Posted on 12/21/2004 7:59:02 PM PST by postitnews.com
HARRISBURG, PA-The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, Americans United for Separation of Church and State and attorneys with Pepper Hamilton LLP filed a federal lawsuit today on behalf of 11 parents who say that presenting "intelligent design" in public school science classrooms violates their religious liberty by promoting particular religious beliefs to their children under the guise of science education.
"Teaching students about religion's role in world history and culture is proper, but disguising a particular religious belief as science is not," said ACLU of Pennsylvania Legal Director Witold Walczak. "Intelligent design is a Trojan Horse for bringing religious creationism back into public school science classes."
The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United Executive Director, added, "Public schools are not Sunday schools, and we must resist any efforts to make them so. There is an evolving attack under way on sound science...Read More
(Excerpt) Read more at postitnews.com ...
"This simply is not true. "
See my reply above to Solo Veritas. The same applies to you, please post your sources.
Acceptable sources would include any peer reviewed paper that even questions evolution. Go on now... find one, post the name and the journal it was published in so I can go see it.
I'll help you scientific illiterates out a bit. There is an entire journal devoted to the publication of evolution papers, cleverly entitled 'Evolution.' If there were actually any scientists who disputed evolution on SCIENTIFIC grounds, then they would have published papers in this journal. Put your money where your mouth is.
"Sorry to bust your bubble, but the theory of evolution is not faith based."
By what evidence do you show that the Cambrian phyla evolved from common predecessors?
So what's your point? Read the articles - didn't read anything about something evolving into something else or did I miss it?
"It would theoretically bring the evolution debate to a halt as a political issue to disestablish the public schools. "
At least you are honest about your motives. Can't sat that for everyone I've spoken with tonight.
Not true. See:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
http://www.zoology.ubc.ca/~irwin/PDF%20files/IrwinIrwin&Price2001
"So what's your point?"
I think what's actually operant here is the distinct possibility that you are unable ro mentally manipulate abstract objects. If you have to ask what the point of a mathematical model is, it really raises the question.
Skepticism-an attitude of doubt or disposition to disbelieve to incredulity. (2)the doctrine that true knowledge in a particular area (evolution) is uncertain or not true.
Thank you for agreeing with me. Sign off.
Texas is right, you know. In science, everything is up for grabs. Every theory or proof.
From here:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Thebes/7755/morton/cambevol.html
"Once held as the position in the rock record where the major invertebrate groups first appeared, the Precambrian-Cambrian boundary now serves more as a convenient reference point within an evolutionary continuum. Skeletalized organisms, including Cambrian-aspect shelly fossils, first appear below the boundary and then show strong diversification during the Early Cambrian. Similarly, trace fossils also appear first in the Vendian, exhibit a progression to more complex geometries across the boundary, and then parallel the dramatic radiation displayed by body fossils."
"Evidences of macroscopic life forms are now found as early as 680 myr ago in the form of worm burrows (Pagel, 1999, p. 881). And several modern phyla are now claimed to appear in the Precambrian and thus are not part of the supposed 'Cambrian Explosion.'"
Haven't read this one yet, but it matches your criteria. Published in "Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington" by the National Museum of Natural History at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington D.C.
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2177
Evolutionists threw a fit about it after it was published, so the journal quickly went into self-defense mode and said "oh, oh, we didn't mean to publish this article". The evolution lobby is just as powerful as the other lobbies.
"I was talking about the math involved with making the bomb."
But you appeared to be using "hard core math" as the differentiator between real and fake science.
Good argument - just throw lots and lots of pages of fine-print stuff at someone and let THEM take hours and hours to squint and wade through it. A wonderful tactic to deflect a simple question that remains unanswered.
I was differentiating between unsupported faith based belief systems and demonstrable ,independently reproducible results, ie the difference between beliefs and facts
Oddly, math is one metric that can be used to do that.
Capiche?
"Due to the vagaries of fossilization, it is not expected that we will ever find animals which are on the direct line between the two groups, and if we do find an animal on the direct line, it is not clear that we would recognize it as such."
Wow, that completely demolished any remaining hope I had that the fossil record could be evidence for evolution.
Anyway, that link was about the biggest collection of "just-so" stories I've ever seen. I asked for evidence, and I get possibilities. That's fine -- it shows that the evidence doesn't have known necessary contradictions with the fossil record, but that does not mean that it indicates it as a _likely_ possibility, either. It is basically asking you to take their explanations on faith. It does not show how their postulations are any more likely than anyone else's postulations.
placemarker
This is the most fascinating thread, but you are taking the wrong approach. You can't argue against a belief system. It doesn't work.
What you can do is approach the matter from the phenom of unintentional consequences. The moment you open public schools up to religion, i.e. ID, then all religions get their shot at the kids, including Islam and Wiccans. The law makes no distinction between any of them.
So, what you're gonna get is sixth graders arguing religion with a teacher and among themselves. It should make for some interesting PTA meetings.
"I was differentiating between unsupported faith based belief systems and demonstrable ,independently reproducible results, ie the difference between beliefs and facts"
History is never reproducible.
"What you can do is approach the matter from the phenom of unintentional consequences. The moment you open public schools up to religion, i.e. ID, then all religions get their shot at the kids, including Islam and Wiccans. The law makes no distinction between any of them. "
YOU'VE been reading the Plano thread from earlier this evening!!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1306084/posts
"The moment you open public schools up to religion, i.e. ID, then all religions get their shot at the kids, including Islam and Wiccans. The law makes no distinction between any of them."
Interestingly, it's already opened up to secular humanism.
History is never reproducible.
Math is, case closed.
It would help if you could keep your antecedents straight.
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.