Posted on 02/28/2006 4:05:45 AM PST by PatrickHenry
House lawmakers scuttled a bill that would have required public school students to be told that evolution is not empirically proven - the latest setback for critics of evolution.
The bill's sponsor, Republican state Sen. Chris Buttars, had said it was time to rein in teachers who were teaching that man descended from apes and rattling the faith of students. The Senate earlier passed the measure 16-12.
But the bill failed in the House on a 28-46 vote Monday. The bill would have required teachers to tell students that evolution is not a fact and the state doesn't endorse the theory.
Rep. Scott Wyatt, a Republican, said he feared passing the bill would force the state to then address hundreds of other scientific theories - "from Quantum physics to Freud" - in the same manner.
"I would leave you with two questions," Wyatt said. "If we decide to weigh in on this part, are we going to begin weighing in on all the others and are we the correct body to do that?"
Buttars said he didn't believe the defeat means that most House members think Charles Darwin's theory of evolution is correct.
"I don't believe that anybody in there really wants their kids to be taught that their great-grandfather was an ape," Buttars said.
The vote represents the latest loss for critics of evolution. In December, a federal judge barred the school system in Dover, Pa., from teaching intelligent design alongside evolution in high school biology classes.
Also last year, a federal judge ordered the school system in suburban Atlanta's Cobb County to remove from biology textbooks stickers that called evolution a theory, not a fact.
Earlier this year, a rural California school district canceled an elective philosophy course on intelligent design and agreed never to promote the topic in class again.
But critics of evolution got a boost in Kansas in November when the state Board of Education adopted new science teaching standards that treat evolution as a flawed theory, defying the view of science groups.
Likewise...
If all male humans are descended from Mr. Missing Link, where did the variation come from?
We now return you to the regularly-scheduled Elsie-thon.
Already answered, but I forget that you can't read. Mutations occur, and the lineage of mutations can be used to trace migrations and descent. There is no possible lineage leading to a single male within recorded history.
Because Noah's wife does not have a Y chromosome. Please try to keep up.
I think we've established that our creationist friends don't understand sex, except possibly in the Hollywood sense. That seems to be their source of information about evolution also. Hollywood movies.
Thanks. I enjoy postings from out-of-the way publications.
Except there were four (count them, 4) human X chromosomes on the Ark and only one (1) human Y chromosome. Now, why don't you answer the question?
If humans descended from Noah, why are there still people named Noah?
Either you refuse or AFFECT to refuse to notice (typical evo bad faith) that the same sort of tracing could be used more conventionally and reliably (there's never the issue of wondering about fidelity, for instance) with the XX. You'd still have the matter of Noah's wife and the common ancestry for discussion to demonstrate the same point as with the more unreliable Y. But an FRevo is never able to discuss anything.
As for millions of lurkers, I hardly think the evo threads are very popular. But they're popular enough for people to be regularly warned about How Evos Behave.
Only the peer-reviewed are allowed that name.
I don't answer questions posed in bad faith. I think you're missing the Girley Man tea party...?
You have nothing. You've never had anything. And now, the whole world basically knows it. Sorry if this fuels your growing paranoia, but it's the truth.
Why would you choose an ambiguous? The male lineage from Noah leads unambigouosly to Noah himself. There can be no other males in the lineage. No other Y chrosomes. All variation among current Y chrosomes must be the result of mutations on Noah's. Such mutations are inherited, and the lineage is easy to trace.
Fuels nothing. I expected as much--just chose to waste my own time attempting to prove a point to myself and others--only it wasn't about the Y chomosome. It was the total futility of attempting a discussion on the merits of a small but interesting question with an evo. Now I'll revert to simply warning others. Hasn't it been a whole fifteen minutes since you've posted your archival spam? Better get with it, or you'll be getting demerits from the Goon Meister.
Not just four women, but four presumabely unrelated women. But only one Y chromosome.
Suddenly we are to believe the Y chromosome is "unreliable" based on the assertion of someone who hasn't a clue why the question is important.
Nah. No bait taken here--but if there was someone besides an evo?-- it might be a fun puzzle to work out.
Obviously the discussion can't be about the Y chromosome, or anything else of substance. It's now about futility.
More postmodernist BS.
Don't think you're fooling anyone. You're about as close to a troll as we get on these threads and everyone, lurkers included, can see that. You pretty much discredit your cause with every posting.
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.