LOL....Now that's the best evidence of evolution that I've seen on these threads!
Posted on 07/09/2003 12:08:32 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
FORT WORTH, Texas - (KRT) -
The long-running debate over the origins of mankind continues Wednesday before the Texas State Board of Education, and the result could change the way science is taught here and across the nation.
Local and out-of-state lobbying groups will try to convince the board that the next generation of biology books should contain new scientific evidence that reportedly pokes holes in Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.
Many of those groups say that they are not pushing to place a divine creator back into science books, but to show that Darwin's theory is far from a perfect explanation of the origin of mankind.
"It has become a battle ground," said Eugenie Scott, executive director of theNational Center of Science Education, which is dedicated to defending the teaching of evolution in the classroom.
Almost 45 scientists, educators and special interest groups from across the state will testify at the state's first public hearing this year on the next generation of textbooks for the courses of biology, family and career studies and English as a Second Language.
Approved textbooks will be available for classrooms for the 2004-05 school year. And because Texas is the second largest textbook buyer in the nation, the outcome could affect education nationwide.
The Texas Freedom Network and a handful of educators held a conference call last week to warn that conservative Christians and special interest organizations will try to twist textbook content to further their own views.
"We are seeing the wave of the future of religious right's attack on basic scientific principles," said Samantha Smoot, executive director of the network, an anti-censorship group and opponent of the radical right.
Those named by the network disagree with the claim, including the Discovery Institute and its Science and Culture Center of Seattle.
"Instead of wasting time looking at motivations, we wish people would look at the facts," said John West, associate director of the center.
"Our goal nationally is to encourage schools and educators to include more about evolution, including controversies about various parts of Darwinian theory that exists between even evolutionary scientists," West said. "We are a secular think tank."
The institute also is perhaps the nation's leading proponent of intelligent design - the idea that life is too complex to have occurred without the help of an unknown, intelligent being.
It pushed this view through grants to teachers and scientists, including Michael J. Behe, professor of biological sciences at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. The Institute receives millions of dollars from philanthropists and foundations dedicated to discrediting Darwin's theory.
The center sent the state board a 55-page report that graded 11 high school biology textbooks submitted for adoption. None earned a grade above a C minus. The report also includes four arguments it says show that evolutionary theory is not as solid as presented in biology textbooks.
Discovery Institute Fellow Raymond Bohlin, who also is executive director of Probe Ministries, based in Richardson, Texas, will deliver that message in person Wednesday before the State Board of Education. Bohlin has a doctorate degree in molecular cell biology from the University of Texas at Dallas.
"If we can simply allow students to see that evolution is not an established fact, that leaves freedom for students to pursue other ideas," Bohlin said. "All I can do is continue to point these things out and hopefully get a group that hears and sees relevant data and insist on some changes."
The executive director of Texas Citizens for Science, Steven Schafersman, calls the institute's information "pseudoscience nonsense." Schafersman is an evolutionary scientist who, for more than two decades, taught biology, geology, paleontology and environmental science at a number of universities, including the University of Houston and the University of Texas of the Permian Basin.
"It sounds plausible to people who are not scientifically informed," Schafersman said. "But they are fraudulently trying to deceive board members. They might succeed, but it will be over the public protests of scientists."
The last time Texas looked at biology books, in 1997, the State Board of Education considered replacing them all with new ones that did not mention evolution. The board voted down the proposal by a slim margin.
The state requires that evolution be in textbooks. But arguments against evolution have been successful over the last decade in other states. Alabama, New Mexico and Nebraska made changes that, to varying degrees, challenge the pre-eminence of evolution in the scientific curriculum.
In 1999, the Kansas Board of Education voted to wash the concepts of evolution from the state's science curricula. A new state board has since put evolution back in. Last year, the Cobb County school board in Georgia voted to include creationism in science classes.
Texas education requirements demand that textbooks include arguments for and against evolution, said Neal Frey, an analyst working with perhaps Texas' most famous textbook reviewers, Mel and Norma Gabler.
The Gablers, of Longview, have been reviewing Texas textbooks for almost four decades. They describe themselves as conservative Christians. Some of their priorities include making sure textbooks include scientific flaws in arguments for evolution.
"None of the texts truly conform to the state's requirements that the strengths and weaknesses of scientific theories be presented to students," Frey said.
The Texas textbook proclamation of 2001, which is part of the standard for the state's curriculum, Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, requires that biology textbooks instruct students so they may "analyze, review and critique scientific explanations, including hypotheses and theories, as to their strengths and weakness using scientific evidence and information."
The state board is empowered to reject books only for factual errors or for not meeting the state's curriculum requirements. If speakers convince the state board that their evidence is scientifically sound, members may see little choice but to demand its presence in schoolbooks.
Proposed books already have been reviewed and approved by Texas Tech University. After a public hearing Wednesday and another Sept. 10, the state board is scheduled to adopt the new textbooks in November.
Satisfying the state board is only half the battle for textbook publishers. Individual school districts choose which books to use and are reimbursed by the state unless they buy texts rejected by the state board.
Districts can opt not to use books with passages they find objectionable. So when speakers at the public hearings criticize what they perceived as flaws in various books - such as failing to portray the United States or Christianity in a positive light - many publishers listen.
New books will be distributed next summer.
State Board member Terri Leo said the Discovery Institute works with esteemed scientists and that their evidence should be heard.
"You cannot teach students how to think if you don't present both sides of a scientific issue," Leo said. "Wouldn't you think that the body that has the responsibility of what's in the classroom would look at all scientific arguments?"
State board member Bob Craig said he had heard of the Intelligent Design theory.
"I'm going in with an open mind about everybody's presentation," Craig said. "I need to hear their presentation before I make any decisions or comments.
State board member Mary Helen Berlanga said she wanted to hear from local scientists.
"If we are going to discuss scientific information in the textbooks, the discussion will have to remain scientific," Berlanga said. "I'd like to hear from some of our scientists in the field on the subject."
False. Every time a fossil is dug up, it is a test of evolution, in the sense that it has the potential to disprove it. (eg, a precambrian rabbit). So far, it's never happened.
Not false at all. Evolution cannot be tested (although the has been no lack of trying...witness what's been done to the unfortunate fruit fly). The fact that fossils exist in no way proves evolution is the best explanation of the bone yard. Proof is the issue.
Regarding your other posts, why God chose to create man with certain similar or even exact copies gene subsets in no way proves transformation between species. Perhaps one day you can ask Him why he chose to use similar building materials in His various designs.
I trust that I will be able to ask Him one day.
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh!
Not false at all. Evolution cannot be tested (although the has been no lack of trying...witness what's been done to the unfortunate fruit fly). The fact that fossils exist in no way proves evolution is the best explanation of the bone yard. Proof is the issue.
Make up your mind. Which is the issue, "testing" or "proof"? If the later, please cite an example of a scientific theory, preferably (for purposes of comparison) a biological one, that you consider to have been "proven".
I apologize if my post had a tone of attack; I had not intended it in that way. It is my strong personal belief that Jesus loves you intensely, and that He would want a disciple of His to see you with the same eyes as He does. By faith I am able to sincerely have a genuine concern for your well being. This in my estimation is in no way a competition where I relish your defeat or destruction.
But as an aside, when you replied I was deeply engrossed in researching the differences between the Hebrew words, "sheqets" and "tow'ebah" and their usage in various Old Testament verses contrasted with the Greek equivalent used in two verses found in Matthew and Mark.
This statement gives me reason to rejoice in that I truly believe the scriptures are a love letter written in blood on a wooden cross about our Creator. Any exposure to His message will not return void.
Non sequitur..."truth" is the realm of philosophers and theologians, "facts" are pursued by scientists.
I wish what you say was true, if it were I would probably know if eating eggs will kill me at 40, or if drinking coffee is risky behavior, or if the planet is suffering from global warming, or if the geologic record displays massive catastrophes associated with the flood or if the massive amounts of fossil beds can be attributed to minor local catastrophes unassociated with one another.
Any analysis of data is a clear dive into the realm of truth, otherwise we would never say things like "Is that a fact?".
I hope you continue to reanalyze the truth about the information that our liberal University system pawns off as "fact".
I am sure you would be more comfortable if we were assured that a majority of the analysis of the data was given into the hands of conservative oriented individuals who are repulsed by the antics of their liberal colleagues. Until the science departments make clean breaks with their Lie spewing compatriots I will question the integrity of their analysis.
It doesn't surprise me how the private sectors attempts at analysis of the genetic data are looked at with disdain by the academic set. The Genome Project was an enlightening view of the emotional condition of the persons who have been stuck in school with adolescents since kindergarten.
Kinda hard to "EARN" its way into textbooks when the evolutionists are writing the textbooks, and controlling the secular learning environment. It's the same problem that occurs when history is re-written by the liberals.. The liberals and their athiestic friend control most colleges and the majority of the secular media.
For a theory to be included in the science curricula, this means that it must FIRST earn standing in the market place of scientific ideas. It must prove its worth to working scientists such that they begin to test, implicate and employ the theory in their ongoing research. There is even an objective manner of determining if and when this has occured, since there is a professional literature in which scientists describe their research.
In the case of evolution, the theory is included because the vast majority of the scientific literature is controled by the evolutionists who so desparately want to believe their theory, regardless of the problems. . Do you seriously believe that if textbooks and secular journals were contolled by folks like Vade, PH, or Aric2000, then the Creation argument would get a fair shake? Don't think so...
You've got to do the one thing creationists have never successfully done, and very, very seldom even try to do. (Because they can't. Duh!) You have to put together a coherent theory or body of theory, build a scientific research program around it, and produce some results.
There is a coherent theory and scientific research organizations like ICR. That evolutionists openly hold these organizations in distain, clearly shows the problems with your argument.
If you do that -- if scientists are actually using a theory -- it will eventually be included in curricula as a matter of course.
Not if evolutionists and secular media control the field of play...
LOL....Now that's the best evidence of evolution that I've seen on these threads!
I think he means grilled. then again, I'm not sure filets benefit much from grilling. They need to be seared, then finished over low heat. Some grills can do this, others can't.
Ah, the good old 1974 Britannica. That was the one where they thought it would be a good idea to have articles on Eastern Europe written by Eastern Europeans -- read Communists. I'm surprised you don't rely on the one true Britannica, the 1911 edition.
ditto
Anyone who checks our little exchange on the Duke study will form their own opinion as to whether you had read the article, and anyone who reads the article will form their own opinion as to whether it casts doubt on evolution. I recommend the article.
That's why some of the original sources found in the designeduniverse links are so precious. Anyone who reads the original source, then the "interpretation" will get an education.
To paraphrase Darth Vader, I find their lack of faith disturbing.
Snowballing along.
Unless Adam walked on all fours, back pain is the result of the original design -- a suspension systen designed for a horizontal posture, incompletely modified for an upright posture. You can thank the designer for hernias also. As for life winding down due to thermodynamic degredation, hasn't worked well for those pesky bacteria.
It will be truely interesting to see the reaction of the IDers if they get their wish. Within five minutes after their doctrine is approved for teaching in public schools, the Wicans wil be knocking on the door, demanding that their science be taught.
I would like to make some comments, not to convince you to change your mind, but to explain further my musings on the subject of the age of the universe. You wrote:
So by applying logic to Genesis, with regard to 24 hour days, I deduce that since God had not created solar system until day 4, that He is not speaking of actual solar days at our space/time coordinates --- but the equivalent of solar days from the space/time coordinate of inception - as the Creator, the only observer and revealer of the creation process.
Also, the underlying meaning of the Hebrew words goes to this interpretation as well, showing the evening and the morning are a bringing of order. As Schroeder explains in Age of the Universe
But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, [yea], and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence. I Corinthians 1:27-29
And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. – Matthew 13:10-13
And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words [are] closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. – Daniel 12:9-10
Except in the realm of math and pure logic, test is a synonym for proof. Consider that gasoline is sold as "test" and whisky is sold as "proof". Same concept.
- Determination of the quality of something by testing; trial: put one's beliefs to the proof.
- Law. The result or effect of evidence; the establishment or denial of a fact by evidence.
- The alcoholic strength of a liquor, expressed by a number that is twice the percentage by volume of alcohol present.
- Printing.
- A trial sheet of printed material that is made to be checked and corrected. Also called proof sheet.
- A trial impression of a plate, stone, or block taken at any of various stages in engraving.
Poor baby! Christians don't own any printing presses, don't have any schools or colleges, and can't afford to do any basic research. That must be why they can't spell atheist.
Of all the excuses for lack of ideas this is the lamest. Even without money, you could at least propose a course of research and outline what you would hope to find.
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.