Posted on 11/09/2005 4:31:43 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
(AP) Revisiting a topic that exposed Kansas to nationwide ridicule six years ago, the state Board of Education approved science standards for public schools Tuesday that cast doubt on the theory of evolution.
The board's 6-4 vote, expected for months, was a victory for intelligent design advocates who helped draft the standards. Intelligent design holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by a higher power.
Critics of the proposed language charged that it was an attempt to inject creationism into public schools in violation of the separation between church and state.
The board's vote is likely to heap fresh national criticism on Kansas and cause many scientists to see the state as backward. Current state standards treat evolution as well-established — a view also held by national science groups
(Excerpt) Read more at worthynews.com ...
"I'll prob. get fired."
I certainly hope so.
Nor for philsophical reasons. You need to me careful not to press the theory into the service of philosphical materialism and use it to discredit all religous authority. William jennings Bryan has been turned into a buffoon, even though his real objection was not to the science--of which he knew little--but to the social darwinism of the time, which he believed was used to justify the exploitation of the weak by the strong.
"Nor for philsophical reasons. You need to me careful not to press the theory into the service of philosphical materialism and use it to discredit all religous authority."
That is part of the problem... science is not capable of disproving religion. And that is not it's job. It is often non-scientist supporters of evolution that overstate it. We don't know where the first life came from and we cannot disprove intelligent design.
On the other hand, science class is about what we can prove and, where there is no definitive proof, what seems most likely as suggested by the evidence and right not ID doesn't fit because of a lack of supporting scientific evidence.
http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/bubonic_plague/
At its worst, the bubonic plague killed 2 million victims a year.
That particular source (which appears to be hosted on someone's cable modem) is a bit low. Plus the plague lasted for several years. In addition to direct plague deaths there were other effects like decreased food production andeconomic disrupitin that reduced population
here is another source
"Black Death - Disaster Strikes
25 million people died in just under five years between 1347 and 1352. Estimated population of Europe from 1000 to 1352.
* 1000 38 million
* 1100 48 million
* 1200 59 million
* 1300 70 million
* 1347 75 million
* 1352 50 million "
http://www.themiddleages.net/plague.htm
An wishful, yet bigoted, statement on the part of those who prefer to close the doors of free inquiry. Science does not set that kind of limit upon itself. Neither does education.
Be sure to alert me if/when you post some of those "challenging arguments" - I'd sure hate to miss them.
If you choose ID you can have both.
That's pretty much the definitive response.
Just as evolutionary humanists believe in evolution, so too did all of the ancient pagans. Substitute a few word changes for the Nordic creation story and you've got the creation story for evolutionary humanism. The one major difference between the ancient's creation stories and their modern counterparts (evolutionary humanism is a species of neo-paganism) is that the latter filled in the blanks between when man was still maize and when he appeared as man (Aztecs creation story).
Evolutionary humanism defies the definition of scientific theory right from the very beginning. Right there with its creation story: No One Was There To Observe The Action. It began with speculation and then a webwork of theories were built up around the original speculation.
It's doomed because it's premised on speculation, monstrous conceit, and wishful thinking, which is why it's full of holes big enough to drive a bus through. It's also the most intrinsically evil system of religion and philosophy (yes indeed---it functions as a religion) that the world has ever experienced. It's a man-killing machine.
ping
I assume you are referring to the Jesus Horses?
Between the Creationists who claim Evolution is a fraud because it's dogmatic and refuses to look at new evidence and the Creationists who claim Evolution is a fraud because it keeps changing with new evidence, it gets so confusing, especially since occasionally it's the same Creationist making both claims in different threads.
IMHO,Intelligent Design, as held by intelligent people, says,
We who believe, in Intelligent Design, including many heavy-duty scientists, are no threat to science, and vice versa. Evolution, which really is the best working theory we have, belongs in science class, where a wise teacher might allude to the fact that a lot of really smart people, including Jimmy Carter (oops, poor example) and even Darwin, believe in Intelligent Design, which since it can't be scientifically demonstrated, is a great discussion for philosophy class, or religion class. Where is the big deal here?
Do you have an argument or not? Post your statistics, tell us what you think they mean and why you consider them valid.
You question whether statistics is science? Amazing.
Not at all - I question whether you are capable of understanding statistics. Did I use too many big words? Do I need to dumb it down even more for you next time? Here, try it this way:
So post it. Put up or shut up, Mr. Troll.
My question is one that you seem to want to avoid.
In as much as the main arguments of intelligent design are based on statistics, would you object to applying stats to evolution? If so, why?
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.