Education panel stalls curriculum vote for creationism appeal [S. Carolina, another Kansas?]

MyrtleBeachOnline ^ | 14 December 2005 | Staff

[PatrickHenry]

An education oversight panel has put off a final recommendation on the state's biology teaching standards at the urging of a state senator who wants alternatives to evolution - including creationism - taught in classrooms.

The Education Oversight Committee voted Monday to recommend approval of the state's biology content standards, but by an 8-7 vote, the panel removed for further study the wording that deals with teaching evolution.

The committee plans to put together a panel of scientists and science teachers to advise committee members on the biology standards dealing with evolution, JoAnne Anderson, the committee's executive director, said Tuesday.

State Sen. Mike Fair, a panel member, wants the education department to change the standards to encourage teaching alternatives to the theory of evolution. Fair, R-Greenville, also has proposed a bill that would give lawmakers more say on biology curriculum.

The Education Department writes standards teachers must follow in designing their daily lessons. The State Board of Education must give those standards final approval. The Education Oversight Committee can recommend the board approve or reject those standards.

The head attorney for the state Department of Education said he didn't think committee members are authorized to change the standards.

"This is unprecedented," attorney Dale Stuckey said. "It's my interpretation of the law that [EOC members] have no authority to change the standards."

Anderson said Tuesday that is not the committee's intent. The committee issued a news release clarifying that it does not have the authority to revise content standards.

"We are asking our colleagues at the State Department of Education for recommendations of individuals from the science community who can assist the committee in bringing about a resolution."

Fair said he wants to encourage "critical analysis of a controversial subject in the classroom."

State Education Superintendent Inez Tenenbaum, a Democrat, said Fair was trying to derail teaching standard revisions she said have wide support in academia. The agency recently conducted a yearlong review of key subjects and basic knowledge all science teachers in public schools must teach.

Current biology curriculum includes Charles Darwin's 19th century theory that life evolved over millions of years from simple cells that adapted to their environment. Creationism relies on the biblical explanation that mankind's origin is the result of a divine action.

In November, the S.C. Board of Education approved changes to science standards some teachers said needed clarification. The oversight committee put off voting on the rules in October to give Fair more time to lobby education officials.

Karen Floyd, a Republican candidate for state education superintendent, has said she will encourage the teaching of intelligent design.

Rep. Bob Walker, R-Spartanburg, said he supports Fair's efforts because "there are other ideas that can be addressed as to how this world came about."

One school official, Lexington-Richland 5 science supervisor Kitty Farnell, said the committee's questioning of educators' work sets "a terrible example for our students."

"It's an embarrassment," she said.

[Dimensio]

So the forces that interrupted the otherwise predictable copying mechanism were themselves the irrational and unpredictable part of the physical universe?

No. I never said that. You seemed to be putting forth the idea that mutations were impossible in a universe that behaved according to consistent physical laws. If I am mistaken in that interpretation of your comments, I apologize.

Evolutionists, even on their own flawed terms, are forced to accept that even their own predictions must be rooted in order, not chaos.

Who claims otherwise? Be specific, and provide citations.

[Dimensio]

Or love.

Someone's never heard of biochemistry.

"Biochemically no different than eating large quantities of chocolate. "

[PatrickHenry]

The claim was made in post 7 of this thread: Dinosaur-Bird Flap Ruffles Feathers. The rest follows. It's a long thread.

[cornelis]

Science has limits.

I'd tweak it a bit. Scientific thinking has limits. It can't study chaos.

[Virginia-American]

You beat me to it.

I'd also say that there are occasional copy errors in computers; that's why there are parity bits and error-correcting codes.

It's really rather breathtaking to hear that the existence of mutations implies that the laws of chemistry and physics don't exist.

[Virginia-American]

thanks

[cornelis]

"My love, my love, my love
My love is che-mi-cal." .

[Dimensio]

I'd also say that there are occasional copy errors in computers; that's why there are parity bits and error-correcting codes.

I'm sure that these copying errors are a result of a fundamental breakdown of the laws of physics and have nothing whatsoever to do with interference created by the same laws of physics that are employed in the transfer of electronic data in the first place.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" I'd tweak it a bit. Scientific thinking has limits. It can't study chaos."

Now only can it study chaos, it does.

Noted: Your non-answer to my critique of your Thrasymachus charge.

Noted: Your change of subject.

[js1138]

Senator Bedfellow tracked it down.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1500340/posts?page=199#199

[cornelis]

Now only can it study chaos, it does. I suppose you could look at it that way. Can we add design to that?

[andysandmikesmom]

And it appears that 'newsgatherer' has been banned, so I cannot go back and read his/her ridiculous statements just to completely refresh my mind....ah well, another one bites the dust...

[PatrickHenry]

Newsgatherer is no longer with us. At least not by that name.

[hosepipe]

[ But it's absolutely necessary. The term,BTW, is methodological naturalism. There is no way to scientifically examine the supernatural. ]

Hmmm some(like me) think that Not believing in God, or even "A" god is Super Natural..
Several thousand years of known history tends to prove that too.. that atheism and agonsticism is Super Natural.. and that anti-God mental figments are not natural..

[js1138]

Couldn't have anything to do with supporting slavery in the name of God, could it?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" I suppose you could look at it that way. Can we add design to that?"

You can add order.

Noted: Your non-answer to my critique of your Thrasymachus charge.

[farmer18th]

Relax, Dimensio, if I really wanted to make your theories look ridiculous I would have had the jaybird giving birth to the donkey. "No, children, the jaybird didn't really give birth to the donkey, but they had a common ancestor."

Class: "who was the common ancestor?"
Teacher: "well, we don't know exactly..."
Class: "did someone record all the births and deaths?"
Teacher: "well, no, of course not, but..."
Class: "..so it's not like a hard science, then, right?"
Teacher: "..oh, it's one of the most trusted theories in science.."
Class: "..but the data can't really be observed, right?"
Teacher: "..look. If you're going to be difficult, I'm going to call your parents."

[wintertime]

"Then argue in favor of eliminating covington support for school. That's quite a bit different than arguing that a government-funded science class should teach pseudo-scientific claptrap."

Orionblamblam,

The only reason there is such controversy over evolution/intelligent design/creationism is that it has political, cultural, and religious consequences for the children in the government school.

Hm,,,,Let's take an example:

Every so often a prehistoric molar or fragment of a hip bone is found. There is ENORMOUS controversy among, possibly, 30 scientists in the anthropology field. The rest of us go about our lives oblivious to the acrimony.

If there were NO government schools, except for the scientists involved, the rest of us won't give a nanosecond's attention to the subject.

Evolution/intelligent design/creationism is merely one of HUNDREDS of curriculum and school policy decision that have PROFOUND political, cultural, and religious consequences for the children. There is NO possible way for a government school to resolve any of these issues in a neutral manner. No matter what the government school does it WILL establish and uphold the political, cultural, and religious worldviews of some while trashing the most closely held beliefs of others.

Solution to the evolution/ intelligent design controversy?

Answer: Abolish government schools.

[cornelis]

even "A" god is Super Natural..

And of course it is. You can't have A as part of nature if you deny teleology.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" Hmmm some(like me) think that Not believing in God, or even "A" god is Super Natural.."

You would be wrong.

" Several thousand years of known history tends to prove that too."

No, it really doesn't.

"that atheism and agonsticism is Super Natural.. and that anti-God mental figments are not natural.."

Popularity of belief is not an indication of the validity of that belief. I am sure you realize this is a logical fallacy.