Posted on 08/13/2008 9:44:45 AM PDT by Sopater
A federal judge has ruled the University of California can deny course credit to Christian high school graduates who have been taught with textbooks that reject evolution and declare the Bible infallible, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.
U.S. District Judge James Otero of Los Angeles ruled Friday that the school's review committees did not discriminate against Christians because of religious viewpoints when it denied credit to those taught with certain religious textbooks, but instead made a legitimate claim that the texts failed to teach critical thinking and omitted important science and history topics.
Charles Robinson, the university's vice president for legal affairs, told the Chronicle that the ruling "confirms that UC may apply the same admissions standards to all students and to all high schools without regard to their religious affiliations."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I used the word capricious to imply “at the whim of the gods.” Sorry if a literal reading has caused misunderstanding.
Mutations are controlled by chemical processes, not randomness.
Reference?
Point mutations are errors in copying, and are most likely quantum events. There are mutagenic chemicals that may cause specific and repeatable copy errors, but that isn't what drives population change in general.
Any algorithm that fails to search all of the available change space would be a bit like a detective who puts a room off limits for the evidence search. The strength of evolution is its ability to find unanticipated solutions, and move in unanticipated directions.
I already gave you references that observed point mutations covering the available search space.
Wrong. Repeatable errors are reqired to drive population change!
It would be nice if you gave a specific reference I could go to instead of having to search through an entire website for something that may or may not support your statement.
Not at all. A single point mutation occurring in a single individual that is neutral or favorable can become fixed in a population. This is the point of the experiments I referred you to.
Of course, the cop that searches every room in the universe for his evidence wouldn't be very efficient.
Statement indicates that you are not schooled in the basics of genetic mutations and their effects on populations.
Genes are not every room in the universe, just as dice don't go up to nine.
Now if you wish to cite an experiment that contradicts the findings of the ones I cited, feel free. Then we can continue this discussion.
Then school me. Cite an expert on population genetics that argues a point mutation must recur repeatedly in order to become established. I might mention that this argument doesn't hold in the world of plant and animal breeders.
It's true that there is a phenomenon that occurs in plants called polyploidy, in which the chromosomes occasionally double. This can happen in more than one individual and may lead to a new species. Humans would be awfully hungry if this hadn't happened in historical times.
But chromosome mutations are unusual in animals and do not account for the bulk of evolution.
Tacticalogic,
Secular Humanists have atheist materialism as their religious philosophy that guides all of life's decisions. The God of Abraham is so far below this that He isn't even on their radar.
Exodus 20:3 "Do not have any other gods before me."
Atheistic Secular Humanist certainly put a **lot** ahead of Him!
Before you're done I expect there's no Commandment that everyone except those people you consider "Good Christians" doesn't universally break on a daily basis.
There is a big difference between **trying** to abide by The Commandments on a daily basis, praying for forgiveness, repenting, and resolving to do better,...and...what the Secular Humanists do.
The Secular Humanists mock them, reject them, consider them to be a human invention, ignore them, and feel that their own superior intellect is above the commandments. I suppose that is the same as "another god before them (me)".
By the way, I checked Wikipedia. Various religions separate the Commandments slightly differently. Some combine the First and Second and consider worshiping something other than God as the First Commandment. Some don't. This is a small and irrelevant matter
The Catholic and Lutheran churches list wrongful use of the name of God as the Second Commandment.
Are we talking about “secular humanists” or “cultures that don’t worship the God of Abraham”? You seem to go back and forth rather transparently without any consideration of the consequences.
“It donest carry along with it the baggage and hall makes of a religion.”
LOL....ever heard of Michael Newdow?
In post #223 you stated, "Isn't it pretty well self-evident that anyone who doesn't worship the God of Abraham breaks the First Commandment?"
You are the person who brought up the idea of "anyone", and "who doesn't worship the God of Abraham" includes a lot of people in cultures in this country and around the world.
I responded to that question.
Did you want me address your question or was the question merely rhetorical?
on the other hand, when we went to the Georgia aquarium, the guide told us the alligator gar we were looking at is a dinosaur.
riiiiiight, and this is why so many Christians are sending their kids to private schools in the first place no doubt!
if only godless liberals were more worried about the algoreacle hot air cult global warming false science...but nope, they’re on board with that too...
so it really isn’t about false science, it’s about hating God.
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.