Posted on 01/20/2005 12:54:58 PM PST by Jay777
ANN ARBOR, MI — The small town of Dover, Pennsylvania today became the first school district in the nation to officially inform students of the theory of Intelligent Design, as an alternative to Darwin’s theory of Evolution. In what has been called a “measured step”, ninth grade biology students in the Dover Area School District were read a four-paragraph statement Tuesday morning explaining that Darwin’s theory is not a fact and continues to be tested. The statement continued, “Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin’s view.” Since the late 1950s advances in biochemistry and microbiology, information that Darwin did not have in the 1850s, have revealed that the machine like complexity of living cells - the fundamental unit of life- possessing the ability to store, edit, and transmit and use information to regulate biological systems, suggests the theory of intelligent design as the best explanation for the origin of life and living cells.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm representing the school district against an ACLU lawsuit, commented, “Biology students in this small town received perhaps the most balanced science education regarding Darwin’s theory of evolution than any other public school student in the nation. This is not a case of science versus religion, but science versus science, with credible scientists now determining that based upon scientific data, the theory of evolution cannot explain the complexity of living cells.”
“It is ironic that the ACLU after having worked so hard to prevent the suppression of Darwin’s theory in the Scopes trial, is now doing everything it can to suppress any effort to challenge it,” continued Thompson.
(Excerpt) Read more at thomasmore.org ...
OK. Please tell me how?
Then that is not the problem with the curriculum, that is a problem with the teachers. Fix the teachers, don't eliminate science from the curriculum.
We teach them electrons move around the nucleus of the atom in nice neat little concentric circles. They don't, they have complex interweaving orbits, and in fact the nulceus of the atom isn't the static blob we teach high school kids but another set of complex intervweaving orbits occupied by protons and nuetrons, and in fact with all the orbit movement going on it's kind of silly to discuss a nucleus at all because there really isn't one. Basically everything we teach about the interworkings of an atom, except the parts, is a lie, we teach them atoms work kind of like cells and that's not true. Complete bunk that must be unlearned.
Goodness but you're highly impatient, not even two minutes between identical demands, you know it takes time to type.
You jst reminded me of another one.
One of my sons came home from elementary school and asked his pregnant mother if the wires hurt at all.
What wires?
Well, maybe not eggzacly wire but what my teacher said there's something like wires holding the baby to Mommie's stomach.
No, I don't like sex education in the schools either.
Here is a simple copy/paste to the post. I don't know why you were having a problem.
I had to unlearn that one too.
I agree, having an incorrect oversimplified visualization is a real pain. It sticks. Sort of like those musical earworms.
You are aware that the journal withdrew the article, and Dr. Meyer is no longer associated with the journal?
You are aware that Dr. Meyer was an editor, and used his authority to publish the article without an actual review by people competent to judge it?
You are aware that those who did review it disagreed with its conclusions?
It's actually kind of hard to remember both versions at the same time, it's like they're natural enemies and one tries to blot the other out.
"So...it's okay to teach non-science in science classrooms? It's okay to distort what is and what is not science?"
Well, it seems to be okay to claim that the fossil record proves that there is no God.
The simplifed models work well with basic chemistry studies and allow students to understand basic reactions and their ramifications. The basic model works fine for a lot of college thermodynamic studies, also.
By your logic, we should not be teaching anything about the atom till we thoroughly understand the Schrodinger Wave equation. What year did you finally grasp that equation derivation?
I can tell you from experience, as my learning experience grew, I was not hampered with having to unlearn simple models. In fact, most of my career was working with only simplified models.
Any teacher who got caught doing that would be fired, tenure or no tenure.
Sorry, it was Sternberg, the (former) editor who pushed the article through.
More here...
http://www.pandasthumb.org/pt-archives/000430.html
Not really. As a nuclear engineer, I have found that models of the nucleus work quite well for practical work. Since we really don't know what is going on in the nucleus, we should really teach NOTHING til we do, right?
Yeah! Never thought of it that way but you are right.
No the simplified model doesn't work well at anything, except wasting college professors' time by feeding BS to the student that they have to unlearn.
Once again with the extreme example that takes a point to absurdity. My logic is that if you don't have time to teach it right then don't teach it. It doesn't take that much longer to learn the way atoms REALLY are put together than it does to learn the lie. If we can't find that extra day or two to teach it RIGHT then what's the point of teaching it? Because you're not actually teaching anything with this model, all that's happening is teachers are lying to students and testing them on their ability to remember stuff they should never have been taught in the first place.
So you spent most of your career working with fiction, good for you, so does Stephen King.
I have no idea. I just reposted it as a favor to someone that said he had formatting problems. I didn't even read it.
Can you show me where I said anything about the curriculum?
"Any teacher who got caught doing that would be fired, tenure or no tenure."
That doesn't seem to be the case, judging from what I read.
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.