Posted on 05/09/2005 11:35:25 PM PDT by Crackingham
While Kansas State Board of Education members spent three days soaking up from critics of evolution about how the theory should be taught in public schools, many scientists refused to participate in the board's public hearings. But evolution's defenders were hardly silent last week, nor are they likely to be Thursday, when the hearings are set to conclude. They have offered public rebuttals after each day's testimony. Their tactics led the intelligent design advocates -- hoping to expose Kansas students to more criticism of evolution -- to accuse them of ducking the debate over the theory. But Kansas scientists who defend evolution said the hearings were rigged against the theory. They also said they don't see the need to cram their arguments into a few days of testimony, like out-of-state witnesses called by intelligent design advocates.
"They're in, they do their schtick, and they're out," said Keith Miller, a Kansas State University geologist. "I'm going to be here, and I'm not going to be quiet. We'll have the rest of our lives to make our points."
The scientists' boycott, led by the American Association for the Advancement of Science and Kansas Citizens for Science, frustrated board members who viewed their hearings as an educational forum.
"I am profoundly disappointed that they've chosen to present their case in the shadows," said board member Connie Morris, of St. Francis. "I would have enjoyed hearing what they have to say in a professional, ethical manner."
Intelligent design advocates challenge evolutionary theory that natural chemical processes can create life, that all life on Earth had a common origin and that man and apes had a common ancestor. Intelligent design says some features of the natural world are best explained by an intelligent cause because they are well ordered and complex. The science groups' leaders said Morris and the other two members of the board subcommittee presiding at the hearings already have decided to support language backed by intelligent design advocates. All three are part of a conservative board majority receptive to criticism of evolution. The entire board plans to consider changes this summer in standards that determine how students will be tested statewide in science.
Alan Leshner, AAAS chief executive officer, dismissed the hearings as "political theater."
"There is no cause for debate, so why are they having them?" he said. "They're trying to imply that evolution is a controversial concept in science, and that's absolutely not true."
>>"They're trying to imply that evolution is a controversial concept in science, and that's absolutely not true."<<
Well based on the length of Crevo threads on ANY site, I would disagree with that statement.
"Now prove to me that the Theory of Evolution is not a government-sponsored religion."
I learned it in a Catholic school that received 0% of its funding from the gov't.
Besides, it's to the advantage of a gov't to keep its citizens ignorant, stupid, non-questioning, and clueless. Since this is the case, I'd expect the gov't to heartily endorse the teaching of the Christian Creation myth, as it serves that purpose nobily.
LOL!
That strata ws laid down during the great flood. When the watrs receded, that's when the grand canyon was carved.
"That strata ws laid down during the great flood. When the watrs receded, that's when the grand canyon was carved."
LMAO! Thanks for the humor!
I read his stuff back in the 1950s to 1960s. He was a big name in British Philosophy.
The outlines of the plot are only now just starting to become known. It may be Lyndon LaRouche who has proposed a theory that the CIA, operating with the Trilateral Commission and the Knights Templar, slipped a payment of gold bricks disguised as a load of second trombones to Queen Victoria, who, in turn, passed it Charles Darwin. He had the musical instruments melted down into counterfeit Canadian Maple Leafs, and bought passage on HMS Beagle as a cover story. Once he got to the Beagle's destination, while no one was looking, he constructed an invisible Total Evil Vortex that allowed Satan to salt the earth with faux fossils and transmit the theory of evolution. Satan's ultimate goal, of course, was to irritate Dr. Dino. It is not known whether this last bit actually happened. Dr. Dino appears to be having too good a time.
What definition of species are you using that would make this true. It's your claim. Give an operational definition.
I think you don't understand what mathematics is, let alone pure mathematics. Mathematics is proof. If there's no proof, than it's something other than mathematics.
Think of it as an academic food chain.
LOL - especially not to myself. But then with so many others telling me I'm wrong, I don't need to!
It's probably just your eccentric use of terminology, but either I'm confused, or you are.
Science, including the variety which you seem to think is rigidly wed to invoking only "empirical entities," in fact invokes non-empirical entities (even if to explain empirical facts) all the time.
It's damn near standard practice to propose a scientific mechanism well before there's the slightest direct, empirical evidence its physical embodiment. For instance "genes" were proposed, and widely accepted by scientists, years anyone knew what they actually were in a physical sense, and before DNA was even discovered, let alone before it's structure was understood. And genes were entirely useful even when they were nothing but an idea. Ineed much of basics of the science of genetics was worked before anyone could point to a gene.
There are also scientific mechanisms which have no physical embodiment strictly speaking. Natural Selection itself would be an example.
I think you're confusing scientific methodology (and even there only very limited aspects thereof are solely "empirical") with the "entities" that science invokes.
In short you can invoke any kind of "entity" in science whatever. There really aren't any rules about that. It can be as prosaic or as wild as you like. The important factor is the functional characteristics of the theory or principle in which the entity (or mechanism, or whatever) is embedded. Does it explain the relevant phenomena? Does it explain facts that competing theories don't? Is it "fruitful of knowledge" in that it functions effectively in delineating and framing new problems for research? Does it have deducible implications as to what facts (ideally as yet unconsulted) must be the case if the theory is true, and what factual observations would indicate that the theory is false?
And so on. I highlight the bit about "deducible implications" as this is the main problem with your desire for "non-empircal entities," by which you seem to really mean entities which are non-natural, that is not constrained by the laws of nature. If your theory includes "entities" or mechanisms which can act pretty much in any way whatever, how do you deduce particular implications?
The GOP is doing fine in those states. There are also several democratic governors and congressmen from red states so it is not like those states are locked down.
If the GOP would ease up on the theocon aspect, it would do much better in the blue states. There are actually several GOP congressmen and governors from blue states. They won election by focusing on fiscal issues rather than religious and moral issues. Without these senators, the GOP would be in the sold minority.
For example, several senators from blue states won statewide elections in 2000 and 2004 while Bush lost the state handily. There is just no way a that a theocon is going to win a statewide election in CA, NY, New England, the west or the northeast That is why guys like Arnold and Rudy have been able to hold offices in democratic strongholds.
Look at how well Keyes did in Illinois. He ran as a total theocon and got less than 27% of the vote in a state where Bush got over 44%.
If the GOP would just soften the theocon assault and just concentrate on national defense, reducing spending, instituting fair taxation, strong border control and property rights, the democrats would never win another national election. Instead we waste all of our resources trying to force religion into schools.
####Besides, it's to the advantage of a gov't to keep its citizens ignorant, stupid, non-questioning, and clueless. Since this is the case, I'd expect the gov't to heartily endorse the teaching of the Christian Creation myth, as it serves that purpose nobily.####
Actually, challenges to evolution generally occur from the citizenry. Governments seem obsessed with promoting evolution. The only exception seems to occur when an angry populace finally has had enough and demands balance from their governing officials. So occasionally you'll see a conservative precinct like Kansas or Cobb County, GA supporting a balanced view, in response to popular local opinion. But bigger government usually then steps in via the federal courts and imposes an "evolution then, evolution now, evolution forever" rule.
No wonder more parents are homeschooling or sending their kids to private schools.
;-)
I do hope you make it...see ya if I see ya. ;-)
I don't know if anybody told you yet, and don't let this be a shock, but we're all going to die anyway. Even you.
like Jim Henson, from rejecting medicine.
Why I'd love to take all of the promised medicine that the biologists will give to us. Why if the grant proposals are to be believed, immortality is just across the horizon. Take stem cells. Why it will cure everything, we will never die. It's the fountain of youth, the cureall. In fact, we'd better get rid of our nasty little ethics right now, if we want to harvest all of the wonderful things that it promises. So, when will this utopia come? Well, never, actually. They don't know what they're doing vis-á-vis stem cells. There isn't even any theoretical hope of any sort of success from this "science". Stem cells are more likely to replicate a Shakey's pizza than anything else at this stage.
But, hey, it sounds good.
There is more to the story. It seems that the thousands of people who claim to have been abducted and anally-probed by UFOs have actually been recruited into an alien-led army of fossil-planting zombies. At night, while receiving orders though the fillings in their teeth (during which time they often generate crop-circles) they are directed to caches of freshly-made piles of fake fossils, which they bury where they'll be found by gullible scientists.
We all know who pays them and why.
People, not even scientists, can predict the future. If you go to Disneyland and visit Tomorrowland, you see rocketships and flying cars. Conspicuous by its absence is the information superhighway. We don't know in which direction the future will advance. However, if you look at medical care from, say the 1950s onward, there is a clear improvement and advance in medical knowledge and technology. No one's promising utopia, but I am still optimistic enough about the future to want to see it and live in it.
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.