Posted on 09/28/2005 4:11:22 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
HARRISBURG, Pa. - A former physics teacher testified that his rural school board ignored faculty protests before deciding to introduce the theory of "intelligent design" to high school students.
"I saw a district in which teachers were not respected for their professional expertise," Bryan Rehm, a former teacher at Dover High School, said Tuesday.
Rehm, who now teaches in another district, is a plaintiff in the nation's first trial over whether public schools can teach "intelligent design."
Eight Dover families are trying to have the controversial theory removed from the curriculum, arguing that it violates the constitutional separation of church and state. They say it effectively promotes the Bible's view of creation.
Proponents of intelligent design argue that life on Earth was the product of an unidentified intelligent force, and that Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection cannot fully explain the origin of life or the emergence of highly complex life forms.
Aralene "Barrie" Callahan, a former member of the Dover school board and another plaintiff in the case, said that at least two board members made statements during meetings that made her believe the new policy was religiously based.
At a retreat in March 2003, a board member "expressed he did not believe in evolution and if evolution was part of the biology curriculum, creationism had to be shared 50-50," Callahan testified.
At a school board meeting in June 2004, when she was no longer on the board, Callahan recalled another board member complaining that a biology book recommended by the administration was "laced with Darwinism."
"They were pretty much downplaying evolution as something that was credible," she said.
In October 2004, the board voted 6-3 to require teachers to read a brief statement about intelligent design to students before classes on evolution. The statement says Darwin's theory is "not a fact" and has inexplicable "gaps," and refers students to an intelligent-design textbook for more information.
In a separate development Tuesday, two freelance newspaper reporters who covered the school board in June 2004 both invoked their First Amendment rights and declined to provide a deposition to lawyers for the school district.
Both are expected in court Wednesday to respond to a subpoena to testify at trial, said Niles Benn, a lawyer for the papers. Lawyers for the school district have questioned the accuracy of articles in which the reporters wrote that board members discussed creationism during public meetings.
In other testimony Tuesday, plaintiff Tammy Kitzmiller said that in January, her younger daughter opted out of hearing the statement - an option given all students - putting her in an awkward position.
"My 14-year-old daughter had to make the choice between staying in the classroom and being confused ... or she had to be singled out and face the possible ridicule of her friends and classmates," she said.
The Dover Area School District, which serves about 3,500 students, is believed to be the nation's first school system to mandate that students be exposed to the intelligent design concept. It argues it is not endorsing any religious view and only letting students know there are differences of opinion about evolution.
The non-jury trial is expected to take five weeks.
Chromosomes are not like bricks.
Even if two organisms, say a fern and a giraffe, were to have the same number of chormosomes, the content of said chromosomes would differ.
It's more like books. Say you have 50 and I have 50. Again, the number is the same but the content is different.
No it's not.
Several related species have different numbers of chromosomes. In some cases the extra chromosomes prevent interbreeding, but in other cases it doesn't. IIRC it depends on the number of chromosomes involved, among other things. For instance, if two chromosomes from species B are nothing more than one chromosome from species A that has split in two, that by itself won't necessarily prevent a successful mating. The 2 short chromosomes will simply both line up in their proper places alongside the longer one from the other species.
(Human chromosome 2 came about from a fusion of chimpanzee chromosomes 2p & 2q. When that first happened, the protohuman offspring with the fused chromosome probably was still able to mate with another person of the same species who didn't have the fusion.)
And by the way, what are the odds of identical mutations occuring in both a male and female of one species resulting in a new speciea at the same time, in the same location, having both survive to adulthoods, finding one another and then successfully mating and having their offspring survive. I would say the odds are zero.
So would I. That's why evolutionists don't believe that speciation happens that way. No single mutation would cause speciation. It's not until an isolated population builds up enough different mutations from the parent population that infertile results of cross-mating starts to happen.
(Actually, that "hopeful monster" scenario you cite could happen in a species where siblings can mate with each other. If every sibling in a particular litter got the same mutation which would otherwise make them infertile with anyone else, they could still mate with each other and start a new species that way. I don't know if anyone's proposed that that actually happened in any specific case, but I remember reading that that's a theoretical possibility. But it's hardly a general model.)
Can you name even one animal that has successfully produced an offspring by mating with another species with a different number of chromosomes?
=====
Check with one of the other folks. I like bones, not chromosomes.
=====
So your answer is "No"?
My answer is "Check with one of the other folks. I like bones, not chromosomes." To rephrase: Don't know a thing about chromosomes, check with somebody else. I like bones. If you think you can make something of that, knock yourself out.
The dentition of this hominid seems to be transitional between apes and later australopithecines.
=====
Seems? Seems = speculation.
More like speciation. In the vernacular, this might be called a "missing link."
That's a LOT of speculation there. And who says that belief in evolution doesn't require faith?
Which makes a new species from a different species even more improbable.
Unless someone could convince a group of them that his rival was a Hebrew, in which he could enslave him. Just don't beat him so hard that he dies. Well, not right away at least. It's okay as long as he lives at least a couple of days after the beating.
Or was a Midianite; then he could not only chop him into pieces, but could do the same to his wife, kids, and pets! And steal all his stuff! And his land!
Oh, and don't worry about running out of labels. Here's a few more to tide you over: the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. Good news for the Jabeshgileads though - at least for the young female virgins. While everyone else with that label gets slaughtered, they only have to put up with capture, rape and sex slavery. Sweet.
Yep, this bible as law stuff is a good deal - that is unless you are the one being labeled.
One other thing to watch out for is the kinda stiff misdemeanor penalties. For instance:
A stubborn and rebellious son? You get stoned to death.
Have doubts about whether the bible is true? Stoned to death.
Someone in your family start to doubt the bible? Stone them to death.
Be a female and not be a virgin on your wedding night? Stoned to death.
Commit a homosexual act? Be put to death.
Commit adultery? Put to death.
Sleep with your mother-in-law? Both get burned to death.
Simply mention that maybe this stuff might be a little harsh? Stoned to death.
Not all the penalties are that bad, though:
Rape an unmarried virgin? Pay a 50 shekel fine and you get to keep her.
You can live in this hellish mythical country. I want no part of it.
While rereading my post, I started to recall that I'd heard of some distant land that ran on a very similar ruleset already. If only I could think of it I could recommend it to you so you could go live in your 'Utopia'.
Oh well. If I think of it I'll let you know. Sorry.
No there isn't. No it doesn't.
I don't know if this qualifies but how about the wholphin.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7508288/
Dolphin and psuedo orca cross. And she had a calf.
This is where evolution has problems. The trees it makes also have mergers. They are inconvenient. And there are other contemporary (live) examples.
DK
Is there a new definition of speculation of which I am unaware?
Yada yada yada.
You don't know what a species is, and say speciation occurs.
You can't say if the hominids interbred.
Mergers are not accounted for in the trees of life.
NS as a ToE is central to biology. But really hasn't had an major impact in medicine. Or any any other major tech application either.
As always, NS is a crappy theory. Crappy definitions, crappy logic, and overstated importance.
So where are the mergers in the trees? We know the mergers exist. Is it because politically evolutionists know that if they actually started revising the trees, they would be hammered at trials like this. Especially "it's a fact evolutionists".
DK
But of course mergers are unimportant because they are inconvenient. How do you account for them in the fossil record?
I was shot down...you killed me last time...you sound like the perfessor.
You're just bloviating. I could claim that every theory ever offered about anything by anyone was "mere speculation". But I'm not a creationist, so I understand about making distinctions & rational judgements.
What is actual science?
I hear crickets!
I don't hear scientists.
What a useless theory NS is.
DK
Maybe that's why it is taken to task so much?
I hear crickets! I don't hear scientists.Perhaps you should start listening more to what scientists say, and less to crickets. ;)
Crickets are more honest.
NS has warts. This trial is about reading a "four paragraph" warning that NS is a theory and not a fact. It points to a flawed book about ID for further out of class reference.
If NS is that fragile, crickets are a better source.
At least they are pleasant to listen to.
DK
LOL
33+ years ago when I was still in Jr. High School me and my friends use to be Jimi Hendrix fanatics. The last time (and first time) I saw Hendrix was in 1969 I believe, at the Fillmore in NYC. Back then I actually had a friend named Olivier who was French and his mother brought us, although at the time I didn`t know or care who Hendrix was. I did after that concert.
For the next 3 years I saved up until I bought every last single one of his albums. Then Pink Floyd a year later at Eisenhower park in East meadow Long Island. To this day, nobody can remeber that, but I know I saw them playing in that park! That same year Zepplin hit the scene and our heads like a ton of bricks.. I remember trashing my friend Davids room to "Dazed and confused" when that awesome end part came up ..
Then 1975, the Ramones.. Walking down the street in the Village and someone walking up to me saying "F**kin` Ramooones", then the B-52`s then came DEVO. The last time I saw DEVO was in 1981 at the Roseland ballroom I believe, and it was incredible..
Then the holocaust came. The horror had happened. It was the same year the music died, TRULY died (hello Don McLean..Were is American pie part 2?) This was the year MTV hit the airwaves and we realized the music holocaust had begun, you could actually feel the shift, feel the destruction, feel the music actually being laid to waste exponetially and it was never the same since.
Originality had been sold out to corporate charts, bulls**t $$$ safety issues and utter pure pretention. 25 plus years later, that same music holocaust still continues and nobody ever says anything about it.
The kids today don`t know what it`s like to see pure genuis live, they really don`t. Since the 1930`s to see Charlie Parker, Sinatra, Elvis, Dylan, Hendrix, Zepplin live....Those very genuises today pushed to the back of a sleazy bar because tey don`t look like some model. Now it`s Brittany and Jay-Z. And they wonder why kids today are violent. What will these kids say when they get older? "Hey when I was 16 I saw Ashlee Simpson live... Well ummm sort of live!" Then they will ask "Well what did she sound like" Like 10,000 other cookie cutter musicians during the music holocaust. I`m still waiting for the other part of that tombstone, but all I`m seeing right now is "The music holocaust 1981 --"
When will it end? Can any Freepers answer that for me? Will we ever get the suprises and joy we use to get when something new would come out?
Crash Landing was and is my favorite Hendrix album.
Stations wouldn't play it.
We've been censored for decades.
DK
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.