Posted on 01/19/2005 8:52:24 AM PST by FeeinTennessee
Pa. Students Learn 'Intelligent Design' By MARTHA RAFFAELE The Associated Press
HARRISBURG, Pa. - High school students heard about "intelligent design" for the first time Tuesday in a school district that attracted national attention by requiring students to be made aware of it as an alternative to the theory of evolution.
Administrators in the Dover Area School District read a statement to three biology classes Tuesday and were expected to read it to other classes on Wednesday, according to a statement from the Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Mich., which was speaking on the district's behalf.
The district is believed to be the only one in the nation to require students to hear about intelligent design - a concept that holds that the universe is so complex, it had to be created by an unspecified guiding force.
"The revolution in evolution has begun," said Richard Thompson, the law center's president and chief counsel. "This is the first step in which students will be given an honest scientific evaluation of the theory of evolution and its problems."
The case represents the newest chapter in a history of evolution lawsuits dating back to the Scopes Monkey Trial in Tennessee nearly 80 years ago. In Georgia, a suburban Atlanta school district plans to challenge a federal judge's order to remove stickers in science textbooks that call evolution "a theory, not a fact."
The law center is defending the Dover district against a federal lawsuit filed on behalf of eight families by two civil-liberties groups that alleged intelligent design is merely a secular variation of creationism, the biblical-based view that regards God as the creator of life. They maintain that the Dover district's curriculum mandate may violate the constitutional separation of church and state.
"Students who sat in the classroom were taught material which is religious in content, not scientific, and I think it's unfortunate that has occurred," said Eric Rothschild, a Philadelphia attorney representing the plaintiffs in the federal lawsuit.
Biology teacher Jennifer Miller said although she was able to make a smooth transition to her evolution lesson after the statement was read, some students were upset that administrators would not entertain any questions about intelligent design.
"They were told that if you have any questions, to take it home," Miller said.
The district allowed students whose parents objected to the policy to be excused from hearing the statement at the beginning of class and science teachers who opposed the requirement to be exempted from reading the statement. About 15 of 170 ninth-graders asked to be excused from class, Thompson said.
A federal judge has scheduled a trial in the lawsuit for Sept. 26.
---
Dover Area School District: http://www.dover.k12.pa.us
Thomas More Law Center: http://www.thomasmore.org
January 18, 2005 6:44 PM
The point is not whether God created the universe. The point is HOW He created it.
Genesis is really unclear about the HOW, and if Genesis is so hard to fathom that it needs web sites and books to explain it to me, then obviously it's not a very clear text. And why should I believe in one particular humans interpretation over another? If the Bible is God's word, then if that word isn't enough, then you're just out of luck.
Evolution does not explain that God did not create the world. It just explains how he Evolved the species. That's it. End of theory.
What, exactly, in Genesis causes you to oppose Evolution so much?
By the way, most of the effort I've made here to point out problems with believing the Bible are an effort to make people think about what would happen when this discussion hits high schools nationwide. And, to make them think about exactly why they believe what they believe about Evolution, because I really don't see what the problem is between Evolution and the Bible.
And Evolution has withstood fierce attacks for 100+ years. And is stronger than ever in the scientific circles where it matters, despite he hallucinations otherwise in creationist circles.
Evolution theory is "repeated" every time an ancient species is found in ancient layers, and modern species are not. It is repeated continually, and if ever it failed to do so, the creationists would pronounce victory far and wide and hold up the fossil in question.
The fact that they have not done so, in decades of trying mightily, is the best reason to believe Evolution science that I know of.
Well, I don't think Intelligent Design is religion trying to masquerade itself as science. I just don't like those who try to trample the very things they fought in the past... like freedom to learn new ideas and concepts. I don't like “scientists” pretending to know it all.
Gaps. All gaps.
I am talking about today.
You have a very high opinion of yourself ...
Not really. Sorry to disappoint you.
so yes to your question ... . You've stated your beliefs in other threads. Some of us notice.
Care to show me?
TO accept evolution is to put your faith in it since you were not there. Good science is repeatable. You cannot repeat your "theories".
Actually we can.
If you had searched the Hebrew and Greek you wouldn't have these questions. That is how I know you didn't do it.
Now you are blowing smoke.
Different things were emphasied.
Those were some REALLY major different things. If the Bible were truly infallible, how would different accounts be able to be (or allowed to be) recorded?
No I'm not going to waste my time on evolutionary theory. That's your specialty. You simply don't want to see it or admit it.
Actually its because you can't.
Beginning with Adam, the first living human, created in the image of God. It was given to him to know the Designer much better than those who followed. What he knew, he taught to his children, and he had hundreds of years to do so. Indeed, more time to teach those few simple things than all the years the trumpeted Theory of Evolution has been around.
Now you could tell me he started the oral stories that Moses compiled. That I might believe. And it might explain how come there are two creation stories in Genesis, each story passed among different tribes perhaps.
I think you'd better study up a bit more and quit chugging so much brew.
ID by its very nature posits a deity and that falls outside the realm of science.
I just don't like those who try to trample the very things they fought in the past...
Not sure what you are getting at here. Remember the fervor caused by the introduction of the heliocentric model of the solar system a few years back?
like freedom to learn new ideas and concepts. I don't like “scientists” pretending to know it all.
Good grief. Any scientist who pretends to know it all is not a scientist in my book.
I was specifically referring to people condemning each other to hell on these threads.
From your response, you believe in evolution for the same reasons that I believe in the Bible. If you had stopped there, I would have had some respect for your position, but you had to go further.
You said that you have pieces of evidence, fossils, that "prove" evolution is true. You seem to think that some creature with a vestgial feet is proof of a transitional life form. Even if such a fossil existed, that does not "prove" anything. It merely shows that at one time there was a creature with something we would call vestigial feet.
But there is a more fundamental flaw in your observation. You do not have every possible piece of evidence nor do any of your experts. .
Hence, you cannot state anything with certainty. You and scientists can only extrapolate from the evidence that you have. Since you cannot know with absolute certainty, You are forced to admit that you are uncertain. But you are intellectually dishonest. You fail to admit, in the light of incompete information, that there could be an alternative explanation.
You trash anyone that bases their position on the Biblical account, because of your superior evidence. However, you are not in a position to state your position with certainty. Then you call those that disagree with you idiots and ignorant? LOL!
Because of your complete reliance on evidence, you really don't have, from an epistemological perspective, a basis for believing what you claim to know as fact. Because you must make a logical inference, based on incomplete information. You must exercise faith in order to bridge that gap. Your faith is in an evolutionary propounded by scientists that have a pack mentality and are subjected to peer pressure and bias.
If you choose to believe in evolution in spite of all of this, evolution must be your religion.
Adios y vaya con Dios. It was nice chatting with you.
By "evolving"...actually.
1.Note that the Bible has not.
2.Note that this paragraph reads like worship.
This is not a true statement.
ID = Intelligent Design. Thusly a deity is posited. Or at least an intelligence that has the capability to create a universe. If that's not a deity, it is so close to one, we would not be able to discern the difference.
Checking back in, it seems like a lot of people are confusing "natural selection" with "evolution" - they are two completely different things. Natural selection is when changes occur WITHIN a given species - different breeds of dog, or strains of bacteria, for example. ID doesn't have a problem with that, and yes, we see it in the lab and in nature all of the time. What we don't see is evolution, which is when natural selection is taken to the degree that one species eventually evolves into a completely different species. This is only theory - no one has actually seen this happen, and this is where the ID / evolution debate comes into play.
Which goes back to my original point that NEITHER of these theories is falsifiable - none of us was around to observe the beginning of the world and of life on this planet and the original conditions were not documented and cannot be replicated (although it's been attempted in the lab, without luck.) I don't have a problem with evolution being taught - as a THEORY, which could very well be WRONG. The problem I have is that it is taught as FACT - I have a stack of biology texts which tell me that certain animals have common traits because they evolved from a common ancestor - but nowhere does it say that this is speculation based on the THEORY of evolution, and may not actually be the case. This is where I feel we do today's kids a disservice - whether we teach them ID or not, we should at least stop presenting evolution as the only accepted scientific truth, when it is still (IMHO) a huge leap from natural selection and a very UN-parsimonious theory. Again, apply Occam's Razor - this is NOT the simplest explanation for the diversity of life, and on the micro level, it seems almost absurd to assume this kind of complexity could have arisen by random combinations and mutations. It's a leap of faith, just like ID - the difference is, ID is the more parsimonious of the two theories.
Well, yeah. Since I can't make you come back and respond, I guess it's see ya later.
If you had stopped there, I would have had some respect for your position, but you had to go further. You said that you have pieces of evidence, fossils, that "prove" evolution is true.
Now let me get this straight. If I just believed in Evolution because someone said it was true for no particular good reason, you'd respect my position. But because I have actual physical evidence (where you admitedly do not), then I'm wrong.
Ok.
But there is a more fundamental flaw in your observation. You do not have every possible piece of evidence nor do any of your experts. .
Your kidding, right? You admit right up front you have zero physical evidence to believe in the Bible. But I'm wrong, because there is more evidence that I might get.
Is this like the FR version of Candid Camera? I read there was this guy that could hack into cameras on the net. Are you video taping me?
Because of your complete reliance on evidence, you really don't have, from an epistemological perspective, a basis for believing what you claim to know as fact.
This is getting really good. Gimme more!
If you choose to believe in evolution in spite of all of this, evolution must be your religion.
Too bad you're not coming back. This was fun.
Not necessarily. How about panspermia. No less than Francis Crick supports the possibility. No deity required.
Evolution defense often relies upon attaching any challenge to theology. The fact that evolution's faithful NEED to be able to rule out either a higher or extra-terrestrial power is not ID's problem. Acknowledging that something unexplained is possible makes jack a frustrated scientist.
Kind of like the Discovery Institute evolved. They first started selling their books touting "creation science" where they found some "fossils" that they said proved a 6000 year old earth.
After that was blown away, they evolved and picked up the 2nd law of thermodynamics argument. But that has been pretty well wiped out, so they now claim that it's not "God" that created the world in 6 days, it is some mysterious "designer" (small "d", since he's not God) that did it over maybe a bit longer than 6000 years. No idea who this designer was, but since they can't give us any evidence that he didn't exist, then he must have.
Yeah, sure, Evolutions evolved.
You're making a critical mistake.
gap-filled pla c ema rk er
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.