Didn't you get the memo? Evos quit using that tactic, when it was determined that the date can't be determined...
Posted on 06/27/2008 2:04:21 PM PDT by EveningStar
Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal has signed a stealth creationist bill into law, and American educational standards take a huge step backward: Science law could set tone for Jindal.
The creationist front group called the Discovery Institute is quietly crowing, and maintaining the fiction that the bill is not religiously-based.
(Excerpt) Read more at littlegreenfootballs.com ...
It isn’t like students are learning science anyway.
Academic freedom. The horror.
(CUE the high priests of Darwin with their usual measured, rational, winsome, NEVER knee-jerk meditations on the subject)
These dramatic statements make me laugh. Since he signed the bill, do 5+2 no longer =7? Are a,e,i,o,and u (and sometimes y) no longer vowels? Did George Washington not command the Colonial troops? Are Atoms no longer made of Protons, Neitrons, and Electrons? Sheesh!
Is Jindal one of them or does he not know the history and got conned by this group?
What a way to slander scientific debate
Did the bill explain how dinosaurs are actually less than 10,000 yrs old? (sarcasm off)
The censorship-driven evolutionists are not going to like this.
Good.
Why should the Darwinsim be taught as truth?
Oh, come on, you know the evo-atheists are smarter than anyone else, if you don’t believe it, just ask them.
(ever met a humble atheist?)
Leftists and darwinists agree: Stifle the Dissent! Silence the critics! Critical thought and disagreements be damned!
It doesn’t matter that most of the greatest scientific discoveries have been by believers in God. No we are far too educated these days.
Sounds perfectly objective to me, if you are either anti God, Marxist or demonic. The great god science is under attack. Bring out the sarcasm and elitism.
Ever seen the South Park episode on atheism?
Cartman goes into the future and they are fighting over the correct name for atheist groups,
instead of fighting over religions.
Good question: not yet.
They’ll learn science if they study Intelligent design
Didn't you get the memo? Evos quit using that tactic, when it was determined that the date can't be determined...
Easy way to solve this issue. Bring on the nationally televised debate between the evo’s and intelligent designer’s and let’s see who can support their case.
Mr. Bill Buckley and his ID scientist cohorts did, they did not lose.
It shouldn't because science doesn't deal with "truth." It should be taught as the current state of scientific knowledge on the subject, as all science should be. One day maybe another scientific theory will come along and supplant evolution, but until then evolution is what should be taught in science courses.
Jindal's nobody's fool.
Nobody conned him and I'm sure he knows who the Discovery Institute is.
Since honest disagreement with the priests of philosophical naturalism is declared to be impossible by those same priests, now what?
The year was 1999:
http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/evol5.htm
GORE WAFFLING IN DEBATE OVER TEACHING OF CREATIONISM?
Web Posted: August 29, 1999
Does he or doesn’t he? That’s the question that academics and reporters are asking today, following a flurry of quotes, news wire reports and clarifications on what Vice President Al Gore’s stand might over the hot-button topic of teaching creationism in public schools. The controversy began early last evening with a Reuters news service article by political correspondent Alan Eisner headlined: “Gore shocks scientists with creationism statement.” According to this account, vice presidential spokesman Alejandro Cabrera declared, “The vice president favors the teaching of evolution in public schools. Obviously, that decision should and will be made at the local level and localities should be free to decide to teach creationism as well.”
According to Eisner, “Several hours” after the initial statement, Cabrera called Reuters again to insist “the vice president supports the right of school boards to teach creationism within the context of religious courses and not science courses.” The story took on a life of its own after that; Reuters sent the dispatch out on its international wire, and over at the Washington Post the gaffe was soon picked up by Hanna Rosin for a piece headlined: “Gore avoids stance against creationism.”
Educators and scientists reacted strongly to the original statement released by the Gore office. “My God, that’s appalling!” declared Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education. ...” [snip] click link for lots more.
CNN http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/08/27/president.2000/evolution.create/
Presidential candidates weigh in on evolution debate
By Bruce Morton/CNN
August 27, 1999
Web posted at: 6:52 p.m. EDT (2252 GMT)
WASHINGTON — Is evolution a political issue?
Should presidential candidates be arguing over whether the planet is 4 billion years old, or whether was it made in six days 10,000 years ago, or if men and dinosaurs coexisted?
It all started when a spokesman for Vice President Al Gore announced that the vice president “favors the teaching of evolution in the public schools,” adding the decision should be local and “localities should be free to teach creationism as well.”
But Louisiana passed a law to give creationism equal teaching time and the Supreme Court struck it down as endorsing religion.
The Gore spokesman then said Gore supported teaching creationism in certain contexts, such as in a religion class, which has not been ruled unconstitutional.
Gore’s boss, President Bill Clinton, agrees that local control of schools is proper.
“I think the president believes the curriculum is by law and by all common practice left to local school boards,” White House Press Secretary Joe Lockhart said. “I think the president believes, that the local school boards, though, are bound by the law of the land and the Supreme Court has spoken very clearly on this issue.”
What do the Republican presidential hopefuls say about evolution?
Texas Gov. George W. Bush, the GOP front-runner, believes both evolution and creationism are valid educational subjects.
“He believes it is a question for states and local school boards to decide but believes both ought to be taught,” a spokeswoman said.
Former Red Cross Chair Elizabeth Dole and Arizona Sen. John McCain expressed no preference, simply saying the decision should be local.
Publisher Steve Forbes agreed, and called textbook illustrations about evolution “a massive fraud.”
Gary Bauer, head of the Family Research Council, said he does not teach his children that they are “descendant from apes.”
Evolutionists don’t say that either, of course. They say todays apes and humans have a common ancestor, a species called australopithecus.
Bauer said he does not accept a theory that claims no divine intelligence was involved in man’s origination and alleges that life arose spontaneously.
Pope John Paul II announced last year that the Roman Catholic church would not oppose evolution — it seems to be mostly fundamentalist Protestants who oppose the theory.
But it remains to be seen whether this argument, which never seems to fall completely out of the public discourse, will play a major role in the still-evolving 2000 presidential election landscape.
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.