Posted on 11/09/2005 6:32:26 AM PST by Our_Man_In_Gough_Island
The US state of Kansas has approved science standards for public schools that cast doubt on evolution. The Board of Education's vote, expected for months, approved the new language criticising evolution by 6-4.
Proponents of the change argue they are trying to expose students to legitimate scientific questions about evolution.
The Kansas decision came as voters in Pennsylvania replaced all eight school board members who approved a similar policy in some of the state's schools.
Since October 2004, schools in Dover, Pennsylvania, have been obliged to read out a prepared statement on intelligent design in biology classes.
Teachers have been ordered to tell pupils that Darwin's theory of evolution is unproven, and that the universe is so complex that it may have been created by a higher power.
Last month parents in Dover sued the school board, accusing it of introducing religion and creationism into schools, in breach of the US constitutional separation of church and state.
Definition of science
Tuesday's vote in Kansas was the third time in six years that the Kansas board has rewritten standards with evolution as the central issue.
Current state standards treat evolution as well-established, a view held by national science groups.
We are all for intelligent design being discussed, but we do not want to see it in biology class
The new standards include several specific challenges, including statements that there is a lack of evidence or natural explanation for the genetic code, and charges that fossil records are inconsistent with evolutionary theory.
It also states that says certain evolutionary explanations "are not based on direct observations... and often reflect... inferences from indirect or circumstantial evidence".
"This is a great day for education," board chairman Steve Abrams told the Reuters news agency.
Decisions about what is taught in Kansas classrooms will remain with 300 local school boards, but the new standards will be used to develop student tests measuring how well schools teach science.
Educators fear pressure will increase in some communities to teach less about evolution or more about creationism or intelligent design.
'Theory, not science'
In Dover, the first US district to introduce intelligent design into schools, new school board members are thought likely to repeal the policy.
"We are all for it being discussed, but we do not want to see it in biology class," said Judy McIlvaine, a new board member.
"It is not a science."
The case against the intelligent design policy was heard in a federal court case which ended last week.
A verdict is expected early next year.
And they KNOW that we are directly descended from them because?
They are all positively linked in a chain because?
I think there are a LOT of assumptions going on here - and perhaps a little wishfull thinking.
"You say that you believe in God?"
"Did I?"
Um, well the opposite of not believing is believing, (the exchange went like this): :
"...so you're an Athiest.[?]"
"Errr. WRONG."
"To believe what you suggest would mean that God is a liar and a scumbag trickster."
You are WAY too insulting and nasty to try and have a civil discussion with - are you like this with all who disagree with you?
It's certainly ONE way to end a discussion.
Well, first of all, I'm glad someone on the creationism side has dropped the ridiculous fig leaf of a term known as "ID" and decided to be up front about what she wants taught in the schools. That's refreshing, and at least it weeds out the Xenu fans and those who claim a role for Galactus in world events.
Second of all, however, one must ask, what theoretical framework do creationists espouse that would result in falsifiability criteria? If your "theory's" sole answer to every inquiry is that "well, it's that way because God did it and it's a miracle and we can't know the mind of God" then of course no one can prove the theory wrong.
I'm sorry that you are confounded by someone who defeats your false dichotomy worldview.
>>"To believe what you suggest would mean that God is a liar and a scumbag trickster."
>You are WAY too insulting and nasty to try and have a civil discussion with
No, I'm not... I'm just honest. In your worldview, God set up the world specifically to look old and life to look evolved. This is trickery.
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.