Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Utah House kills evolution bill
Fort Wayne Journal Gazette ^ | 28 February 2006 | JENNIFER DOBNER

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.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: biofraud; crevolist; scienceeducation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 881-900901-920921-940 ... 1,541 next last

900


901 posted on 03/01/2006 9:28:12 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 899 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

Close.


902 posted on 03/01/2006 9:29:19 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 901 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
I dont frequent these threads- but this question has been bothering me lately since this topic is in the news so often now.

I wish someone could explain to me why we can not present both theories, all ideas ~and let the children decide for themselves.

903 posted on 03/01/2006 9:29:21 AM PST by Diva Betsy Ross (Embrace peace- Hug an American soldier- the real peace keepers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Diva Betsy Ross
I wish someone could explain to me why we can not present both theories

Which two theories are you referring to? Why do you pick those two as the competing creation stories to present to children? (or why did you exclude the other 10,000 creation stories?)

There is one scientific theory of evolution, and there are thousands of creation stories that more or less disagree both with each other and the scientific theory. Present one of the religious creation stories, present them all, I say.

904 posted on 03/01/2006 9:32:27 AM PST by Thatcherite (More abrasive blackguard than SeaLion or ModernMan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 903 | View Replies]

To: Diva Betsy Ross
I wish someone could explain to me why we can not present both theories, all ideas ~and let the children decide for themselves.

"Intelligent design" or "creation science" or whatever you wish to call it is not a "theory" as scientists use the term. What you are asking is a sort of affirmative action for your preferred creation story.

905 posted on 03/01/2006 9:34:06 AM PST by BeHoldAPaleHorse (Tagline deleted at request of moderator.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 903 | View Replies]

To: Diva Betsy Ross
I wish someone could explain to me why we can not present both theories, all ideas ~and let the children decide for themselves.

There are two reasons. First, children are not competent to evaluate such material. That is the province of experienced scientists. Schools (pre-university level) exist to present students with the best available information.

Second, the overwhelming opinion of scientists in firm agreement that there is no scientific theory other than evolution which explains the material in question. Specifically, Genesis is not a scientific theory, and ID is a wild conjecture with no data, no research, no testable hypotheses, and no scientific (peer-reviewed) literature.

906 posted on 03/01/2006 9:34:17 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 903 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
The ability to count annual layers in the cores well into the glacial period and probably through 110,000 years will help to answer questions about the timing of the glacial periods and the usefulness of radiocarbon calibrations.

Ok.....

907 posted on 03/01/2006 9:35:05 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 886 | View Replies]

To: ml1954; PatrickHenry
Elsie-thon post count.... Posts 801-850 Elsie: 25 posts All Others: 25 posts

Exactly. This is like wading through a swamp. Wasnt FR supposed to get some kind of filter a while back?

At least G3K posted in blue.

908 posted on 03/01/2006 9:35:55 AM PST by RightWingNilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 851 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
They counted the annual layers.

Almost 2 miles of them!

(There's a job for an undergrad!!!)

909 posted on 03/01/2006 9:36:41 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 889 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
But even on this thread we see those who, confronted with a conclusion from the evidence of the world, consult scripture and ask who that evidence might be calling a liar.

Its amazing. A complete divorce from reality.

How do these guys survive in the real world?

910 posted on 03/01/2006 9:38:14 AM PST by RightWingNilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 860 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

But the ones who threaten to run weeping to the mods won't identify themselves--they need to wear some sort of badge. You always run the risk of unknowingly Speaking to One Who Must Not Be Spoken To. Maybe some sort of emoticon--like a yellow streak?


911 posted on 03/01/2006 9:39:39 AM PST by Mamzelle (GM=gutless marvel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 893 | View Replies]

To: RightWingNilla
Wasn't FR supposed to get some kind of filter a while back?

A few years ago, John Robinson said a "bozo filter" was on his list of things to do. If we ever get it, I will immediately apply it to known scripture-spammers. If I want to see that material, I'll hang out in the religion forum.

912 posted on 03/01/2006 9:39:57 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 908 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp

Bad assumption.


913 posted on 03/01/2006 9:40:19 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 889 | View Replies]

To: Elsie; PatrickHenry

It's done electronically. The pH of ice varies between summer and winter thus leading to a difference in conduction across a core.

The core sections are compared with tree sections (visit Lone Pine and go up the mountain about 10,000 feet) and with varves. All are in agreement. For short periods (like back to the Age of the Pyramids) written evidence also agrees.


914 posted on 03/01/2006 9:43:51 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 909 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Good question. Why do creationists ignore Noah's Y chromosome? Why doesn't every male have the same Y chromosome?


915 posted on 03/01/2006 9:44:54 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 895 | View Replies]

To: Quark2005

Nice Post. Lets see if you get an honest answer (*not holding my breath*)


916 posted on 03/01/2006 9:48:33 AM PST by RightWingNilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 884 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic

Sigh. You're probably right. Some things just strike me as "well, duh", and I wonder why the question is even being asked.


917 posted on 03/01/2006 9:52:22 AM PST by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 913 | View Replies]

To: Elsie; Coyoteman
You, you're not! You, also, are believeing "writers who says it's true".

There is a big difference, Elsie. I can understand and corroborate the modern physical evidence personally. For example I know from my own personal experience and graduate training in geology, hydrology, and soil-mechanics, that young earth hypotheses about how the Grand Canyon formed after the flood are just ignorant nonsense that flies in the face of ample data that I can personally verify. For example Coyoteman understands the archeological evidence that says "no global flood in the history of mankind" personally as well as understanding the multiple cross-confirming lines of data that support C14 dating. By and large it is the creationists who just get all their thinking from other experts.

If you think that mainstream science just consists of accepting "writer's who say it's true" then your disconnect with reality is bigger than I thought. People who show, using physical evidence, that widely accepted scientific theories are wide of the mark have a name, and that name is "Rich and Famous Nobel Prize Winner". Everyone is on the lookout for data that will make their name. To say that scientists are somehow ignoring evidence that shows YEC to be true is moonbat conspiracy theory territory. You don't want to go there, do you?

918 posted on 03/01/2006 9:55:13 AM PST by Thatcherite (More abrasive blackguard than SeaLion or ModernMan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 899 | View Replies]

To: Quark2005
A.D., if discerning working theories from physical data is so trivial compared to the mathematical manipulation used therein, why haven't mathematicians jumped into the game and snatched up every Nobel Prize in physics, chemistry and medicine awarded over the last 100 years?

Physics, chemistry and medicine are beneath the dignity of great minds, as is common household maintenance.

919 posted on 03/01/2006 9:56:33 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 884 | View Replies]

To: js1138; Quark2005
Physics, chemistry and medicine are beneath the dignity of great minds, as is common household maintenance.

And dont forget personal hygiene.

920 posted on 03/01/2006 9:58:06 AM PST by RightWingNilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 919 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 881-900901-920921-940 ... 1,541 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson