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.
What if the Bible said something that your experience told you was loony.
Like a 40 days rain flooding the entire world?
One thing is certain, no matter how you translate "orion", you can't prove that Mark's statement is inaccurate geographically.
I can prove it's like going from D.C. to New York via Boston.
The logical conclusion is that the author of Mark was working from (at best) someone else's account, and got this bit wrong.
If you are a world class biblical scholar, my apologies. I guess you are some sort of wunderkind, just a man of many accomplishments.
Festival of Tractionless Bloviating Disruptor Trolls placemarker
What longshadow said.
One doesn't have to be a world-class biblical scholar to be familiar with the basics of modern scholarship about the origin of the books of the Bible. I recommend www.earlychristianwritings.com. And I had a very old-fashioned education, and so learned Latin and Greek in school.
How many times has one of your experienced-based conclusions been inaccurate, falsified and/or wrong?
Given the differences in everyone's experience, and also given the fallibility of personnel experience, can one find absolute truth in experience?
As to the all cats lay eggs question...There is no basis of reality in the question and the Bible never contradicts truth (It is Truth).
OK now that is funny! I think you guys have too much time on your brain. LOL!!
scold, school marm , send in the clowns, placemarker
Cosmic ray reference?
Ana meson from Orion?
Those characters distinguish a clade within reptiles. As you note mammals branched off after some, but before most, major reptile groups. So, on the cladistic approach, "mammals" can't be a group with equal rank to "reptiles". Although this is the way we classify them. If we were consistently cladistic "mammals" would have to be a subgroup of "reptiles".
You'd have more fun with the death of Judas.
Read the passage about the flood...it wasn't just the rain; "all the springs of the deep burst forth..."
That sounds even loonier to me.
Yeah, aint the InterNet great?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1587326/posts
Merci, Mamzelle.
I believe the demarcation is upright stance and a striding gait.
Are we not primates too? Or mammals?
Lemurs (and some more "primitive" forms), monkeys, the "lower" apes, anthropoid apes and humans are all primates. So far as I know this is also a legitimate clade.
I think "mammals" would also be a legitimate clade, but NOT if given equal rank (as it is) to "reptiles". Reptiles are then not monophyletic (the group doesn't include ALL of its descendents) and this is not allowed in cladistics as I understand.
I wasn't rain. It was invisible pink unicorn tears.
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.