Intelligent Design ruling

[furrycute]

Why does Baylor avoid teaching college? I am assuming Baylor must have a pretty good biolog program. And then there's the Baylor medical school and the associated hospital. How can Baylor avoid teaching evolution?

 

[majorloser]

I'm sure Buckle goes for the Premier League........Celtic fan or Kilmarnock?

Doesn't watch our football..............

I guess you're going to have to cheer for England in the '06 WC?

 

[Buckle-meister]

I'm sure Buckle goes for the Premier League........Celtic fan or Kilmarnock?

Kilmarnock? Celtic and Rangers are the two (both here in Glasgow) largest teams. Who just happen to loathe the sight of each other; Rangers is traditionally Protestant and Celtic Catholic.

Matches tend not so much to be football as carnage. Mind you, makes for good viewing.

I guess you're going to have to cheer for England in the '06 WC?

Nice try.

 

[gene]

Board Recinds ID Policy

I think this provides some good closure to this issue. I bet a lot of science teachers are releaved to not have to teach religious views as science or devalue provable sciences such as evolution.

Board Rescinds ID Policy

I still don't see why they can't teach it as an elective or philosophical course since it isn't science anyways

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

I think this provides some good closure to this issue. I bet a lot of science teachers are releaved to not have to teach religious views as science or devalue provable sciences such as evolution.

Board Rescinds ID Policy

I still don't see why they can't teach it as an elective or philosophical course since it isn't science anyways

Solid decision, but the last paragraph shows the incompetence of some judges.

"In Georgia, the state schools superintendent drew protests in 2004 for proposing a science curriculum that replaced the word "evolution" with "changes over time." Last year, a federal judge ordered Cobb County schools to remove from biology textbooks stickers that called evolution a theory, not a fact."

Evolution is still not a fact, and it will be a long time before becoming fact. It's a theory, and a darn good one. Scientists are more than satisfied with it being referred to as theory.

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

I will have you know that hockey is as big as college football, NFL, AND baseball put together.

When the canucks loose (which is alot right now) are government fails!

SheepStar

Don't forget ice skating, curling, the CFL, and luge. C'mon Sheep, there's more to Canada than hockey.

 

[gene]

Evolution is still not a fact, and it will be a long time before becoming fact. It's a theory, and a darn good one. Scientists are more than satisfied with it being referred to as theory.

Actually in a meaningful sense evolution is a fact, but there are various theories concerning the mechanism of it.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Go evolution!

BTW, they never pushed intelligent design in Catholic schools. We were actually taught evolution in middle school.

Does anyone know if other private Christain schools refrain from teaching evolution in science classes? I know colleges like Baylor avoid it, but how about grade school/high school.

You should have been taught evolution. The Pope has accepted that fact already, the last Pope. He has exceptional scientists on staff Some even contribute to evolution science
It is the fundamental religions that have an issue s they take the Bible as it is printed being the facts without any further interpretations. But, that is an oxymoron as people interpret what they read differently, especially something that is not clear at all and cannot question the author about his meaning, or read other papers by the author to get an idea. Our founding fathers left loads of personal papers to read.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I think this provides some good closure to this issue. I bet a lot of science teachers are releaved to not have to teach religious views as science or devalue provable sciences such as evolution.

Board Rescinds ID Policy

I still don't see why they can't teach it as an elective or philosophical course since it isn't science anyways

Kansas is next

I suppose an additional course in high school to be an elective subject takes lots of $$$ and enough incentive for students to take the extra class. With shortages of funds, it would be understandable. I am pretty sure when they get into college, they will be exposed to ID in a philosophy class. That is where they need it with more overall growth of an individual.

 

[miklorsmith]

Why can't ID be taught as an elective? Well, it's Brand New for one thing. It must stand up to considerable scrutiny and be at least shown plausible by many, various experts. It must stand the "test of time" to at least some degree before we unleash it on our children.

It flies in the face of the status quo, i.e. social inertia. Think of common wisdom as a big ship that takes a long time to turn.

Proponents must be able to convince decision-makers that this is NOT religious doctrine in any way.

Probably most important, ID must gather strong and long-lasting support. Consistent pressure would absolutely be necessary to overcome the problems that are obvious on the surface as well as those unforeseen. It would take years and years to mount such a coup and would have no chance unless an organized effort is mounted.

It's a big deal. It's all the kids in our entire (public school) nation that would be affected. So, considerable skepticism is warranted.

 

[jeffsg4mac]

This is my last post on this topic, waste of time really. I am leaving with this. If evolutionist are so d!@#m sure they are correct and evolution is fact then why has this prize not been won? Why have they dodged debate after debate with these guys and not been willing to take it into a court of law and get their money and fame. I know the answer.

http://www.csulb.edu/~jmastrop/prize.html

 

[gene]

This is my last post on this topic, waste of time really. I am leaving with this. If evolutionist are so d!@#m sure they are correct and evolution is fact then why has this prize not been won? Why have they dodged debate after debate with these guys and not been willing to take it into a court of law and get their money and fame. I know the answer.

http://www.csulb.edu/~jmastrop/prize.html

Jeff;

I assume that was a joke post Judges don't make scientific decisions. Why not read the literature instead? Overturn evolution and you get a Nobel Prize worth millions!

Oh, Mastropaolo's reminds me of a cable snake oil vendor. Look it up at talk.origins archive talkorigins.org

also search the talk origins news group via google groups / advanced for mastropaolo and you will see where he is coming from.

I think anthropologist Jeff McKee also debated him ...

http://home.insight.rr.com/jkmckee/CVJKM.htm

http://home.insight.rr.com/jkmckee/debate1.html


Upon futher reading I see this is one of those fake challenges -- to "win" by the rules set by the creationists is impossible. It has nothing to do with science. It is about Mastropaolo's ego.

Good one Jeff

Try reading this and things will become more apparent:
http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller.htm

 

[majorloser]

I will have you know that hockey is as big as college football, NFL, AND baseball put together.

When the canucks loose (which is alot right now) are government fails!

SheepStar

Seems to me all the Canadian hockey teams are moving South of the border

THANKS CANADA!

I now have two hockey teams in Florida since nobody wants the sport up there anymore.

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Hmmm, OK Gene imposible rules for the evolutionist. Are you kidding me? Looks even to me. Unless evolution is not science then maybe you have a point. Give me a break

Rules for the Life Science Prize
1. The evolutionist puts $10,000 in escrow with the judge.
2. The creationist puts $10,000 in escrow with the judge.
3. If the evolutionist proves evolution is science and creation is religion, then the evolutionist is awarded the $20,000.
4. If the creationist proves creation is science and evolution is religion, then the creationist is awarded the $20,000.
5. Evidence must be scientific, that is, objective, valid, reliable and calibrated.
6. The preponderance of evidence prevails.
7. At the end of the trial, the judge hands the prevailing party both checks.
8. The judge is a superior court judge.
9. The venue is a courthouse.

FAQ# 23. How is the judge chosen?

Whichever judge is available must confirm that he can be
completely objective, that he thoroughly understands the rules for counting evidence, that he will strictly rule according to those rules, and he must be acceptable to both sides. The judge would be a Superior Court judge that would be able to take the case
without bias, which is the usual condition for a trial. In addition, the judge would be
acceptable to both sides prior to the trial, which is also the usual condition for a trial.
There will be no impediment on this issue.
Courts have rules on recusing judges. If necessary, those rules shall apply.

Yes sir certainly sounds rigged to me.

 

[gene]

This is my last post on this topic, waste of time really. I am leaving with this.

Hmm I guess you can't keep the Black Knight down. It's merely a flesh wound.

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Hmm I guess you can't keep the Black Knight down. It's merely a flesh wound.

Oh yeah, I forgot. Now quit pestering me or I will bite your ankles

 

[mtrycrafts]

Why can't ID be taught as an elective?

It's being discussed in philosophy classes in college.


Well, it's Brand New for one thing.

Well, yes, when creationism didn't fly, some came up with ID.

It must stand up to considerable scrutiny and be at least shown plausible by many, various experts.


Depends on what the claims are for ID what scrutiny it gets. As science, it gets a lot and will never plausible and it is not science. Cannot be falsified, a prerequisite for science.


It must stand the "test of time" to at least some degree before we unleash it on our children.

Like astrology? Homeopathy that's been around for 100 years and more?

Proponents must be able to convince decision-makers that this is NOT religious doctrine in any way.

Not possible. It is not science so what else can it be?

Probably most important, ID must gather strong and long-lasting support.

So, science doesn't have to based in facts? Be testable? Observable? Falsifiable? Do we establish science by popularity?


It's a big deal. It's all the kids in our entire (public school) nation that would be affected. So, considerable skepticism is warranted.
How about the whole of the population? Would we want this to be accepted as science by adults?

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

Miklorsmith: Why can't ID be taught as an elective?

Mtry: It's being discussed in philosophy classes in college.

Don't forget Bible Study classes. Believe me, these young kids get ID (call it what you want) at a very young age if the parents are somewhat religious - depending on the belief system. It's probably a rude awakening in 5th or 6th grade (I'm old, when do they spring this on our kids?) when their science teacher tells them where they actually came from.

 

[brushro]

Evolution?-Come on !!!

what the hell is this?-why cant you people keep this kind of debate material elsewhere instead of here?-i know it's the steam vent but Jesus !!!!(nyuk..nyuk...nyuk)

 

[gene]

Did Jesus Exist?

This is an interesting law suit which I am sure Jeff can appreciate

Jesus Lawsuit