Skip to comments.
University of Idaho Bans All Alternatives to Evolution
Discovery Institute ^
| 10/06/05
| John MIller
Posted on 10/07/2005 7:35:38 AM PDT by Sopater
University of Idaho President Tim White has entered the debate pitting Charles Darwin's theories of life against religious-based alternatives by forbidding anything other than evolution from being taught in the Moscow school's life, earth and physical science classes.
"This (evolution) is the only curriculum that is appropriate to be taught in our biophysical sciences," he wrote. "Teaching of views that differ from evolution may occur in faculty-approved curricula in religion, sociology, philosophy, political science or similar courses. However, teaching of such views is inappropriate in our life, earth, and physical science courses."
(Excerpt) Read more at discovery.org ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy; US: Idaho
KEYWORDS: antichristian; censorship; crationism; crevolist; evolution; highereducation; moralabsolutes; science; scienceeducation; unbiblical
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220, 221-236 next last
To: js1138
That's what science is -- the assumption that natural causes can be found.Well, natural causes is usually incurable. No one is ever diagnosed with a bad case of natural causes, even if they die of it.
181
posted on
10/07/2005 3:42:41 PM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: Wings-n-Wind
The central premise of Darwinian theory is that life was somehow "born" from the pool of unliving ingredients...The topic sentence of your statement is completely erroneous. Maybe you're on the wrong thread by mistake...(I've done that before.)
If, however, you are participating in this discussion, it would be beneficial to you to educate yourself about the topic you're debating. PatrickHenry (a FReeper) has a good compilation of resources.
182
posted on
10/07/2005 3:43:27 PM PDT
by
Rudder
To: SuziQ
Do you have an alternative scientific theory to evolution?
183
posted on
10/07/2005 3:44:06 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: gondramB
Just piling on now, but I'm bored...
The central premise of Darwinian theory is that life was somehow "born" from the pool of unliving ingredients
This is akin to someone going into the Religion threads and beginning a critique of Christianity stating, "The central premise of Christianity is that all adherents must tithe regularly." See, the media makes it seem that way sometimes, and there are most likely many Christians who believe that. But it's absurdly wrong to anyone who actually knows the "central premise" of Christianity.
I trust now you'll never state your falsehood again. Thank you.
184
posted on
10/07/2005 3:49:36 PM PDT
by
whattajoke
(I'm back... kinda.)
To: narby; Sopater
They can teach your belief in "religion, sociology, philosophy, political science or similar courses". How many classes covering your belief do you want? But but "University of Idaho Bans All Alternatives to Evolution"
I'm shocked, shocked that the Discovery Institute lied.
185
posted on
10/07/2005 4:02:16 PM PDT
by
Oztrich Boy
(Paging Nehemiah Scudder:the Crazy Years are peaking. America is ready for you.)
To: camle
if evolution is true AND God is true, why teach one but not the other? You do know how many theories of God there are? All equally valid from a scholarly or intellectual viewpoint.
It'd take several lifetimes to teach them all.
186
posted on
10/07/2005 4:14:01 PM PDT
by
Oztrich Boy
(Paging Nehemiah Scudder:the Crazy Years are peaking. America is ready for you.)
To: Sopater
This is censorship because it wants religious viewpoints taught in the appropriate classes? Is it also censorship if my math teacher refuses to teach political science to me?
187
posted on
10/07/2005 4:17:19 PM PDT
by
Mr. Blonde
(You know, Happy Time Harry, just being around you kinda makes me want to die.)
To: Right Wing Professor; little jeremiah; staytrue
For a perspective on Richard Milton by Richard (/topic Dawkins, Lewontin, Leakey.... How many evolutionisns are there named Richard compared to similarly nmaed anti-evolutionists? maybe someone should make a list)
A cynic might note that there is a paying public out there, hungry for simple religious certitude, who will lap up anything with a subtitle like Shattering the Myth of Darwinism.
188
posted on
10/07/2005 4:38:16 PM PDT
by
Oztrich Boy
(Paging Nehemiah Scudder:the Crazy Years are peaking. America is ready for you.)
To: Dimensio
Do you have an alternative scientific theory to evolution?No, I don't, but I'm not a scientist. However, it is a THEORY, so the ideas of the scientists who are questioning it should be entertained.
189
posted on
10/07/2005 4:45:29 PM PDT
by
SuziQ
To: Dimensio
"Now, do you have an example of a "lone scientists" who was apparently shunned by the scientific community only to have his or her works embraced by the scientific community several decades later? Names please."
LOL...Galileo, maybe?
To: SuziQ
However, it is a THEORYIt's not a SCIENTIFIC THEORY. Do you know the difference? If not, I, or many other FReepers, will be glad to assist you.
191
posted on
10/07/2005 4:50:34 PM PDT
by
Rudder
To: WKUHilltopper
I wasn't aware that Galileo's opposition came from the "cientific community". In fact, I was under the impression that the objections to his research were religiously motivated.
192
posted on
10/07/2005 4:52:55 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: Rudder
No, thank you. I may not be a scientist, but I'm not stupid.
193
posted on
10/07/2005 4:53:35 PM PDT
by
SuziQ
To: SuziQ
No, I don't, but I'm not a scientist. However, it is a THEORY, so the ideas of the scientists who are questioning it should be entertained.
You say "theory" in all-caps like you understand the significance. Please explain what is meant by "theory".
194
posted on
10/07/2005 4:55:02 PM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: Sopater
Good to see he's so f**king brilliant. I'll chuck my Bible and hang onto this prick's every word from now on.
To: Wings-n-Wind
The central premise of Darwinian theory is that life was somehow "born" from the pool of unliving ingredients Stop lying! This is a conservative forum and we get all the pure BS we need from the libs.
196
posted on
10/07/2005 4:55:44 PM PDT
by
shuckmaster
(Bring back SeaLion and ModernMan!)
To: spunkets
He simply stated the University's rule that the topics in the biophysical science class will contain only the relevant science. They'd do and say the same to address any other attempted corruption.Yes. The faith must be kept pure and unsullied. Free and open inquiry is too dangerous.
Darwinism's high priest has spoken.
There is incomparably greater freedom to debate evolution and intelligent design at FR that there is at the University of Idaho.
That's amazing.
Although I fully believe that FR's Darwinists would, if they could, stifle the debate here as well.
To: SuziQ
No, thank you. I may not be a scientist, but I'm not stupid. Then why assert that a THEORY (presumably any theory) should be allowed in a university classroom?
I've got a theory: You are stupid, despite your protestations.
199
posted on
10/07/2005 5:02:13 PM PDT
by
Rudder
To: JCEccles
"Yes. The faith must be kept pure and unsullied. Free and open inquiry is too dangerous.It's a science journal. The reviewer's job is to review and judge fitness for publicaiton on the scientific soundness of the article presented.
The reviewer should have been able to grasp that ID is not science. That ID concludes and claims that the laws of physics are insufficient to govern the world. That is the central fact that should have caused the article to be sent back for change, or rejected outright.
"Darwinism's high priest has spoken."
Whatever. ID remains unscientific and science is not faith.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220, 221-236 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson