Posted on 03/05/2006 10:14:04 AM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
Evolution bill stirs debate on origin of life, religion
TIM TALLEY
Associated Press
OKLAHOMA CITY - While other states are backing away from teaching alternatives to evolution, the Oklahoma House passed a bill Thursday encouraging schools to expose students to alternative views about the origin of life.
The measure, passed on a 77-10 vote, gives teachers the right to teach "the full range of scientific views on the biological or chemical origins of life." The measure stops short of requiring the teaching of "intelligent design" alongside the theory of evolution in science classes.
Its author, Rep. Sally Kern, R-Oklahoma City, said evolution is taught in some classrooms as if it were scientific fact although the theory, developed in the 19th century by Charles Darwin, is neither observable, repeatable or testable and is not solid science.
"They are getting a one-sided view of evolution," said Kern, a former teacher. "Let's teach good, honest science."
Critics said the lessons would be more appropriate in religion or philosophy classes than in science class. They said the measure would take control from local school boards on developing lesson plans and violates the constitutional prohibition on government endorsement of specific religious views.
"I think we're about to open a slippery slope here," said Rep. Danny Morgan, D-Prague. In December, a federal judge blocked attempts to teach intelligent design in high school biology classes in Dover, Pa.
"We're going to be right back in the courthouse," Morgan said.
Kern said her bill does not promote a particular religious point of view but promotes critical thinking by students by exposing them to all sides of a scientific debate.
"This bill is not about a belief in God. It is not about religion. It is about science," Kern said. "I'm not asking for Sunday school to be in a science class."
Evolution teaches that all organisms are connected by genealogy and have changed through time through several processes, including natural selection.
Intelligent design teaches that life is so well-ordered that it must have been created by a higher power. Critics argue that the theory is merely repackaged creationism, which teaches that the Earth and all life were created by God.
Supporters said exposing students to different viewpoints will create lively classroom debate.
"Do you think you come from a monkeyman?" said Rep. Tad Jones, R-Claremore. "Did we come from slimy algae 4.5 billion years ago or are we a unique creation of God? I think it's going to be exciting for students to discuss these issues."
Opponents said alternative theories on the origin of life are a matter of faith, not science. "God truly is the creator of heaven and Earth, but I can't prove that," said Rep. Al Lindley, D-Oklahoma City.
The bill now goes to the state Senate, where similar legislation has been defeated in the past.
On Tuesday, lawmakers in Utah defeated a bill requiring public school students be told that evolution is not empirically proven. In Ohio, school curriculum is undergoing change following the Pennsylvania ruling that intelligent design should not be taught alongside evolution in public schools.
Kansas has adopted language to encourage students to explore arguments against evolution, but the standards have not been tied to any lesson plans or statewide testing.
Sure they did. Unless you believe automakers are always 100 percent correct in predicting what will sell.
The market produces half a dozen new businesses for every one that survives, and hundreds of new products for every one that is a hit.
Living things also have systems that produce change in a way that productively explores possibilities. It is neither completely random nor directed.
Products and living populations are shaped by consequences.
Darwin's natural selection was partly inspired by the Scottish economists, including Adam Smith.
It is not so much the number of creation stories that will be brought into the classroom as it is the critical analysis that will be brought to bear on them.
The OK legislators are assuming a one way criticism, but if religion presents itself as science, then the histories presented by religion will be subject to empirical analysis.
At which point those who worked to present religion as science, will claim that the scientific process applied to what they themselves introduced as science, is an attack on their religion.
Don't forget to add to the list, first, last or in the middle-- as it makes no difference-- the evolution creation myth that life came from Mars, or somewhere....
They already do that on these threads. They say ID or creationism is supported by science, and when you apply the methods and reasoning of science to their claims, you're suddenly a God hater.
Science an religion are different ways of looking at reality. They do not belong in the same course of study.
You've noticed that too?
Zero is a number. (Same joke as "I'm in shape. Round is a shape." I know.)
I guess "global" was limited to the view of whoever was describing it at the time.
Now local floods are a different thing. There is one in the Black Sea area some 7,500 years ago, and the channeled scablands of eastern Washington document another massive flood (actually a series of them) at the end of the last glacial episodes. Fascinating.
Shouldn't there be more land than water on this planet? It seems we could use more land for people but we are stuck with a whole bunch of water. People just don't want to believe that Supreme Intelligence exists. They have no problem saying someone invented the computer but when it comes to the "Inventor" of the one who invented the computer then they have problems. The Laws of Science declare Supreme Logic. Nature is something to marvel at whether it be weather patterns, waves of energy or the night vision of an owl. The more one looks closely at a piece of nature, the more one marvels at the structure. Take for instance, the combs of honey in hexagonal structure or the intricate design of a spider web or shapes of a snowflake. Science instead of pointing away from God points one toward a ultra-wise Creator.
Consider the continental shelves and mountains and undersea canyons. What happened. "You covered it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled; at the voice of Your thunder they hasted away. They go up by the mountains; they go down by the valleys to the place which You have founded for them. You have set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth." Ps.104:5-9 This earth buckled which is why we have high mountains corresponding with deep ocean canyons. The Noahic Flood waters receded into these crevasses.
Assuming, for the sake of arguement, that that is correct then where is intelligent design observable, repeatable or testable?
In the beginning was some cellular thing, we're not sure exactly, but It was.
It had some flagellum or flagelli, or something, yes it did. It looked around and said "Where's the rest of me?" and then it organized Itself into something else, we're not sure what, but yes it did, selah!
Then It said to Itself, I am hungry, so then It began to get energy from somewhere and behold! It reproduced. Yes it did! We can't prove It, but It happens!
And that surprises you how?
Exactly the kind of discussion that is intended.
I thought of that after I posted, but lunch prevented me from posting. I guess that makes me a poster of different truthfulness. It is true that any number of competent scientists repudiate Darwin.
For large instances of zero.
But you attack one theory on the same grounds that the other fails on. Shouldn't you be offering a theory that is more supportable, testable, and observable than evolution?
What are evos so afraid of? Looks like OK isn't afraid.
And the kids of the 25% of parents who won't bother to send them to school will mostly turn to crime, and we can spend $28,000 a year keeping them in prison, instead.
Every single western democracy has had compulsory education for at least the last 100 years, but on the say so of religious cultists, we'll do away with it.
To the person who witnessed such a flood 7,500 years ago, the whole world was flooded.
Or at least, what they perceived to be the whole world.
There was, of course, a worldwide deluge just prior to the invention of writing. It would have been the end of the ice age. We really don't know if cities and civilizations were flooded.
The waters haven't receded, however.
If evolution is true, should machines be evolving on their own. What amazes me is that non-living things cannot evolve but we assume that living things can evolve. Why does man build cars, airplanes, spaceships, etc.? Because He was created in the image of God. I don't see any chimps or elephants designing radios or tvs or vcrs. Just humans. Why do we have tv or radio? Because God created waves for light, electricity and sound. Otherwise there would be no computer or internet. Why do planes fly? Because God created the laws of aerodynamics. Why do we not fly into space or fall off this earth but are attached to the iteven if we live on the bottom because God designed the law of gravity. What evolutionists hate is that creationists God as the God of Biology, Chemistry, Zoology, Physics, Astronomy, and Geology, etc. What does this mean? Creationists can and will attack on all fronts. If not in science, they show the Providence on God in His Story (history)BC (Before Christ)and AD (in the year of our Lord). They will show the absolute truth of mathematics proving God is the author of math. They will disprove evolution in philosopy. They will show God was the one who instituted Government and Morals. They will show God is the author of art and music. Furthermore in church, they will contrast evolution from Biblical creation and help them learn how to refute evolution. Instead of segmenting God, creationists have God permeate their lives and their education so God is seen in all Arts and Sciences and the Bible plays a role in all aspects of life.
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.