Posted on 12/01/2007 12:39:07 PM PST by Alter Kaker
AUSTIN, Tex., Nov. 29 (AP) — The state’s director of science curriculum said she resigned this month under pressure from officials who said she had given the appearance of criticizing the teaching of intelligent design.
The Texas Education Agency put the director, Chris Comer, on 30 days’ paid administrative leave in late October, resulting in what Ms. Comer called a forced resignation.
The move came shortly after she forwarded an e-mail message announcing a presentation by Barbara Forrest, an author of “Creationism’s Trojan Horse.” The book argues that creationist politics are behind the movement to get intelligent design theory taught in public schools. Ms. Comer sent the message to several people and a few online communities.
Ms. Comer, who held her position for nine years, said she believed evolution politics were behind her ousting. “None of the other reasons they gave are, in and of themselves, firing offenses,” she said.
Education agency officials declined to comment Wednesday on the matter. But they explained their recommendation to fire Ms. Comer in documents obtained by The Austin American-Statesman through the Texas Public Information Act.
“Ms. Comer’s e-mail implies endorsement of the speaker and implies that T.E.A. endorses the speaker’s position on a subject on which the agency must remain neutral,” the officials said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
It's a group hug thing.
The rest of us shrug off our headcolds and move on. Same with bacterial mats.(BTW, bacteria don't have a cell nucleus).
It’s censorship only if the government does it.
“OK, I’ll bite, bugs are smart. Now what.”
Bugs don’t know whether the universe was created by a single source (intelligent design), such as GOD, or whether it all happened by random mutation, any more than we do.
“(BTW, bacteria don’t have a cell nucleus).”
Because they are prokaryotes, not Eukaryotes, like us.
What I'm trying to do is save a perfectly good description expression from the hands of those who would lock us into a single interpetation of everything.
No, they are prokaryotes because they don’t have a cell nucleus.
How do you know the bugs don’t really know.
I think you missed my point. I wasn’t asking about the origin of the origin of all life (abiogenisis). I was asking about the origin of all life being that one item of whatever that Common Descent proponents point to when they draw the so-called “tree of life”. The big discussion here was how foolish ID people were when they did not rely upon proven scientific experimentation to provide substantiation for their claims. Only the real scientists did this. I was pointing out that those scientists (talkorigins and Nova) represented the inferences that they drew to be the equivalents of scientific proof of Common Descent. Common Descent is a conclusion reached by inference not a provable scientific fact, insofar as it is not repeatable nor demonstrable. But, you claimed that it is science. And you can hold on the sarcastic food comments. I may not be as smart as you, but I can listen and learn.
Forensic science is science, or we need to empty all the prisons and apologise to all the criminals who have been executed.
Here is some recent information that suggests that the above approach may not be accurate: Making Genetic Networks Operate Robustly: Unintelligent Non-design Suffices, by Professor Garrett Odell (online lecture).
Abstract: Mathematical computer models of two ancient and famous genetic networks act early in embryos of many different species to determine the body plan. Models revealed these networks to be astonishingly robust, despite their 'unintelligent design.' This examines the use of mathematical models to shed light on how biological, pattern-forming gene networks operate and how thoughtless, haphazard, non-design produces networks whose robustness seems inspired, begging the question what else unintelligent non-design might be capable of.
The prokaryotes were very happy, lived long and well, and just went about their way doing the job every day.
Then those darn Eukaryotes came along.
The prokaryotes never new what they were missing until then.
From that day forward, the prokaryotes hung their heads on the way to work, and were never, ever, happy again.
“How do you know the bugs don’t really know.”
Wait. Just a minute. I had an answer for you, and I seem to have lost it.
Now, that’s really gonna BUG ME until I find it!
: )
The story so far:
You: Hmmm. Apparently the big evolutionary players, like TalkOrigins and Nova, don’t agree with you. They believe Common Descent is absolutely the realm of science and anyone questioning their right to this claim are “religionists” trying to jam out-dated dogma down the public’s throat.
Check out your compatriots.
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
Me:Common descent is science. Abiogenesis (studying how life might have originated) is also science. They are not the same field of science, however.
Steak is food.
Pizza is food.
They are not the same food.
OK?
Plus your current post.
My response:
1. We don’t do “tree of life” diagrams anymore.
2. No matter how you cut it or rephrase it, the origin of all life is not part of evolution. Maybe you thought I was being sarcastic, but I wasn’t. I was trying to clarify, and it looks as if it was still not clear enough. They are two separate subjects and I’m smart enough to know that my qualification do not extend to origin of life questions.
What are YOU talking about? You have evolution when you have the frequency of alleles in a population’s gene pool changes with successive generations.
I don’t have the feeling that you and I are talking about the same evolutionary theory. The one I am talking about is the one you learn in college if you major in the life sciences.
Actually, new genetic material is introduced all the time. Bacteria spontaneously mutate, but more relevant here is that our Drug ABC, is an antibiotic. Antibiotics prompt bacteria to mutate, changing the genetic material.
All that happens is that genes with a pre-existing resistance (or ability to borrow said resistance) survive to propagate.
LOL.
So what is the new gene (read: data) that appears?
Do you know the difference between a gene and an allele?
The reason that alleles have a limited number of forms for any given gene is that the gene really isn’t mutating so much as processing information differently based upon environmental inputs.
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.