skulls proved to be faked by the "discoverer"? Why should anybody believe in a theory that has more holes in it than a spaghetti strainer? You can believe it and convince yourself and others it is true but where is the missing link. Why is the gap mentally between chimp and man the same as the gap between chimp and protozoa? Do you realize the miracle chemical firing it take to read this post let alone translate it and respond? Just doesn't wash!

Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters

[Dimensio]

Why do you presume that any alternative to the evolutionary model represents "teaching religion?"

Do you know of a non-religious alternative to the evolutionary model? One that passes the scientific method?

[ocean]

I just want to know one thing. How did the eyeball evolve to be so common among otherwise completely opposite and unrelated Life forms????

Fish, polar bears, snakes, sea horses, ducks all utilize the eye for sight while having evolved different means for other functions.

Someone explain.

[Dimensio]

Weren't about half those skulls proved to be faked by the "discoverer"?

No. You might want to tailor your attacks on evolution to that which is actually reflected in reality.

Why should anybody believe in a theory that has more holes in it than a spaghetti strainer?

I keep hearing allegations of "holes" in the theory, yet none of substance have ever been provided.

You can believe it and convince yourself and others it is true but where is the missing link.

What "missing link?" Be more specific.

Why is the gap mentally between chimp and man the same as the gap between chimp and protozoa?

It's not. If your education on the subject is truly this bad then you are not even remotely qualified to speak on the validity of the theory of evolution.

Do you realize the miracle chemical firing it take to read this post let alone translate it and respond?

Asserting that an event is a miracle does not make it so.

Please tell me that you are trolling and that you are not truly this stupid.

[Dimensio]

I just want to know one thing. How did the eyeball evolve to be so common among otherwise completely opposite and unrelated Life forms????

Here's a start

Another page of information.

Here's a bit on colour vision.

[Right Wing Professor]

Fish, polar bears, snakes, sea horses, ducks all utilize the eye for sight while having evolved different means for other functions.

All those eyes are homologous. The organisms all evolved from one common ancestor, which had pretty much the same kind of eye as all of them.

On the other hand, baleen whales and whale sharks are both large aquatic plankton feeders. Why would a designer have used very different designs for so much of their physiology, given that they live in very similar ways?

[shuckmaster]

They should require that all churches give a scientist a few minutes to let the congregation hear a bit of factual truth before they start in with their superstitious myth telling.

[shuckmaster]

They should require that all churches give a scientist a few minutes to let the congregation hear a bit of factual truth before they start in with their superstitious myth telling.

[Clemenza]

Keep ID in Sunday school. It has as much to do with hard science as those Scholastics in the old days who used to argue about how many angels could fit on a pin.

[shuckmaster]

Before you fundamentalist evolutionists begin flaming, where is the missing link??

Looking in the mirror at you!

[Dimensio]

The pros and cons of both theories were laid bare for all students to see.

Is that what you want in public schools? Non-scientific religious stories laid alongside scientific theories in science classrooms?

Would you accept Native American creation stories taught as an alternative to evolution?

[longshadow]

"Festival of Noodly Appendaged Deities" placemarker

[bray]

Never understood why your Fundamentalist Evolutionists get so angry when your little theory is challenged. Calling me stupid and other names because it won't stand on it's own. Please explain our brain evolved from a chimp. Maybe you can explain how life started, oh yeah that dont count because it is too big a hole in your theory. Maybe you can just explain why you can translate letters on this page into thoughts and ideas. Course you will go to your namecalling which is what evolutionists are really good at.

Pray for W and Our Troops

[bray]

How original, perhaps you can tell us where you got your degree??? Mine is in acctg and finance, how bout you?? There is no missing link is the point after 150 years of desperate searching. You poor little evolutionists are being challenged and you are so used to laughing at Christians.

Pray for W and Our Troops

[MikeHu]

The problem with excluding alternative (competing) explanations is that many of them are also scientific and equally valid but not the orthodoxy, and therefore the Establishment will suppress all competing views -- because they threaten the status quo view of which they are its high priests (experts). But more and more, there will be revolutionary paradigms that dispute most of what was previously known. However, the teaching hierarchy (NEA, Board of Education) will suppress superior knowledge in favor of invalid knowledge -- because that is what they were indoctrinated to believe is the truth, though the state of the art in every field is highly dynamic and changing. That is the skill set one wants students to learn and not simply accepting what their teachers tell them is the truth and ONLY truth.

When students get that kind of education and then get out into the world, many start to flounder and fail because what was told them and they took on faith as the scientific truth, was only blind faith, and not the questioning of all authority -- including the teachers.

In order to be superior choosers in their lives, children must be exposed to choices to learn to make better choices -- and not be sheltered from that experience because somebody claims to know the REAL TRUTH and others don't have it. That's why our schools ARE such failures. They don't teach the students how to think -- but only what to think, ie., political correctness, so they become more dependent on teachers and more vulnerable to demagogues. Then the unions stick a sign in their hands and tell them what to chant -- and how high to jump, and that's all they know, fancying themselves as those "in the know.."

[Maceman]

Do all U. S. Presidents surrender their right freely to comment on issues of the day, when asked, or only Republican presidents?

THis is not about their RIGHT to comment. This is about a President understanding the symbolic importance of witholding comment to make clear that certain areas ought not be the province of the federal government.

And yes, I think it behooves all such presidents to remember that there are times when it is best not to comment on a subject. THis is one of those times.