Posted on 08/18/2008 9:35:10 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
With five seats on the State Board of Education up for grabs this year, education advocates say how children learn about evolution hangs in the balance -- and who voters choose could affect Kansas' national reputation.
A frequent flip-flop between moderate and conservative majorities on the 10-member board has resulted in the state changing its science standards four times in the past eight years.
Conservatives have pushed for standards casting doubt on evolution, and moderates have said intelligent design does not belong in the science classroom.
In 2007, a new 6-4 moderate majority removed standards that called evolution into question.
This year, none of the three moderates whose seats are up for election are running again. Only one of the two conservative incumbents is running for re-election...
(Excerpt) Read more at kansas.com ...
==Do you consider estimates of the age of the Earth based on radioactive decay of Uranium to be “Darwinian”? How about the ice cores...?
In both cases, they are interpreted in such a way as to conform to Darwin’s fairytale. And in both cases, Creationists and ID scientists are coming to very different conclusions. Once again, the evidence for and against would have to be presented so the students can decide for themselves.
Who is more likely to be afraid, the person whose pride is threatened or the person who looks objectively on the world? The earth is not the center of the solar system, man only became human when touched by God, and we are not alone in the universe—and it is pride that makes people fear such statements.
Yeah, that’s why WWII planes ended up being “ice dated” to over 250 years ago.
We sure could have used those in the Revolutionary War!
What would be interesting is demonstrating that the creationist textbooks teach the ToE wrong.
The UC is not accepting credit from creationist textbooks that believe that evolution is wrong. I have not read that the reason is that it is claimed that it is taught wrong.
This also assumes that public school textbooks teach it correctly when the case really is that that's all they teach.
The YEC proponents don't appear to have any evidence. All they have is a bucketful of dispersions to cast at any other theory or evidence. It's "dog-in-the-manger" science.
Got a source for that?
Here’s a good one:
http://p38assn.org/glacier-girl.htm
And here’s the google with MULTIPLE articles about the topic:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GZEZ_en-GBUS287US287&q=p38+lost+squadron+greenland+ice
Oops, not 250 years, 250 FEET of ice.
Now, what is the assumption on how many feet/year that ice layers form?
If it’s inches, those planes traveled back in time THOUSANDS of years.
I bet the “ape men” were scared shtless.
I forget as well.
What is the scientific evidence that the singularity existed? That it popped into existence all on its own out of nowhere from nothing for no reason?
What is the scientific evidence that it existed for an indeterminate amount of time (even though time didn't exist) before it expanded for that unknown reason? What is the scientific explanation of why it expanded when it did; what was the mechanism that triggered the expansion?
What is the scientific evidence to support virtually any aspect of cosmology? String Theory?
What is the scientific explanation for where the natural laws of the universe came from? How did they set themselves up? Why are they stable?
What is the scientific explanation for why scientists demand rigorous standards of proof from creationists/IDers for things that they don't apply to themselves?
No apparent reference found in the first link that backs up your claim.
There don't make assumptions about the number of feet per year. Seasonal differences produce differences in the composition of the ice. Age is determined by counting the individual seasonal layers. It is not based on assumptions about how many feet of ice are deposited per year.
moreover, all this just...well you no happened for no reason...and out of goop came salamanders which begot pigs, which begot apes which begot man...
You're proposing that we should assume there is something horribly wrong with what appears to be a reasonable and intuitive assumption about the ice covering that plane, for no apparent reason.
Who are you implying fears such statements? The scientist whose pride in his work tolerates no dissent?
LMAO!
Nope, that would be YOUR side that resmebles algore...remember there IS no more deabte about global warming hot air cult!
Nice try but no cigar!
http://www.b-29s-over-korea.com/lost_squadron/lost_squadron.html
“Several years later when treasure hunters arrived they found all the planes had vanished. No one saw them for almost 40 years. In 1981 A pilot taxied his Lear Jet up to Pat Epp’s hangar, and Epps commented what a beautiful airplane. The pilot replied “ yes, but I have always wanted a P-38”.
Epps called his friend Richard Taylor and asked was he ready to make a trip to Greenland. They formed the Greenland Expedition Society and headed to Greenland to retrieve the aircraft. They would dig them out, brush them off and fly them out, right? Well not exactly. They thought the planes were under a few feet of snow. To their surprise not one plane was visible, they were nowhere to be found. Even the metal detector produced nothing. Frustrated, they left.
Both returned a few months later for a second try. This time it was the dangerously unpredictable weather that had covered their equipment with snow and ice, making any progress impossible. They had no alternative but to leave again.
Five years passed with two teams trying without finding anything. Running short of money they decided to charge volunteers five thousand dollars each to be a part of the search team. The 1986 mission failed again, with money flowing down the drain.
By this time both men were ready to give up and quit the project. They tried another plan, to sell one eighth of a P-38 for twenty five thousand dollars. In 1988 they returned with a sub-serface radar device that could detect objects beneath the ice. Mounted on a sled it was pulled repeatedly over a square mile area with no results. Finally, just when they were ready to quit for the last time, the scope picked up an object. Gordon Scott sent down the steam probe 100’, then 200’, then at over 250’ down it hit something.
As luck would have it extremely bad weather rolled in again ruining once again their chances of recovering anything. They were forced to leave. A year later in 1989 they returned with a core drill. They sank it down to the 250’ depth and it struck something, apparently metal. It drilled through, and when pulled up there was a piece of aircraft aluminum in the bit. This created excitement and enthusiasm for the weary group, they had actually found one of the planes. The find was over a mile from the original crash site. “
No one in science demands proof. Just evidence. And above all, a theory or hypothesis that suggests lines of research.
In case you haven’t noticed, string theory isn’t accepted as even a theory, since no one can say how it can be tested. It has the status of a conjecture. Same for conjectures about why physical constants are what they are.
Can you site a high school textbook that treats string theory or multiverses as anything more than conjectures? Title, publication date, page?
It’s always something with the godless...
1. “but but but it’s not science”.
then you prove no one can conclusively agree on the very definition of science, let alone what’s accepted by all scientists AS science.
then
2. “there’s no proof”
then you provide proof but that’s not proof, so say the godless...
3. “there’s no scientific paper”
aggain, so say the godless...
and so on ...
ad infinatum.
==The YEC proponents don’t appear to have any evidence.
That’s where you’re wrong. For instance, the ice core data you mentioned is much more in line with YEC.
Can you provide a source for that showing some analysis of those cores that supports a YEC theory?
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.