Evolution curriculum sparks debate in SoCal community

Riverside Press-Enterprise ^ | 25 March 2006 | AP

[Greg o the Navy]

The secular humanists, liberals, and multi-culturalists are doing their best to undermine this. If the UC Berkeley professor mentioned in this article and his ilk can't accept living in a Christian nation, it seems to me they should be encouraged to go elsewhere.

[From many - one.]

You forgot to list scientists.

[DeweyCA]

A school district official who helped craft the statement said the move fits in with the state's framework for teaching science. "Sure, kids can question things, but once you start crossing the line into beliefs or religion, that's not something that's appropriate for science," said Howard Sundberg, Lancaster's assistant superintendent of educational services. "Those questions could help a theory to be understood," Sundberg said. "I just don't see any bad

It seems to me that they want to teach the strengths and weaknesses of the theory, and leave any reference to religion out of the discussion. That sounds like a reasonable approach.

[DeweyCA]

A school district official who helped craft the statement said the move fits in with the state's framework for teaching science. "Sure, kids can question things, but once you start crossing the line into beliefs or religion, that's not something that's appropriate for science," said Howard Sundberg, Lancaster's assistant superintendent of educational services. "Those questions could help a theory to be understood," Sundberg said. "I just don't see any bad that can come out of it, as long as we stay within the domain of science."

Here is the full quote.

[balrog666]

"You don't do students a favor by pretending there are controversies in the scientific community where there are none," said Kevin Padian, a professor of integrative biology at the University of California, Berkeley.

That does seem to sum up the idiocy of this policy.

[farmer18th]

Question evolution? QUESTION evolution? What are you? Some sort of heretic?

[staytrue]

his ilk can't accept living in a Christian nation, it seems to me they should be encouraged to go elsewhere.

So you are saying that all non christians should move out of the country ?

So you are the reason why the liberals call conservatives intolerant.

[DeweyCA]

You also don't do students a favor by pretending that there are NOT controversies with the theory. Stephen Jay Gould, until his recent death was America's foremost promoter of evlution, had such big problems with neo-Darwinian evolution, that he proposed the theory of "punctuated equilibrium" to try to explain the lack of transitional fossils. Anybody who thinks that are no weaknesses with the theoiry of evolution isn't willing to face the criticisms put forth by some of the best evolutionists in the world.

[BCrago66]

We're not living in a Christain nation. We're living in a free nation, with a predominantly religious civic culture, in which individuals may believe or not believe as thier hearts and minds dictate.

If you feel threatened by that, perhaps you should go elsewhere. You might be happier in Afganistan, where many citizens apparently hold a similar attitude toward those who don't share their religious beliefs.

[Coyoteman]

For later (maybe) ===> Placemarker <===

[jec41]

Muslims don't like science either and they are very progressive. Look how far they have come in the last 1600 years.

[balrog666]

You also don't do students a favor by pretending that there are NOT controversies with the theory.

There are no significant scientific controversies with the theory. That is all that matters here.

Stephen Jay Gould, until his recent death was America's foremost promoter of evlution, had such big problems with neo-Darwinian evolution, that he proposed the theory of "punctuated equilibrium" to try to explain the lack of transitional fossils.

No, you misunderstand what Gould said. And punctuated equilibrium was proposed by Darwin a hundred years before Gould.

Anybody who thinks that are no weaknesses with the theoiry of evolution isn't willing to face the criticisms put forth by some of the best evolutionists in the world.

Oh, wise one, tell of us these scientific controversies that you know of that the biologists know not.

[TitansAFC]

Oh come on Greg, don't you pay attention to the debate here at Free Republic on Evolution/ID/Creationism?

We only have a few choices:

1.) No mention of Evolution whatsoever (Evolution? What's that?). Completely avoid the discussion out of fear of the controversy that often ensues, despite its widespread influence in modern science.

2.) Mandate that teachers ram Evolution (and Evolution alone) down the throats of every student. Disallow all other considerations, as there are heresy (oops, I mean "not science").

If there's one thing I've learned from Freeper debates on the topic, it's that there is no such thing as a happy medium in this debate. That's why the other, perhaps more logical and cooperative options simply cannot be placed on the above list of choices.

Because as I've learned in Free Republic:

If you are an Evolutionist, you're more religious than a Creationist.

-and-

If you are an ID or Creationist person, you don't REALLY have scientific objections.

[Greg o the Navy]

Last time I checked the currency in my pocket doesn't say "In Allah We Trust."

[tomzz]

Sounds reasonable enough to you and me; try convincing an evolutionist...

[AntiGuv]

sneaking ping!

[RussP]

Hey wait, ... let's remember the talking points: any skepticism about evolution is by definition based on "religion" and is therefore "anti-scientific."

That's all you need to know -- and don't ever forget it!

[AndyTheBear]

"You don't do students a favor by pretending there are controversies in the scientific community where there are none," said Kevin Padian, a professor of integrative biology at the University of California, Berkeley.

Science is based on consensus. If a large enough majority promotes a certain view, thoughts outside of the consensus should be systematically dismissed. Any who offer such thoughts should be ridiculed, mocked and kept away from our children.

This is what it means to be open minded and objective.