Posted on 08/13/2008 9:44:45 AM PDT by Sopater
A federal judge has ruled the University of California can deny course credit to Christian high school graduates who have been taught with textbooks that reject evolution and declare the Bible infallible, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.
U.S. District Judge James Otero of Los Angeles ruled Friday that the school's review committees did not discriminate against Christians because of religious viewpoints when it denied credit to those taught with certain religious textbooks, but instead made a legitimate claim that the texts failed to teach critical thinking and omitted important science and history topics.
Charles Robinson, the university's vice president for legal affairs, told the Chronicle that the ruling "confirms that UC may apply the same admissions standards to all students and to all high schools without regard to their religious affiliations."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
No, the issue is preparation for college level science courses. A college shouldn't give science credit for non-science courses. In the same vein, seminaries should not give theology credits for physics classes. In both cases, they would be setting the student up for failure and that would be mean and irresponsible.
Job 381. Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:
2. "Who is this that darkens my counsel with words without knowledge?
3. Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me.
4. "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand.
5. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it?
6. On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone--
7. while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?
8. "Who shut up the sea behind doors when it burst forth from the womb,
9. when I made the clouds its garment and wrapped it in thick darkness,
10. when I fixed limits for it and set its doors and bars in place,
11. when I said, `This far you may come and no farther; here is where your proud waves halt'?
12. "Have you ever given orders to the morning, or shown the dawn its place,
13. that it might take the earth by the edges and shake the wicked out of it?
14. The earth takes shape like clay under a seal; its features stand out like those of a garment.
15. The wicked are denied their light, and their upraised arm is broken.
16. "Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea or walked in the recesses of the deep?
17. Have the gates of death been shown to you? Have you seen the gates of the shadow of death ?
18. Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth? Tell me, if you know all this.
19. "What is the way to the abode of light? And where does darkness reside?
20. Can you take them to their places? Do you know the paths to their dwellings?
21. Surely you know, for you were already born! You have lived so many years!
Pictures are worth a thousand words...
Is Al Gore and his followers right about MAN causing Global Warming®?
We can SEE all the stuff that's been 'created' as you say.
We cannot SEE this 'god' that you say made it all.
I think I'll worship what I can see...
--EvoDude(and don't bother to fling a verse at me like Romans 1:25!)
They are presently looking at the changes and I will bet you dollars to dough-nuts that the changes are genetic in nature not epigenetic. In other words the e.coli adapted an existing gene to convert it to a gene capable of making a protein that could break down citrate. With removal of the citrate this gene would suddenly be subject to neutral mutations and it wouldn't exactly revert “back”, it would simply loose the function as soon as it was no longer a selective advantage to have it.
According to the epigenetic model the e.coli would have to have had the citrate digesting gene in “storage” in highly methylated DNA. If this was the case then every e.coli would be capable of turning on the gene within a single generation; it would not take multiple generations to evolve the capacity to digest citrate, with only one of twelve lines developing the ability(as was observed) it would be as simple as a) subject e.coli to citrate b) observe methylated gene get demethylated so that mRNA of it can be produced c) Protein from mRNA capable of digesting citrate produced d) e.coli digests citrate.
How does your idea that living systems are capable of adaptation (by ANY mechanism, genetic or epigenetic)square with your idea that only devolution is possible after the Fall of man?
Heb11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen.
Romans 5:1
Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ
2Peter1:5For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge
No, they are applying a single standard based on course content. There are thousands of conflicting religious views and thousands of creation stories, but biology based on science is the same in every country and every culture.
The earth has edges? Flat?
I will bet you dollars to dough-nuts that the changes are both genetic and epigenetic. For instance, read the following, especially the pastoral words of comfort at the end:
According to classical evolutionary theory, phenotypic variation originates from random mutations that are independent of selective pressure. However, recent findings suggest that organisms have evolved mechanisms to influence the timing or genomic location of heritable variability. Hypervariable contingency loci and epigenetic switches increase the variability of specific phenotypes; error-prone DNA replicases produce bursts of variability in times of stress. Interestingly, these mechanisms seem to tune the variability of a given phenotype to match the variability of the acting selective pressure. Although these observations do not undermine Darwin's theory, they suggest that selection and variability are less independent than once thought.
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0092867407001213
==If this was the case then every e.coli would be capable of turning on the gene within a single generation
That's pure speculation on your part. It could be that some organisms have the capacity to adapt within a single generation, whereas others must go through an extended period of epigenetic shuffling before arriving at the correct adaptation. And we mustn't forget about lineage. It could be that some organisms have inherited the capacity to adapt to specific stresses and thus can adapt very quickly to certain environmental changes. For instance, in the case of the citrate-eating bacteria, only one lineage developed the ability to digest citrate. It might be that the other nutrients were not sufficient to meet the nutritional needs of this lineage, thus causing a bit of stress, whereas the other bacteria could exist just fine in the same environment. Or it could be that all lineages are only slightly stressed, and that one lineage has a lower stress threshold than the others, thus initiating a more or less leisurely search for an adaptation. Or it could be that they are all stressed, but only one lineage inherited the genetic/epigenetic tools to adapt to that specific environment. The possibilities are endless at this point. And many of these possibilities are probably lost on the Darwinists running the experiment because they are incapable of thinking in terms of Creation/ID.
That would have kept us in the dark ages.
That would have kept us in the dark ages.
Further, there is no evidence for creation/ID.
That's why they are planning to impose it on us by force (see GGG's comment from last night).
We didn't need The Enlightenment anyway, eh?
The Temple of Darwin uses the force of government to maintain its stranglehold on science. The First Amendment forbids giving one religion preferential treatment over another. And seeing how the Temple of Darwin has captured our government science institutions all the way to the highest levels, it is necessary to use the force of the ballot box, where Creationists and IDers enjoy a clear majority, to reestablish the separation between Darwin and State, and force the Temple of Darwin to realize its worst nightmare--competing on an even playing field with Creation and ID scientists.
Paging Nehemiah Scudder. Pick up the white courtesy telephone please.
==Paging Nehemiah Scudder. Pick up the white courtesy telephone please.
It figures, the first person the Temple of Darwin calls when faced with the prospect of loosing their dictatorship over science is none other than Nehemiah Scudder.
Looks like JS has sunk to a new low on FR...even for a Darwinist.
Ah, Let the uneducated masses vote on what science they should believe in. One time most of the world's population believed that the earth was flat and the sun revolved around the earth.
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.