[PatrickHenry]

We've been paying attention to the trial in Dover, but the Kansas situation may be heating up. Underlining and bracketted comments added by me. Everyone be nice.

[PatrickHenry]

EvolutionPing

A pro-evolution science list with over 310 names. See the list's explanation at my freeper homepage. Then FReepmail to be added or dropped. See what's new in The List-O-Links.

[gondramB]

A report from the Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning in Aurora, Colo., gave the Kansas standards good marks for being appropriate for all students, meeting testing criteria and challenging students to learn at a high level. However, the report criticized the standards as unclear, especially in areas related to evolution and the study of life's origins. The review noted the state doesn't expect to test students on many key elements of evolution covered by language in the standards"

If that's the only complaint it sounds like science education hasn't been hurt that badly yet. That's somewhat encouraging.

[saganite]

Sorry. Intelligent design isn't science. Teaching ID in science class is tantamount to conceding scientific instruction in our schools isn't important but religious indoctrination is.

[b_sharp]

It's a terrible shame that scientists are expecting to determine what should be taught as science. It would be much better if all science was determined by public referendum.

Do I really need a sacasm tag?

[shuckmaster]

In 1999, those organizations refused to grant copyright permission for changes in the Kansas standards that eliminated most references to evolution. Two years later, after elections, the board rewrote the standards again, making them evolution-friendly.

IOW, there's hope for Kansas but, it's coming from outside the state?

and that man and apes share a common ancestor.

People who have a problem with that are coming from a point of superstitious ignorance and should avoid science debates as deliberately as they've avoided science class.

[LiteKeeper]

YEC INTREP

[narby]

Case said the proposed standards confuse the lines between good science and the supernatural.

The language that this discussion has generated is another place where the misguided attacks on evolution is damaging to Christianity.

By definition God is the "supernatural". An entity that is not a part of the natural world. But by lumping Christianity into the "supernatural", it joins ESP, tarot cards, Voodoo, and all other discredited faiths.

The more Christians attack evolution, the more they shoot themselves in the foot.

[doc30]

I've been trying to think of an analogy to best explain why the arguements IDer's use against evolution are so non sequitor.

The creationist/ID alledged attacks (or alledged controversy) would be like someone who understands English only trying to critique Russian literature. You just can get there from here. Then when you point out that they basically aren't qualified (i.e. fluent in the language) they claim censorship or harrasment against their views. Even though those views are essentially nonsense because they cannot speak the language!