Posted on 08/08/2005 6:15:00 PM PDT by Crackingham
The real impact of President Bush weighing in on the national debate over how to teach the origins of life may be felt in the classroom, where much of the anti-evolutionary lobbying is done under the radar.
One tactic is for a student or parent to present the teacher with a list that's popular in conservative circles called, "Ten questions to ask your biology teacher."
The result, observers say, is that some teachers fear even mentioning "the e-word."
"That's what people would somewhat jokingly call it," said Al Janulaw, who spent more than 30 years teaching science in elementary and middle schools. For the past six he has been a Sonoma State University instructor teaching student teachers how to teach science.
The White House entered one of the country's most politically charged red- and-blue battles last week when Bush was asked at a news conference about his views on evolution and intelligent design -- a critique that says Charles Darwin's natural selection theory doesn't explain some features of the natural world.
"I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught," Bush said. "I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought."
The mere fact that Bush mentioned intelligent design on the same footing as evolutionary teaching is being seen as a huge moral boost for anti-Darwin critics.
Although California schools are not in the center of the debate, as are schools in other parts of the country, some of the state's science teachers are apprehensive and see Bush's comments as an unwelcome intrusion of religion into the science curriculum.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Yes you can. It was by design, dare I say intelligent? I'll leave that to the observer. lol
Well the MSM would love to associate the Right with the Know-Nothingism of the Creationist Movement, but in this case they are correct. The push isn't to explain ID or Creation Theory, it's to attack evolution.
And "anti-evolution" takes less ink than "pro-detailing what Creationist claims are problems with the evolution theory"
Hang around here. You'll run into a few. They won't admit it, but they like activist judges (so long as they are active on their side) and big government programs (as long as they promote 'right' thinking).
Biological evolution is concerned with what happened after the origin of life. (hard science)
The study of the origin of life is usually called abiogenesis. (mainly a philosophy of science)
Scientism (Positivism) is Secular Humanism - a philosophical theory marrying biology to origins.
See this for more
Typically I ignore them. But yes, lately there seems to be a crevo post for every four or five regarding politics.
It is getting tiresome. It seems to be the same culprits over and over again who start them ( either anti-religion bigots couching the threads in the 'noble pursuit of protecting conservatism', or folks who seem to think to score points by 'protecting the world from ahteism' ).
But it is up to the moderators whether or not the crevo threads are appropriate.
I tend to view them like Iraq--in Iraq, all the crazies tend to go into that country to fight, rather than spread their bile everywhere else. So I guess in that sense, it's a good thing.
K. I'm back to ignoring these threads.
Any modern mammal fossil found in the cambrian would do it.
Explainations made in terms of common ancestory are in fact very testable. A quite precise tree of ancestory has been made for each major group of animals based on fossils found and DNA comparisons. While slight discrepancies with new discoveries against the tree will only cause the tree to be reworked, there is plenty of room for new fossil or DNA find to heavily contradict the tree to the point that no tree is viable at all.
Hey! Don't feed the animals!
But, yes, it was funny.
I've met liberal anti-evolutionists though. Pagans.
Begin babytalk
Science is not a religion.End babytalk
Science is not tolerant of a lot of things, including superstition, divine revelation, shamans' tales, old wives' tales, prophesies, anecdotes, deliberate corruption of the scientific method, witches' brews, and idiocy in its numerous manifestations. To this we can now add CS and ID.
You never met my aunt.
Rev. Jim Jones was a Marxist creationist.
A profound statement!
A study of the early history of America, from the landing at Plymouth Rock to the gathering together of a company of brave and learned men and women in 1776, prompted the same kind of wonder and appreciation in this citizen! Had they not held a firm belief in those "self-evident" truths ("Creator endowed life, liberty and rights," the "laws of nature and of nature's God," "Divine Providence," and a "Supreme Judge of the world"), we in the Year 2005 would not have been born in a land of liberty.
Our rights and the liberty to enjoy them are derived, not from imperfect human beings in positions of power in government, but, as the Founders and most Presidents, including JFK, acknowledged, from "the hand of God."
Any who discount the role and plan of a Creator may do so freely. The Creator has endowed them with that liberty!
No problem. :-)
I'd do a flame to end all flames, but I read your bio page.
Now I'll only say I disagree.
post 11 calls for you
> Frodo is fictional.
Yup. So are a great many other people that have been written about.
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.