Posted on 03/14/2006 10:49:13 AM PST by LouAvul
Intelligent design theory is creating quite a stir.
Most recently Kentucky Gov. Ernie Fletcher said he supported school boards teaching Intelligent Design. In December, a Pennsylvania judge ruled against a Dover Township school board decision to include the theory in text books, costing the taxpayers about a million dollars in legal fees. Movements to begin teaching the intelligent design theory have popped up in dozens of states forcing local legislators and courts to address the issue.
The concept is simple: Were humans created by some sort of intelligent designer, possibly a deity, or by did we evolve scientifically based on Charles Darwin’s theories of natural selection?
However, as parents, school boards and taxpayers debate the larger issue, students locally have shared some interesting views.
Clarksville High School junior Kyle Banks is a member of Morton Memorial United Methodist Church and said he believes God created the world and its inhabitants, but has adapted to the idea of keeping his church beliefs separate from his schoolwork.
“I don’t necessarily agree with (evolution), but I don’t mind it, as long as they teach it as a theory,” Banks said.
Indiana’s educational standards concerning evolution were developed five years ago by a 60-person committee made up of teachers, scientists, administrators and parents.
In the ninth grade, students are taught how living things function in their environment through laboratory and field work, according to information from the Indiana Department of Education. The goal is to help students recognize that living organisms are made of cell or cell products that consist of the same parts as other matter, involve the same kinds of transformations of energy and move using the same kinds of basic forces.
“It’s based on getting a logical idea and testing the hypothesis,” said David Winship Taylor, head of biology at Indiana University Southeast in New Albany, who has expertise in the area of evolutionary botany. “We know we have genetic variations and changes in genetic variation — and we have time.”
Students interviewed for this story came from extreme religious to agnostic backgrounds and each one said they looked at learning evolution as just another one of their academic requirements. With the exception of Banks, all were open to the idea of adding intelligent design to classroom discussion.
“If we have a problem with evolution, we could go into the hallway or office,” said Quincy Jones, a New Albany High School senior.
During his ninth grade study of evolution, Jones couldn’t remember one student leaving the classroom for personal reasons related to the topic.
“It wasn’t forced upon us, we just went over theory,” added NAHS sophomore Stephanie Medley.
A local youth minister supports the idea of teaching the competing theories.
“I think the students would benefit from hearing both sides of the story,” said Chris Tanner, a youth minister at Georgetown Christian Church. “You can teach it without saying it’s a God to who you’re held accountable. You could just say ‘a creator.’”
Matt Holloway, a Clarksville High School junior and also a member of Morton Memorial, has come up with his own hybrid belief that blended the ideas of evolution and religion.
“I probably have a different belief than most people,” Holloway said. “I view it as evolution and creation can co-exist.
“I believe in God and that he created all humans and if he wanted to create humans that could evolve, he could do that.”
Clarksville High School Science Teacher Sherri Abromavage said sensitivity is still a factor when discussing evolution.
“We’re just seeing how science explains some of the questions we have,” Abromavage said.
To date, she said she has never had a student not complete the evolution portion on her biology class because they were uncomfortable with the theory.
“Once they realize they’re not expected to give up their personal beliefs, they’re fine,” Abromavage said.
However, there are a few schools within Clark and Floyd counties where God and science are on the same syllabus.
“We teach the principles behind evolution and we include the means of origins, the origin of that idea and why scientists believe that,” said Tim Ferree, assistant principal and former science teacher at Christian Academy in New Albany. “We teach is the biblical record of origins.”
It makes for more well-rounded students to present them with all the information, Ferree said.
“Both ideas of how we got here are accepted by many different people and an educated person has to know all the ideas,” Ferree said. “There’s going to be some overlap in some areas and you have to open your eyes to that. “We shouldn’t be afraid to take a look at different types of origins.”
However, as far as teaching creationism in public schools, the U.S. Supreme Court has made its position quite clear.
“Evolution is a scientific fact and the problem one has when one teaches something besides evolution is you’re going to be teaching opinion, and usually a religious opinion, and that raises first amendment concerns,” said Ken Falk, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana.
In Kentucky, the word “evolution” was recently deleted from guidelines of what Kentucky public school students should know and be tested on when officials from the state education department substituted the phrase ”change over time” for evolution.
Deputy Commissioner Gene Wilhoit said he and other Kentucky state department officials saw no need to keep the word evolution in the guidelines for high school and middle school students.
“The word is a lightning rod that creates a diversion from what we’re teaching, and we did not want to advocate a particular doctrine or a specific view,” Wilhoit said.
It seems this kind of creative editing is spreading throughout the country.
In August, the Kansas Board of Education also garnered attention when it adopted new testing standards that play down the scientific importance of evolution.
Kentucky biology teacher Ken Rosenbaum said these types of decisions will discourage schools from covering the topic.
“A lot of teachers are upset about this,” said Rosenbaum, who is also director of the Kentucky Science Teachers Association. “They know it was done for political reasons. It’s either a scientific theory or it’s not. Why don’t we just stop calling the sunrise the sunrise?”
Because in the case of ID, it isn't just "any presentation of evidence". It's a dishonest, factitious presentation designed only to cast spurious doubt upon established knowledge, and not to offer any viable alternative.
ID is the academic equivalent of a push-poll. It doesn't care how the questions are answered because the questions aren't presented honestly. The questions are merely there to tarnish, in the listener's mind, something the questioner opposes.
But, OK, Let's suppose that ID became the dominant belief because it is taught and most people liked that one. What then? So what? Why so excited?
You wouldn't have to believe it if you didn't want to.
And yet creationists continue to avoid or distort the facts.
Where are your billion year old human fossils?
Why are there no living trilobites, or thecodonts?
Where is your evidence for a cement flood from space that turns plants and animals to rock?
There's little doubt that anyone who wants to push creationism has no interest in teaching science.
In order to be scientific it must be reproducible.
Evolution cannot be reproduced.
Evolution is not scientific.
" In order to be scientific it must be reproducible."
Nope. It has to be testable, not reproducible. If what you claim is true, there could be no historical sciences.
(Crickets chirping.)
Troll someone else's thread.
Not true.
I do not consider evolutionary hypothesis to be rational. It's more wishful thinking.
An entirely misleading statement.
Variation within a species is a fact.
The mechanism by which whole new species arise is not known. However, it involves the insinuation of non-trivial, directed, and highly complex new information within a genome.
And that implies intelligent action.
I don't believe that. Prove it.
How can you prove a negative? I have NEVER seen physical evidence, tested and subject to peer review, that God/Allah/Marduk/Romulus/Zeus ever existed, have you?
No you don't. If you had evidence, we would not be having this discussion.
I have never seen a complex, delicate yet durable universe "pop" into existence from nothing. Have you?
Probably closer to 90 percent.
And that includes a huge number of scientists who merely accept the darwinists' faith claims at face value, and scientists who keep silent on the issue to avoid being subjected to an atheist inquisition.
And you do likewise. In the final analysis, one will choose what one believes.
I don't believe that, either. Proof, please.
"And you do likewise. In the final analysis, one will choose what one believes."
But I can DO it. You can't. Put up or shut up. I'm willing. :)
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.