I'm jumping this thread, FReepers. Adios.
Posted on 09/29/2005 6:22:55 PM PDT by wallcrawlr
A group of Nobel Prize winners should have done more homework before criticizing proposed science standards in Kansas, advocates of the guidelines said in a letter Thursday.
Intelligent design advocates pushing new standards, which would expose students to more criticism of evolution, say the laureates' complaints are an attempt to suppress debate on the issue.
The letter was signed by Bill Harris, a professor of medicine at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, and Greg Lassey, a former middle school science teacher, who helped draft the disputed language.
"We all want good standards," the letter said. "However, demeaning rhetoric that does not address specifics but serves only to belittle and misrepresent the changes is not helpful."
Earlier this month, 38 laureates, including prominent chemists, physicists and medical experts, asked the State Board of Education to reject the proposed standards.
The laureates, led by Holocaust survivor and author Elie Wiesel, said evolution is the foundation of biology and that it has been bolstered by DNA studies.
Many scientists see intelligent design as another form of creationism, which the Supreme Court has banned from public schools.
Intelligent design theorists believe the complexity of the natural world cannot be explained except by attributing creation to some higher intelligence.
The Kansas board expects to vote this year on the standards, which will be used to develop tests for students but would allow local boards to decide how science is taught.
I guess so.:)
I tend to equate creationism with ID because politically, they are the same entitiy, with the same fundamentalists backing the same horse. After youse guys explain ID/Creation to me, maybe you can tell me where religious fundamentalists promote harmony and civility in our world. We as humans are charged with uplifting the human condition, from generation to generation.
“Logically derived from confirmable evidence, evolution is understood to be the result of an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection.”
Yes, basically.
Neutrality is the new buzzword Professor.
Alas, it does not appear the School Board was neutral. They on numerous occasions made clear their goal was positively to introduce religion into the classroom. The recent Ten Commandments cases make it clear that the objective of the government action is paramount in deciding whether the actions are constitutionally permissible. This is why the ACLU made such an issue of the discussion of religion in the school board meetings, and why the Thomas More lawyers have been trying (unsuccessfully) to keep that evidence out.
You know what? I don't know who is what and what side is down, so I'm just going to sit on the sideline and learn a little bit. I'm serious. Sometimes you need a scorecard just to get through an evening at FR. God, I hope I haven't embarassed myself again because I do this every once in a while here at FR.
I see. I guess it may not be entirely clear. Those are quotes made by others that I was simply trying to make people aware of.
Like minded people (as me) who dont appreciate the hostile comments and accusations made by some towards creation and intelligent design advocates on Fr.
I'd prefer to debate/discuss with people as if I'm sitting around a campfire rather than yelling across the aisle. I can appreciate humor and sarcasm but I dont appreciate mocking, namecalling and rude hostility.
Thats whats different in my new Freeper world of crevo discussion.
One reason to be grateful for a generation of scientists from China, given they are loathe to grant "authority" to a western white man (Darwin).
Simon Wiesenthal died a few days ago - perhaps you're thinking of him?
Uh huh. Uh huh. Okay. Um, can you repeat the part of the stuff where you said all about the ... things?
It goes waaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyy beyond that. Even the simplest form of life is not just extremely complex. It is UNIMAGINEABLY complex. That is a simple fact.
If it were NOT a fact, then someone would have IMAGINED how do do it, and would have CREATED some synthetic life. All the combined intellect of humanity through out history has utterly failed to CREATE synthetic life. Yet a lot of them seem to think it just happened accidentally. That takes faith.
I'm jumping this thread, FReepers. Adios.
Yes. Got me good.
LOL. Sometimes even I have to sit back and ask myself "What the heck was I thinking?" after a post.
Really? "charged" by whom/what? The god of natural selection?
Last time I post to you, you stupid sh*t.
By my heritage.
Not trying to 'get' you, FRiend. It's just hard to know sometimes whether you're being mis-understood, having your intelligence questioned, or just plain missing out on the joke :-)
Everyone seems to be trying to weasel out of their mistaken identities.
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.