District Patrons Propose Ways to Critically Analyze Evolution
School Board To Consider Converting Some Buildings To Middle Schools
Last updated Sunday, March 18, 2007 7:41 PM CDT in News
By Lana F. Flowers
The Morning News
ROGERS -- High school students' science textbooks do not contain enough evidence to support the theory of evolution and a community group wants to fund DVDs or lectures to fill that perceived gap.
The Rogers School Board will hear a committee's recommendation for adoption of the science textbook. The board will meet at 6 p.m. Tuesday in the school administration building, 500 W. Walnut St. in Rogers.
The school board will have a study session at 5 p.m. Tuesday in the same location.
Dentist Donald J. Eckard was a community representative on the science textbook adoption committee and takes issue with some biology books.
"The four biology textbooks I reviewed, including the one adopted for grades nine through 12, 'Biology' by Glencoe, present Darwinian evolution with very little critical analysis," Eckard states in a memo to the board.
District patron Mark Moore contends students must critically analyze the theory of evolution in order to understand both the theory and how the evidence that supports it falls short.
Moore proposes three solutions to critically analyze evolution, including a manuscript to accompany textbooks; a DVD to critically evaluate the evidence supporting evolution; and a DVD of a debate between creationists and those who support evolution.
"In each case, the district need not worry about the costs associated with the production of these materials. People in your community want this," Moore said in an e-mail to Eckard and included in the board's agenda packet.
"They feel so strongly about it that they are willing to put up the money for production costs. What would be needed is a commitment that the materials will actually reach the students," Moore stated in his e-mail.
Moore and Eckard are expected to speak to the board Tuesday.
In other business, the school board will hear a recommendation that Greer Lingle Middle School; Oakdale and Elmwood junior highs; and either Birch Kirksey Middle School or the Sophomore Center all be middle schools.
The district now has elementary schools that house kindergarten through fifth grades; middle schools that include sixth and seventh grades; junior highs with eighth and ninth grades; a sophomore center for 10th grade; and a high school with juniors and seniors.
The district will change school grade configurations once a second high school opens along Fifth Street for the 2008-09 school year.
Then, elementary schools still will include kindergarten through fifth grades, but middle school will encompass sixth through eighth grades and the two high schools will include ninth through 12th grades.
Web Watch
Rogers School Board
To view the full agenda for the 6 p.m. Tuesday meeting, go online to www.rogers.k12.ar.us and look for the link under "More information on ... "
Razorback Central
July 9th, 2009
July 7th, 2009
Reader Comments (114 comment(s))
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsibility of their authors. The Morning News does not review comments before their publication, nor do we guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by our comment policy. If you see a comment that violates our policy, please notify the web editor.
School patron wrote on Mar 19, 2007 7:08 AM:
" This school patron wants MR MOORE to put his children in (Private CHRISTIAN SCHOOL) and leave my children alone ! another way to waste tax money on court fees ... "
Mark Moore wrote on Mar 19, 2007 7:41 AM:
" This is Mr. Moore. I taught science in public school for a dozen years. My students understood evolution better than those in Rogers seem to, based on the board's complaints about it. In order to critically analyze a theory, you must first understand it.
If you only want your child to be indoctrinated in a theory whose supporters don't have the courage to defend it in open debate, there is nothing I can do for you. If you want them to understand how to think rather than regurgitate the party line, I can.
The current way this is being taught, with no questions allowed, is more suited to the North Korean approach to teaching about the "Dear Leader" Kim Jong Ill. Even if the claims of the material can't be defended intellectually, we must never question! "
Archaeopteryx wrote on Mar 19, 2007 8:07 AM:
" Mr. Moore would have you believe that science is a process in which the correct answer should be chosen by debate, sort of like American Idol. He believes that scientists should feel obligated to defend their findings against glassy-eyed dogmatists like himself. Fortunately, that's not the way science works. If he has evidence that disproves evolutionary theory, I invite him to get it published in reputable scientific journals--that's the way science works. Until then, it would be better if he'd keep his religion out of public schools. "
Hitler wrote on Mar 19, 2007 8:07 AM:
" It's good to teach both sides of EVERY argument. I perrsonally would like to be able to teach both sides of the Holocaust controversy. Just give me a few days in the classroom in front of your darling 8 & 9 year olds (their so impressionable at that age) and they'll come to see that Adolph Hilter wasn't such a bad guy!!! I only want them to be exposed to a critical analysis of the facts.
God Bless America, our Fatherland
HH "
Jim Lendall wrote on Mar 19, 2007 8:36 AM:
" This rush to stupidity has consequences. For those who lament the loss of industrial "super-projects," you must remember that corporate types read local local news, not just the economic bribes to entice them (and their workers) to move to Arkansas. These people understand the difference between science and ignorance.
Successful corporations are built upon science, not ignorance, unless it is a televangelist empire. "
Screwtape wrote on Mar 19, 2007 9:24 AM:
" Hitler, your day in class is coming soon! Already, thanks to our success, government schools routinely teach the positive side of what was heretofore indisputably considered evil: homosexuality, premarital sex, radical Islam... and evolution theory displacing the obvious belief in God has been the secret to our success! "
isn't a theory something that has yet to be proven? wrote on Mar 19, 2007 9:30 AM:
" Why is it a theory? It is called science when someone speaks of Evolution, but not science when we talk about different ways of possiblilities of how we arrived to this state of being. There are some parts of Evolution that make complete sense. Can't believe that it took all those years to realize that stupid people usually mate with stupid people, that giants do not mate with "little people", that the scientists only mate with themselves. I guess those that do not want the children to see both sides of the story and make a decision for themselves down the road are part of that old Flat Earth Society too. "
Theorize this, sweetheart wrote on Mar 19, 2007 10:02 AM:
" The word theory has a number of distinct meanings in different fields of knowledge, depending on their methodologies and the context of discussion.
In common usage, people often use the word theory to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements that would be true independently of what people think about them.
In science, a theory is a mathematical description, a logical explanation, a verified hypothesis, or a proven model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theory which explains why the apple behaves so is the current theory of gravitation.
"
Jim Lendall wrote on Mar 19, 2007 10:20 AM:
" I realize that logic, fact, science and honesty mean nothing to those who are hell-bent in forcing the rest of us to believe in their psychosis. The religionists distort the scientific meaning of "theory" to fit their perverted meaning.
If a person is "saved," evangelicals even allow for lies and crimes, especially if the dishonesty is designed to delude people into believing as they do. In fact, it is a sin for evangelicals not to try to convert others, ... by any means possible.
It is useless to expect that logical discussion will solve this conflict. I'm afraid that we are doomed to enter a new "dark ages." "
To Mr. Lendall wrote on Mar 19, 2007 10:39 AM:
" why are you throwing variables into this equation that have nothing to do with the concept of bringing to light the scientific flaws of a mostly decent "theory"? It is unfortunate that you "know" (not believe) that it is useless to expect that logical discussion will solve this conflict. I am afraid that individuals that share the same characteristics as Mr. Lendall will doom us to enter the new "dark ages" cause of such narrowmindedness (yes that is a big word, I know). One does not have to be a part of any religion to understand that there are merits in both Evolution and in Creationism. To teach each by itself without the other is doing a disservice to education, to teach each by itself without teaching the counter arguements is doing a disservice to education. I am not a big fan of the Evangelical components putting their non-scientific concepts into action...but there is enough science in Creationism that disrespecting it for whatever shallow self-absorbing reasons as I have heard from most...is doing a disjustice to science. Leave your prejudices aside when trying to evaluate both sides. That goes for the wackos on both sides of this debate. "
Thank you Sweetheart wrote on Mar 19, 2007 10:52 AM:
" for a decent detail of what a "Theory" is. Many really really good concepts, like the "Theory of Gravity" are still just that...very very very good educated guesses. Taking the known variables and producing a working equation to a certain model. Many theories are debunked. Many theories are made into Laws. Many theories are debunked then made better by the addition of more variables. Evolution for the most part has tons of understandable "seen" variables that is why it is so easily followed and "preached". "
Strange Bedfellows wrote on Mar 19, 2007 11:08 AM:
" Lendall, your "argument" that big corporations won't move to Arkansas because of the anti-evolutionists is the same thing Huckabee worried about when the leg proposed a bill to have textbooks disclaim evolution as theory. Seems like you and the Huck share some common concerns.
Being worried about what others will think is a sorry substitute for structured thought. It's a shame that you corporatists peddle superstition out of herd mentality (the same thing you're quick to accuse creationists of doing). I suppose you'll soon be telling us all to purchase Al Gore's carbon offset credits? "
Captain Janeway wrote on Mar 19, 2007 11:48 AM:
" Sorry folks, but even Behe had to admit under oath in the Dover School District case that even he does not use Intelligent Design in his work, and also that ID has not offered a single sceintific contribution. NOT ONE. "
Private Christian School Advocate wrote on Mar 19, 2007 11:55 AM:
" To School Patron:
Some of us do put our children in "PRIVATE CHRISTIAN SCHOOL" however, we still pay the same taxes you do for public schools, so why can't we join the debate---we are not exempt from taxes just becuase we choose to educate your children a certain way. Just because one has a belief system that may not be share by the majority, does make them excluded in participating in public debate for the public school system. Some of us who do put our children in PRIVATE CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS may not have done so if the public schools were better! "
Speaking the truth in love,,, wrote on Mar 19, 2007 11:59 AM:
" No new genetic information has ever been added to change, evolve, mutate a known species. This is scientific fact. There have been mutations and changes by decreasing information or by maintaining. Thus, people did not gradually evolve from dirt. Also, there are no known dating methods that are proven reliable. There are many fossils found in strata that are 'out of place'--not thought to have existed millions of years ago as that strata is supposed to represent. There is so much more info that is not represented in scientific literature. Scientists refuse to publish it; If you would like to be truly informed, you must look at both sides of this issue; go to www.answersingenesis.com for some very interesting scientific reading. "
Evolution is a wild idea wrote on Mar 19, 2007 12:18 PM:
" I can tell all you evolutionists one thing. If you choose to believe the Theory then you will be wrong forever and suffer for it. I think it is nonsense and if I am wrong it will be only for my life time. Here is another great reference link. http://www.everystudent.com/index.html "
wouldn't the concept of cloning wrote on Mar 19, 2007 12:25 PM:
" be a decent indication of being able to help design intelligence. Now I know many of my friends throughout the years have proven that they have no intelligence (my xwife included) but just the mere fact that we as this mostly frail species can produce a creature with the use of advanced science, would it be too far to fathom that we may have been "created" by someone or something. Take religion out of the equation for a second and actually ponder that. "
Captain Janeway wrote on Mar 19, 2007 12:28 PM:
" To "Speaking the truth in love,,,"
New genetic information is added. You have no clue what you're talking about.
http://www3.uta.edu/faculty/betran/naturereviews.pdf
I strongly encourage you to go back to school and learn all of the information your pastor doesn't understand and/or won't tell you. "
To Hitler wrote on Mar 19, 2007 12:29 PM:
" You make a sound arguement that we still haven't evolved much past mutated monkeys. Way to keep the common denominator down to the absolute lowest form of existance. Keep up the good work, I'll be sending you a dreidel in the mail! "
Rick J. Black Sr. wrote on Mar 19, 2007 12:35 PM:
" If you want to teach that a mythical being created all this, then send them to your own citadal of indoctrination the church school. I send my kids to school to learn facts, not myths and delusions from a book that is no more than fiction,myth, and hearsay. Darwin's Theory has been proven time and time again in the scientific field. No amount of hand wringing by fundalmentalists is going to change that. I will fight bringing religion of any form into the classroom as actual and factual teaching. I will never willingly expose my children to such pathogens. This family chooses's knowledge over ignorance. "
HAhahahaha wrote on Mar 19, 2007 12:41 PM:
" Sorry to be laughing, not meaning to be rude, but does Mr. Black Sr. note the irony in his last sentence...lol "
Ferrous Patella wrote on Mar 19, 2007 12:42 PM:
" Dear "Thank you Sweetheart",
I would like to correct one error in your comment: Scientific theories do not become laws (even when they are "really really good concepts, like the "Theory of Gravity"). The term "law" in this context does not mean an idea it "truer" than a theory. Rather it means "a concise (usually mathematical) expression of one facet of a theory."
So Newton's Laws of motion are no more true for being called laws. If fact they have been proven false by experiments on the Theory of Relativity. Yet we still call them "laws" and teach them in school because they work (mostly).
Calling Evolution "just a theory" is an intentional misdirection since *all* science is just a theory. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. The evidence against it is merely rhetoric. If you truly want to critically analyze evolution, go to the answersingenesis.com web site AND to talkorigins.org
But be warned: Be prepared to do your homework. In science, the devil (sorry for the pun) is in the details and people have been rigorously challenging the theory of evolution for over a century and the body of evidence is large and in depth.
In the meantime, our high schools need to teach the consensus of the science community. "
Speaking the truth in love...and in logic wrote on Mar 19, 2007 12:49 PM:
" Mr/s. "Speaking the truth" makes several claims which are old stand-bys of "creation science", the precursor to Intelligent Design, which has been deemed unconstitutional for use in public school science classes by courts at all levels, including the Supreme Court, since decades ago. Futher, s/he calls us to be "truly informed" and "look at both sides" by visiting a website that certainly is not representative of "both sides". Just look at the title...Answers in Genesis! Science seeks answers in nature. For scientifically based rebuttals to the claims made by Mr/s. "Speaking the truth" and other creationists, see the index of creationist claims at http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/
"
To Ferrous Patella wrote on Mar 19, 2007 12:55 PM:
" You are very correct and thank you for intelligently and very professional manner for delivering your message. This is a touchy subject and does deserve honest wordage. When Darwinism started it took a heavy beating from the religious world. Yet, it stayed true to itself and in time (through solid scientific evidence of most of it) has been established as something that should be taught as "fact" to everyone. While Creationism is something that at this current point is an unproven theory that will take something "out of this world" to assist in its scientific model. This is where the Evolutionist have the distinct advantage. I applaud you for your class and dignity! "
Tell it right wrote on Mar 19, 2007 12:57 PM:
" http://www.everystudent.com/wires/aboutevolution.html "
Kevin Wayne Williams wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:00 PM:
" To "Speaking the Truth in Love"
You have an amazing post there: the only true part is that answersingenesis.com is entertaining. Unfortunately, it is a work of fiction, not fact.
Your first statement is simply false: New genes are created continuously. Look up "gene duplication" in your favorite genetics textbook to get an idea of how duplicate genes become the raw material for new genes.
The dating controversies have been invented by creationists desperate to maintain a 6000 year old earth. Used appropriately, and with an understanding of the error boundaries of each technique, modern dating technology is quite reliable.
I would like to remind you of one basic thing. Everyone is entitled to an informed opinion, but an uninformed opinion is worthless. If you have been getting your information from answersingenesis.com, you are worse than uninformed: you are deceived. "
Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:04 PM:
" To Mr or Mrs. Rick J. Black Sr. and Mr or Mrs. Jim Lendall ( I don't want to disrespect the possibilities that there may have been a change of gender, I respect those that evolve to a diffent gender) your blatent disrespectful manner is dispicable. Just because someone questions your opinions you choose to resort to 1st grade mentality. You should be ashamed of yourselves. You two goofs should take lessons of class and dignity from Ferrous Patella. You should change your names cause from now on, you are on the "irrelevant" list. "
No Moore wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:06 PM:
" "District patron Mark Moore contends students must critically analyze the theory of evolution in order to understand both the theory and how the evidence that supports it falls short." Did Moore teach his students to critically analyze atomic theory? How about the germ theory of disease? Mr. Moore clearly has a bias. What are the sources of his "supplementary materials?" Are they equally biased? This opens the door to every group donating "supplementary materials" to push their agenda. (Not to mention a repeat of the Dover lawsuit for the district.) "
Klebsiella wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:08 PM:
" We have witnessed evolution in our own lifetimes--antibiotic resistant pathogens. Penicillin was once a great drug but is now practically worthless as pathogens have evolved that are no longer susceptible. Are we to believe that God directly intervened in the bacterial genome to punish us for our wicked ways? If God gave us sense and reason, is it a sin not to use it? It appears Mssrs. Lendall and Huckabee are correct--Arkansas is the second lowest state in educational attainment (behind only W. Virginia). "
Legal fees anyone? wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:11 PM:
" From the article:
"In each case, the district need not worry about the costs associated with the production of these materials. People in your community want this," Moore said in an e-mail to Eckard and included in the board's agenda packet.
"They feel so strongly about it that they are willing to put up the money for production costs. What would be needed is a commitment that the materials will actually reach the students," Moore stated in his e-mail.
My questions:
So, according to Moore, the people of the community are willing to financially support production of the "educational" materials. 1. Are they really? 2. Are they willing to pay the legal damages which will almost certainly be incurred by the Rogers School District if this goes through? The Dover Area School District payed over $1,000,000 in damages as a result of their creationist debacle over Intelligent Design. "
Why? wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:13 PM:
" If there is no God then why do some that do not believe work so hard to prove that God does not exist? Everything started from something therefore Evolution disproves itself. If you have nothing and you add nothing then you still have nothing. Something had to been first or there would still be nothing today. No amount of humanism or evolutionism will change that. You can change a gene, mutate a gene or make a gene from other genes but yet you can not create one from nothing. Time, space or written word does not change that FACT not theory. "
Why? wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:25 PM:
" What are the evolutionists afraid of? If creationism is just "myth" and fantasy then why are you so afraid of it? We allow Greek myths in that talk about Gods and we talk about all other manners of things that have no "theory" behind them but yet they are allowed. But not one word about Jesus? Think about it what are you afraid of? Does it scare you to think that you are loved and created for a purpose other than just to take up space and breath? If it is untruths and myths let it in and the kids will learn some wonderful "fictional" characters and stories. "
I remember Dover. wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:28 PM:
" Right, and not only did the school board get stuck with the bill, all of the board members who supported Dover's anti-evolution policy were voted right out of office over the incident. Be careful, elected officials, your electorate is watching. We like the separation of church and state, and we don't like nationwide and international embarrassment. "
Ken wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:31 PM:
" If evolution didn't happen then what is the alternative? Did two of every species just materialize out of thin air? Was there a puff fo smoke, or did they sort of fade in as if they were being transported from the Starship Enterprise? Has anyone ever witnessed something like this happening?
If we accept that a common ancestor can produce a Pekinese and a Great Dane in a hundred generations, what is so extraordinary about producing a chimp and a human in a million generations?
"
Why indeed? wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:31 PM:
" Would you be skeptical of a "critical analysis of static electricity" stuffed into your child's science class by people who worship Zeus and want your child to credit him with creating the lightning? Would you trust them to be honest in "teaching the controversy"? "
Because... wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:33 PM:
" We're talking about science class. Greek mythology is allowable and appropriate for discussion in courses on ancient literature, comparative religion, and the like. So are the Bible, the Koran, etc. (Notice, for comparative purposes, not for promotion of any one religion.) However, none of these are science texts, and they are not useful when seeking to provide scientific explanations for natural phenomenae. "
Kevin W. Parker wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:34 PM:
" "If creationism is just "myth" and fantasy then why are you so afraid of it?"
Okay, if we're going to talk creationism, then let's talk every kind of creationism (not allowed to favor any specific religion, after all). We can talk about Genesis and then go on to the trillions-years-old universe of Hindu creationism, and after that we can work through some Native American legends. Of course, this doesn't leave much time to do actual science, but what's important, after all? "
Legal fees, good point wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:41 PM:
" But you should also have mentioned the case in Georgia. In the case regarding the anti-evolution stickers in the textbooks, it cost the district over $200,000. (~$170,000 legal fees and ~$30,000 to remove the stickers.)
Further, not only was money lost, but the agreement enjoins the board, the district, and its schools not only from "restoring to the science textbooks of students in the Cobb County schools any stickers, labels, stamps, inscriptions, or other warnings or disclaimers bearing language substantially similar to that used on the sticker that is the subject of this action" but also from taking any of a number of actions that "would prevent or hinder the teaching of evolution," including making oral or written disclaimers about evolution or Darwin, placing statements in textbooks about "creationism, creation science, intelligent design, or any other religious view concerning the origins of life or the origins of human beings," and "excising or redacting materials on evolution in students' science textbooks." The agreement is binding in perpetuity. "
So afraid wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:44 PM:
" Why are you so afraid? Do you not like knowing you are loved and there is eternal life? It is called faith in the unseen. You have faith that when you breath you will get air into your lungs but yet the air can not be seen. You have faith in other drivers at a stop light will stop on red yet you can not see their thoughts. You have faith that the sun will shine everyday yet you have no control over its actions. To me it is an unseen Faith in what you know to be true not a religion. I know there is a God I know that God created all things for a reason. This debate is of Evolution versus Creation is but one blip in the History of the Christian faith and as such the Darwin Theory will fade as has every other challenge that has been tried against the Creator. We are on this Earth for a blip of time and it is the Eternal Life that I know I have that gets me through every day. I want all of you to know Jesus as I do and the Darwin theory will fall apart as if it is ashes in a hurricane. It takes Something to make Something Else. God is that Something and we are that Something Else. We were created by God's love as is everything around us. I pray that someday all will see it. "
I have to agree with the Evo's on this one wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:46 PM:
" That is why I wish that the Creationists would sway away from the use of religion and other almost unprovable concepts and deal more that their religion implies. That there is a viable chance that we or most of what runs around on this big blue ball were created. If we have the ability to clone animals now, we will have the ability to clone humans soon, what happens to us in a few oh...thousand more years. Would we have the ability to create life in the concept of what the Creationists are saying happened to us? Or at least something to that effect. "
To Ken wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:47 PM:
" You can not make a chimp into a human because you can't create genes you can only change genes. Just like we do not see a new human come oozing out of the swamp. "
To I have to agree with the Evo's on this one wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:53 PM:
" Where did the first Gene come from? You are not creating anything you are changing an already living thing and changing it. Cloning, transplanting or whatever is popular today. We know that happens. But where did the things come from that started it all? It takes something to make something. Try to build a house with thought and theory. "
To Why indeed? wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:59 PM:
" I think that some that believe in Darwin think of it as their religion therefore it should not be taught in school as well. Now what? Teach them as theories side by side for comparitive evaluation. Science is a comglomoration of "theory" based on research and I think that since the Bible has survived or thousands of years without being disproven it is pretty good comparison. "
Why Indeed? wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:04 PM:
" 'I think that some that believe in Darwin think of it as their religion therefore it should not be taught in school as well.'
It's not religion; it's science. It makes testable predictions and requires no supernatural intervention. Scientists don't 'believe in Darwin' and in fact the theory of evolution has come a long way since then.
'Now what? Teach them as theories side by side for comparitive evaluation. Science is a comglomoration of "theory" based on research and I think that since the Bible has survived or thousands of years without being disproven it is pretty good comparison.'
But creationism isn't science; it has no testable scientific theory, and it makes no falsifiable predictions distinct from those of modern biology. So how about we keep science in the schools and religion in the churches? "
Is it possible to create using other items? wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:07 PM:
" Is it possible to create life by using the resources that are available to you? If in a thousand years, we better understand the concept of what makes a gene...a gene, would it be far fetched to think that someone can create a gene? I don't know! But I am willing to suspend judgement on it before I rule it out. You can build a house with wood and nails. It doesn't make the house any less "created" it just means that the house is ...a house. We do not know how to make a gene right now, if we ever do, I am sure that eventually someone will make one. "
Darwinism in not a fact wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:09 PM:
" if it was a fact then explain why Tom Arnold married and had children with Rosanne Barr!!!! Explain that one! "
PCR mix alot wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:11 PM:
" Who says you can't create genes? Ever hear of recombinant DNA technology? Any gene can be created, duplicated, modified, and multiplied in vitro. Please get an education; your vapid arguments are a vulgar display of oxygen thievery. "
Scared Evolutionist wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:11 PM:
" Several of you have asked what "evolutionists" are so scared of. I am scared of living in a world where diseases, and natural disasters are attributed to divine wrath, demonic influence or evil spirits rather beeing analyzed in terms of natural, non supernatural causes. I am scared of living in a world where medical, agricultural, and evironmental science doesn't take the affect of natural selection into account. I am scared of living in a world where scientists don't study the history of climate change over millions of years in order help us understand the future, because everyon "knows" the earth is only a few thousand years old. Most of all I am afraid of living in a world where relistious beliefs are allowed to dictate the very definition of science.
"
To PCR mix alot wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:18 PM:
" Then we can create life without cloning? Can you please educate us stupid folk? Are you implying that we can create life just as how the Creationists are implying...minus all that religous stuff? "
Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:20 PM:
" I understand what "Scared Evolutionist" is saying. I am scared of the nutcases on both sides. The religous wackos that dictate 100000 different versions of a book or the chicken littles that each decade come up with a new "get rich quick" scare tactic using "science" as their wicked tool. "
Rock wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:21 PM:
" Another Sunday Morning News story makes clear the silliness of this proposal and the commentary purportedly supporting it. That is the Business section story about shortfall of new nurses in northwest Arkansas and nationwide. It is just such destructive attitudes as this proposal and the very ill-thought argument from which it flows that cause our shortage of nurses, and other professionals whose training and performance depend upon a sound basis in biology, chemistry, geology, etc. The term Darwinian Theory is in the past because it is no more the height of current knowledge than the Wright brothers accomplishments at Kitty Hawk are the leading edge of aeronautical theory. Wake up, please, to the NEED to put this kind of effort into treating the education of the coming generation, the coming producers and deciders, seriously. It is not productive to make it your personal battlefield. Irresponsible. Destructive to the individuals who with proper encouragement and education would help themselves and society and to society as a whole. "
But wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:26 PM:
" Where did the first "thing" or gene or whatever come from? What is considered Science today will be considered myth in the future. At one time most of the World believed the world was flat therefore it was. That is Science today, if you can not see it it does not exist. "It", being whatever you apply it to did not just appear it came from somewhere. We are here today and we will be here tomorrow but tommorrow is always today. It is a way of understanding a time concept but tomorrow still is not here today. You can not create tomorrow anymore than you can create a person from nothing. You have to have something to start with that was here before. Yes you build a house out of materials but you did not create the house from nothing you used something, materials in this case, to build the house. Your thoughts and empty space did not create the house. Therefore the house was created from known materials. That is no more a play on words than people thinking we created anything first. Everything that happens came from something. Creationism or as a call it Faith in God is knowing God created something from nothing. There is nothing to prove, it is Fact. Fine let everyone take there tax money from public schools and send their child to whatever school they choose. That would take everyones dog out of the fight. "
Harry Bacca to "Rock" wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:28 PM:
" You make sense! We do need a LOT more qualified Nurses and other medical professionals. "
Art Hobson wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:32 PM:
" Teaching creationism in order to "balance" the fact and theory of evolution is just like teaching that the earth is flat in order to "balance" the fact and theory that it is round. Evolution is supported by the overwhelming scientific consensus, a consensus that is based on observation and reason. Scientists overwhelmingly reject creationism. "
Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:36 PM:
" How can one make something out of nothing? Hence then we are really all nothing. There is no today, there is only Now! I am not all that familiar with the concept that the one many call "God" how he/she/it made all of this from nothing. I am sure that if something created things on this big blue planet that some sort of something was used. Even if no organized being created life here, something happened to create life. Could you better explain yourself please! "
and many moons ago wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:39 PM:
" they used science to tell us our limitations of mankind. They told us that if we exceeded speed x, that we would explode, they said that the Earth was the center of the solar system, they said a lot of things. Scientist live in the world of what they can see. I can respect that, but there are a lot of things in this universe that our little frail minds do not have the ability to see yet. "
To Art Hobson wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:40 PM:
" Scientist of the Day believed by consensus that the World was flat. It was proven wrong. Evolution did not create anything it mutates, adapts or whatever term you choose to use. It started with something already there. Scientist are mostly knowledgable in the field they are in but lack the ability to think they might not be know what they are talking about. They argue like a playground soccer game and disprove each other by whatever means necessary. They are also the same type of people that told us that smoking was okay and made the Nuclear bomb. "
To Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 19, 2007 2:47 PM:
" God the Father needs nothing to create something. He is the Something that made the Something else. Today is Now. Today and Now are the same. If you want it explained further go to this link and browse the website. It explains things much better than I can.http://www.everystudent.com/index.html "
Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 19, 2007 3:04 PM:
" what you consider to be "God the Father" is a magician then. I am sorry for the blasphamous tone, but I don't buy that reasoning for creating life. A book is not enough to dictate a rational teaching to our children in the world of science. If God used "nothing" to create us, then we are made of "nothing". Well, women are created from nothing and a rib from nothing. Using the "God created all things from nothing" is hard for anyone to truely take seriously in a world that logic is taught instead of faith. If we get into the habit of teaching faith as science then what is to stop the Moslems, Hindu's, Jooos, Ewoks, and the makers of Pez from wanting their faiths of creation to be taught. I want to support the concept that we were created, but the constant use of "God created everything from nothing" is not really helping...with all due respect. "
To Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 19, 2007 3:25 PM:
" Magic had nothing to do with it. Go to that website and read what is on it. I beleive in free will and we all make our own decisions. You have to decide what you want to read. I take by Faith that God created all we see. It should make you very sad to think that we go nowhere after death. I know where I am going and it will be awesome beyond words. I am personally very sad that humans are so arrogant to think that things can not happen that we can not explain in theories. Faith is just that Faith. I have a peace of knowing something that anyone that wants it can know too. Just ask with an open heart and mean it and it will be yours. I will pray for all on this board regardless of the side of the fence you are on. God Bless you all. "
CMB wrote on Mar 19, 2007 3:26 PM:
" It's really pretty simple - Evolution works. It works in every science where it's tried as an explanation for the experimental results. Every single one. In contrast, Creationism explains nothing. It has never helped explain one single observation better than an actual scientific theory does - it basically amounts to hand-waving.
Why can't the churchies pushing this crap attract converts without stealing our tax dollars and teacher time?
Otherwise - let's just teach the kids both sides of everything; some say the earth is flat, some say that math doesn't exist, and some say that Satan rules. Heck, let's just put it all in. "
To CMB wrote on Mar 19, 2007 3:35 PM:
" The truth does not have to prove anything but yet it has never been proven wrong either and many have tried. Many theories in science have been proven wrong over time and have disappeared into history but the Bible has survived. Oh yeah I am a tax payer so I don't have to steal what is partly mine too. Just because we do not see things the same does not make me any more or less a citizen than you. "
Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 19, 2007 3:42 PM:
" ok, I never said anything about not knowing where I am going after my death. That is between me and whoever/whatever is in charge of that department after my shell here on Earth becomes food for another. I find it arrogent that humans find it hard to believe that something that is created from absolutely nothing does not make much sense and one can have all the faith in the world, but that still doesn't make much sense. Faith is about having a belief system that has something to do with a logical thought process (one does not have to visually see something, but it still must make some sort of logical sense). If I believe in the tooth fairy, doesnt make it right, even though for every tooth I had lost, I recieved cash for it. I know that there is something outside of this realm that we see, I just can't prove it at all, but it doesn't give me the right to tell all of you that my way of knowing is better than yours...right now :) I take it in Faith that something created some of the species that live/have lived on this big blue planet. I don't know the hows/why, and until I do, I will suspend judgement in the preaching of such concept. Evolution is not rocket science, exept when they are talking of how thing were created...etc. "
Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 19, 2007 3:54 PM:
" that website didn't explain how God created water from nothing. It didn't explain how the Earth was created from nothing. It didn't explain how there was absolutely no effort in making everything cause it was all made of nothing. It didn't explain how much science was done to come up with the diffent boiling points and cooling points of water, as it didn't explain how the gravity (that happened from nothing) effects the water (that was made from nothing). Sorry to sound so negative but I take the subject very seriously, I have seen too many good humans brainwashed by both sides. "
catsmeow wrote on Mar 19, 2007 4:51 PM:
" Sooo many Comments Getting Dizzy...I hope all you who believe in evolution know that you are talking to brick walls. Save your breath.. you'll need it to resusitate the believers later. If the Catholic religion accepts evolution then why are other religions so reluctant? Can you not incorporate both to satisfy either side? These debates will go on for ever and niether side will give. Science and Religion.....Help us all. For the believers, Do you really think God is not smart enough for science, Do you think he did not give us the ability to disprove his quandries? "
To Catsmeow and Harry bacca wrote on Mar 19, 2007 5:54 PM:
" I do know that there are somethings that God does not give us the ability to know or understand. As you said this conversation and debate will go on until the end. I feel for those that will be here to deal with it. Faith is about knowing without questions. Logic and science have nothing to do with faith. If God told you how water was made without anything you would not understand it anyway nor would I. It would be like trying to dive to the bottom of the ocean without any support. It is not for us to do nor understand. I have known many atheists and agnostics as well as all other manner of believes. As a Combat Marine I have seen and heard those very same people yell for Gods mercy when the bullets and bombs started booming. I will pray for you and hope that you find what you seek. By the way Catholics are not even close to being in the same believe system as I am. They believe in Jesus but that is about as far as we agree. Free will is why it seems they jump on whatever band wagon is popular at the time and in my thinking is not the way I believe. Harry, if you need a written invitation to God study the Bible and trust me you will find it there. God Bless you. "
catsmeow wrote on Mar 19, 2007 8:51 PM:
" Your right these debates will never end. But I will tell you this I thank God everyday for the health of my son, I pray that all of our military will return home safely. But I also am a nurse and I believe strongly in science. For if no science, we would not be able to cure the diseases thrown at us. But in the end we all become believers as we ask for Gods forgiveness, or pray to God not to let us die. I have said a prayer or two for patients that lay at deaths door. Many things we have to have faith in, medicine is one. People are cured of diseases without medicine, but pure faith, These I cannot explain. I have read the Bible and have many questions, I have read Darwin's books and have many questions. But I also say God Bless you to our troops, to my dying patients whom could not be cured by science. I understand both sides. To the Marine..Thank you, you play a great role in life. It take special people to do what you do. "
Believer wrote on Mar 19, 2007 9:31 PM:
" God did not leave us any absolute proof of his existence, except his word. He gave us the free will to have faith or not. Personally, I do believe in God. I am sorry for people who believe this world is all there is, what a sad thought. If I didn't have my faith I don't think I would have the courage to get up every day. Knowing that there is a better place waiting for me keeps me from being afraid. It gives me peace that nothing else can. I know that I am going to be alright no matter what happent to me here on earth, because this body is just something to carry my soul in until it is time to move on to heaven. Why would you want to take our faith from us? I don't go to a Church and i'm not a fan of organized religion, but the feeling I get in my heart and soul when I pray lets me know that God is there, waiting for me when my time here on earth is over. I will pray for everyone to somehow feel his love. God bless you and yours. "
Superlatives! wrote on Mar 19, 2007 9:37 PM:
" Thanks to everyone for their impassioned comments. Awarding the "best ofs" was no easy task, but it was certainly an entertaining one. And now, without further ado, the superlatives:
***Best monikers***
PCR mix alot
Ferrous Patella
Screwtape
(Honorable mention goes to Archaeopteryx; Klebsiella; Theorize this, sweetheart; and Captain Janeway)
***Best pop culture references***
Mr. Moore would have you believe that science is a process in which the correct answer should be chosen by debate, sort of like American Idol.
-Archaeopteryx
If evolution didn't happen then what is the alternative? Did two of every species just materialize out of thin air? Was there a puff fo smoke, or did they sort of fade in as if they were being transported from the Starship Enterprise?
-Ken
If we get into the habit of teaching faith as science then what is to stop the Moslems, Hindu's, Jooos, Ewoks, and the makers of Pez from wanting their faiths of creation to be taught.
-Harry Bacca
Ewoks please! I really don't like them.
-Can we leave out
***Most emphatic (and fun) slap-down***
Please get an education; your vapid arguments are a vulgar display of oxygen thievery.
-PCR mix alot
"if it was a fact then explain why Tom Arnold married and had children with Rosanne Barr!!!! Explain that one!"
-Darwinism in [sic] not a fact "
Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 19, 2007 9:38 PM:
" Semper Fi! But with that, I do not need an invitation to God, though I respect your very kind and sincere offer. I have my own relationship within my faith. One that you probably will not find much in the Bible. I respect the Bible and those that attempt to follow it, but I do not wear it openly upon my sleeves. It it is the content of your character along with the content of your actions that make/break you. I too served in the Scarlet and Gold. I bet if we had a good discussion we would come to a respectful compromise and would better illustrate each others belief system. We are not that far apart. I give the system of God a little more credit than, "he made it out of nothing". Hence my stern rebutal to that arguement. To say that we are not ready for God's explanation of how things were made is a stark contrast of the "he made it from nothing". I hope you respectfully see that difference. We have NO clue what God is/was/. Many follow a book as a guide but that is not enough to say anything of what is really going on behind our current reality. Creationism has some interesting concepts that are hard to find as fact cause most of it is based on a philosophical belief. Thank you for wearing the Eagle/Globe/Anchor! "
More superlatives wrote on Mar 19, 2007 9:42 PM:
" Too bad they don't allow carriage returns Anyway, best slapdowns continued: Would you be skeptical of a "critical analysis of static electricity" stuffed into your child's science class by people who worship Zeus and want your child to credit him with creating the lightning? Would you trust them to be honest in "teaching the controversy"? -Why indeed? %%%% To Mr or Mrs. Rick J. Black Sr. and Mr or Mrs. Jim Lendall ( I don't want to disrespect the possibilities that there may have been a change of gender, I respect those that evolve to a diffent gender)... -Harry Bacca %%%% You make a sound arguement that we still haven't evolved much past mutated monkeys. Way to keep the common denominator down to the absolute lowest form of existance. Keep up the good work, I'll be sending you a dreidel in the mail!" -To Hitler ////// *** Most entertainingly false point***
No new genetic information has ever been added to change, evolve, mutate a known species. This is scientific fact.
-Speaking the truth in love %%%% Science is a comglomoration of "theory" based on research and I think that since the Bible has survived or thousands of years without being disproven it is pretty good comparison.
-To Why Indeed "
and finally... wrote on Mar 19, 2007 9:45 PM:
" And the last category - ***Most inappropriate comment***
"It's good to teach both sides of EVERY argument. I perrsonally would like to be able to teach both sides of the Holocaust controversy. Just give me a few days in the classroom in front of your darling 8 & 9 year olds (their so impressionable at that age) and they'll come to see that Adolph Hilter wasn't such a bad guy!!! I only want them to be exposed to a critical analysis of the facts. God Bless America, our Fatherland HH"
-Hitler %%%%
I have known many atheists and agnostics as well as all other manner of believes. As a Combat Marine I have seen and heard those very same people yell for Gods mercy when the bullets and bombs started booming.
-To Catsmeow and Harry bacca %%%%
The current way [evolution] is being taught, with no questions allowed, is more suited to the North Korean approach to teaching about the "Dear Leader" Kim Jong Ill.
-Mark Moore %%%% Thanks again to all! "
Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 19, 2007 9:55 PM:
" This is real fun reading. Thank you Mr. or Mrs or Ms or Miss Superlatives! May God and Darwin Bless you! "
Superlatives wrote on Mar 19, 2007 10:21 PM:
" Mr. Bacca, You're welcome, and congratulations on your award! :) I have to say, I am glad that so many people are engaged in a discussion about their children's education. Even the insults are sort of heartwarming in a sick sort of way... it shows they really care. "
Exstinkshun wrote on Mar 19, 2007 11:27 PM:
" Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church every Sunday no matter what all them science folks say. "
believer wrote on Mar 20, 2007 12:43 AM:
" Exstinkshun, insulting people who believe in God does not make you a genius. "
Jim wrote on Mar 20, 2007 8:08 AM:
" A writer says:"Who says you can't create genes? Ever hear of recombinant DNA technology? Any gene can be created, duplicated, modified, and multiplied in vitro. Please get an education; your vapid arguments are a vulgar display of oxygen thievery. ".
You are so wrong sir. Recombinant DNA is the results of a chemical copying 'machine'. If you really want to prove your point, get a bunch of scientists together and have them make DNA FROM SCRATCH, a complete DNA. IMPOSSIBLE!
Jim "
Eric wrote on Mar 20, 2007 8:19 AM:
" Is there some reason why evolution is the only theory that people claim needs "critical analysis." I'm not sure of anything else in science class that we ask children to make a judgement call on.
This is just a fantastic way to waste taxpayers money as the school eventually has to defend this in court.
Please keep your proselytizing out of public schools. "
Darwin Theory wrote on Mar 20, 2007 8:35 AM:
" Darwin was wrong. Scientists have said so. Why do you still worship Darwin Theory? "
Fruitless arguing wrote on Mar 20, 2007 9:26 AM:
" Belief in Evolution and Christian faith are not mutually exclusive. The Bible was never intended as a science textbook. The Catholic church has no problem with evolution as science. "
To Fruitless arguing wrote on Mar 20, 2007 10:39 AM:
" Catholics are no more an authority on God than Scientists are on Jupiter. Truth is not an opinion it is fact. I do not agree with a lot of the Catholic ideas of faith and religion. If you are in the Truth then the Truth does not change with popular or unpopular opinion. Hey, Eric how long has it been since you were in school? I have been out for a while and many Science theories have been disproved and or changed hundreds of times. That is Science it is theory it is not always facts. Time itself changes nothing. God did give us the ability to reproduce and learn our environment. God also gave us freewill and the ability to know right from wrong. We are accountable for our actions, either here on Earth or in the next life. The answers are in the Bible but since it was written 2000 or so years ago we do not always understand the connotations or the answers get skewed by human interpertations. We are sometimes very self serving. The Truth however is not. The Bible was and is a divine guide that was inspired by God for us. It is not a text book. The Bible helps us to build a very personal relationship with God. My faith and understanding is like an infants view of the world. I am always learning and always seeking more. I pray the same for everyone. Read it, Believe it, because it is the Truth. "
Daoist wrote on Mar 20, 2007 10:55 AM:
" True believers who wish to put all their faith in the Bible are faced with three problems: (1) How can one know which books are "inspired" and should be part of the scriptural canon? (2) How can one know which one — if any — of the existing contradictory manuscripts of a given book preserves the "true" wording? (3) Assuming that one has the correct manuscript of a given book, how can one know what the particular Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic words mean? There is no way these questions can be answered with absolute certainty. At best, believers must trust to the probabilities — not certainties — that arise from a scientific investigation of the facts surrounding the biblical texts and traditions. Believers will have to face the fact that there is no way at all to know which Bible to believe — let alone what to believe in it. Believers still have to put their "faith" in other human beings. "
To Daoist wrote on Mar 20, 2007 11:03 AM:
" That information seems to be from a non believers stand point. The Bible is a Guide to a relationship with God. It is personal and is based on Faith in God. When you have a relationship the doubts are gone and you know and are lead by God. It is not about man it is about the Truth. It is in the Bible but to make it Personal you Pray. You put your Faith in God and teh Truth is known. It can not be explained it has to be experienced and felt. It is awesome and is a freedom that anyone can have. All you have to do is ask and believe it. "
they need to wrote on Mar 20, 2007 11:09 AM:
" I think they should...why is this always about Christianity? No matter WHAT I personally believe, our children need to be taught ALL ASPECTS OF SCIENCE AND BIOLOGY...the only thing is that when I was in school, I only remember being taught the big bang theory, not necessarily evolution (which people critique all the time) so why is critical analysis such a big deal all of a sudden? Just because someone want's to question it? It's all a question...it's called a theory!!! "
stalagmites wrote on Mar 20, 2007 11:15 AM:
" Sorry, I just can't help saying this...I (and I am sure most of us) have been taught to believe the Earth is millions and millions of years old with SCIENTIFIC PROOF to back that up..howeve I know something most of you don't know. I was in Oklahoma one time and was taking of a tour of one of the dams there.(the man made kind, no the beaver made kind) I noticed in the corner of the dam was a HUGE STALAGMITE..the same kind the scientists SWEAR it takes a million years to make.....how it got there? I know the dam wasn't but about 50 years old or so.hmmm........kinda makes you wonder? "
Captain Janeway wrote on Mar 20, 2007 11:56 AM:
" To Jim:
How do you think DNA replicates itself? It's doing a chemical copy.
Look up any of the genome projects that are going on or have been completed.
"
To Captain janeway wrote on Mar 20, 2007 12:03 PM:
" I think you are both saying the same thing. Jim is saying Science can not create a gene without something to start with. Like a milkshake, you got to have the ingredients or you have nothing. Nothing brand new has ever been created by man and it never will. We always have to use something, ice cream, milk, glass to put it in, and so on or it is nothing. We can not just think it in to being. Everything is from Something else. Science is at the very moment proving that they proved nothing in the Theory of Evolution. Darwin did not believe it he put it as a theory that did not explain much. "
Truth patrol wrote on Mar 20, 2007 1:56 PM:
" If the earth is only 6000 years old, then it is entirely likely that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church on Sunday. "
If... wrote on Mar 20, 2007 2:09 PM:
" The Moon was made out of Green Cheese then Wisconsin would have some competition. If...cars were able to run off of oxygen...then we wouldn't need to use oil. If...yeah, it all makes sense. "
Daoist wrote on Mar 20, 2007 2:25 PM:
" To lump me and my beliefs with ewoks, elves etc. is offensive and distasteful and really exposes your ignorance. My original post might have made you uncomfortable, but is was accurate. To believe in the bible is to put your faith in the MEN who rewrote it many times over. Good luck with your little religion. "
Are you an immortal yet? wrote on Mar 20, 2007 2:36 PM:
" So it is ok for you to talk down to people but not ok for people to talk down to you? Your original post didn't make me feel uncomfortable at all, it made me sad that someone who goes by the name of Daoist, will talk down and disrespect a group of people as if all the people associated with the intended derogatory comment are like that. Ah...wait, I was responding to your comments about all christians being arrogent and smug at the same time. Not the other post that you actually made sense in, so I apologies for not being more accurate with my own comments. Not all "Christians" are that arrogent and smug, saying that is like saying that all "Daoists" are arrogent and smug. So if maybe we are having a miscommunication. Some christians are idiots...yes. It would be safe to say that there are idiots in all of the religions and all of the cultures. "
nvm, I read your post from earlier wrote on Mar 20, 2007 2:39 PM:
" Somehow I missed it earlier. You are mostly correct in that post "True believers who wish to put all their faith in the Bible are faced with three problems" You are correct with that one. I just got upset when you "I feel sorry for christians. It must be hard to be that ignorant and smug at the same time." I don't like attacking an entire group cause of a few stubborn apples. "
Christian School Advocate wrote on Mar 20, 2007 3:30 PM:
" No wonder so many people choose Private Christian Schools, where we know what is taught and bases on what we believe, THE BIBLE. Also, no wonder so many people are now HOME SCHOOLING! To have leaders like you fighting like children. I will pray for each of you who continue to "stand firm" in your belief--- as I do mine! And I understand not everyone can "afford" private christian school, but after reading all of this, who would die on a hill trying to find a way to get money for it! At least they get what they are paying for. And, by the way, still pay the same public school taxes as everyone else does!! "
Christian School Sham wrote on Mar 20, 2007 4:00 PM:
" Advocate Christian schools at your own peril. Studies have shown that students at these schools have much lower science and math score on standardized tests than students enrolled in public schools. Science and math aptitude are the intellectual currency needed for the skilled jobs of tomorrow. There is no need to bequeath a legacy of poverty and ignorance to your children despite your best intentions. "
Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 20, 2007 4:08 PM:
" We are all children of "God" so of course we fight like "children". Duh! If you want to send your child to a school that teaches from the Bible, then which Bible does it teach from? I believe that was the intent of the arguement from Daoist. Is it the one that was re-written by person A, or was it the one that was put into language B, or ?. I have seen many of young school kids just as messed up from going to "Christian Schools" as I have seen messed up school kids from "Public School". Sending your child to a "Christian School" is nice if you want to force your child into believing a certain way of religous thought. The discussion here is should we bring in Creationism into the Public Schools as a learning tool while the students are studying Evolution concepts. As a religous person myself, I would have to give that right to the school district and those that are elected to make those decisions. If they can explain Creationism without preaching, I'd say go for it...but I find it hard for that to happen. If I had a vote, I'd vote for the scientific concepts of what Darwin clearified for us. Not so much of how we began, but how things Evolve. "
Stop this train wrote on Mar 20, 2007 5:02 PM:
" How did this discussion get hijacked into a creation and ID discussion? Eckard and Moore are advocating that an increase in the amount of data on EVOLUTION be made available to teachers. "
to truth patrol wrote on Mar 20, 2007 5:35 PM:
" If you were a little more educated on the subject you would know why the Earth isn't the same as when Adam and Eve were alive.(I'm not being crappy either). The Earth changed..it tells you why it changed in the Bible...can anyone comment on the stalagmite thing? Any explanations on that one? I want to know where the scientific proof is on that one?!? "
Just Thinking wrote on Mar 20, 2007 6:08 PM:
" There have been some very (and some not very)interesting comments posted thus far and I have been compelled to present some other points to ponder:
For one, why do some of the Christian points of view seem to have a disdain for Catholisism and Catholic beliefs? Was not the Catholic Church the first Christian Church? Did the Catholics not put together the Canons that make up the Bible that you find so in-errant? Further, evolution is not limited to the biological. Cultures evolve, languages evolve, and so to religions. This is obvious if you look at church (Christian)history and the Protestant Reformation and all the branches & beliefs (withing Christiandom) since. Most Christian Religions were against all forms of birth-control at one time or another but now most are only against abortion. The Catholics doctrine hasn't changed regarding that. Has Jeseus come back since that First Easter to tell Christians what they should or should not believe? Where is everyone getting the authority to interpret things as they see fit? Sounds like human-nature and gross rationalisation to me.
So if only an intelligent designer could create something out of nothing (like God did?); Who created God?
Mythology is only Myth because those Gods and their creation stories went extint as far as belief systems go. Just thinking..
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."-Thomas Jefferson "
Just Thinking wrote on Mar 20, 2007 6:27 PM:
" Somebody commented that "the scientists also once thought the World was flat". Actually, everybody did. At that time most scientist were part of the church (before the enlightenment). Remember, (if you've read any history besides Noah) scientists, philosiphers, etc. were persecuted (by the Christian Church) for positing new beliefs such as a round Earth, and a system of planets that revolve around the sun; just as Darwin (and Natural Selection) were eschewed because it was a new idea the Church could not come to grips with (especially a Biblical literalist). Scientists for the most part are not trying to kill religion of any sort; they are just trying to keep science as science. If people want to bring creationism (or intelligent design-it's other name) into the science classroom, then we should welcome the evolutionary scientist into Sunday school classrooms to give the "other theory". Science is Science, religion is religion. "History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose." (Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Baron von Humboldt, 1813 "
truth patrol wrote on Mar 20, 2007 6:59 PM:
" If you had gone to the Creationist museum, you would clearly see a photograph of early peoples riding dinosaurs. There is no need to attack peoples of faith. God certainly created the dinosaurs. "
From Ohio wrote on Mar 20, 2007 8:42 PM:
" Just passing thru on the Web. You have yourselves quite a contest going on here. Don't forget who this is all for... your children. With science growing and changing so quickly now, I think one day we'll find evolution and ID come into one. Hopefully one day... we'll know the truth. I'll butt out now. :) "
check it out wrote on Mar 20, 2007 11:31 PM:
" Just some food for thought. For anyone interested googlebomb Lee Strobel. See what he has to say on the issue. "
Flat Earth Myth wrote on Mar 21, 2007 8:41 AM:
" No one ever thought the earth was flat. Not even Columbus. That is a myth. "
Stuart wrote on Mar 21, 2007 8:35 PM:
" BUT wrote: "Where did the first "thing" or gene or whatever come from?
Good question, there a few hypotheses, but no definitive answers. On the other hand 3000 years ago people did not why it rained, why the sun rose and set, why the moon went through phases or why people got sick.
Do you think "God did it" was asatisfactory answer for those questions? If not, then why do you suppose it is an adequate answer for where the first gene came from? "
Harry Bacca wrote on Mar 21, 2007 9:00 PM:
" After reading more and more of the Creationist websites and such, I will vote against teaching Creationism as a counter to Evolution. I would also though vote against the concept of Evolution being taught in any "how we were created" manner. I would rather take my chances on being consistant with teaching our kids what we know (within our best capabilities of course) than to get into the habit of (again) teaching things that we "think" we know. Our species has had a really bad habit of teaching things that we think, rather than what we know. I know that if you put 100 of us on an island,... the fittest will survive and I know that hot chicks will probably mate with hot men before they mate with not-so-hot men. I know the lazy will either be eaten by me or they will learn to work in order to progress our society. It is mostly harmless to teach some of the fundamental no-brainers of Darwinism and the Evolution concept. It can be harmfull if we start allowing very questionable concepts to be made to the same level of "know" as other sciences. The schools can advise the students that there are alternative concepts to the creation etc, and to express the desires to research in libraries or local churches etc. As a religous person myself, I can not honestly support Creationism in its current state. "
Darwin did not... wrote on Mar 21, 2007 9:05 PM:
" ever say humans descended from apes, just that humans and apes came from a common ancestor. At least know what you are arguing against. "
update? wrote on Mar 21, 2007 10:37 PM:
" Does anyone know how the discussion went last night at the School Board meeting? I'm having trouble finding any information.
Also, this may be off-topic, but I disagree with the 3/19 commenter who asserted that "giants do not mate with 'little people.'" I would refer the commenter to the recent issue of "US Weekly" that had a feature called "My Little Giant," with pictures of very short and very tall celebrities who had decided to make a life for themselves together. "
Edward C, Dallas wrote on Mar 24, 2007 8:06 PM:
" I am amazed that the christians here are so convinced anyone wants to disprove the existence of god. There is no god, but it is not possible to prove a negative.
If your belief system is so fragile that a scientific fact can bring it to it's knees, it is a worthless belief system to begin with.
I am so tired of everyone complaining about American chidren falling behind the world in science and math while doing everything in their power to squelch the facts from the classroom that make sense of otherwise loosely connected facts.
I promise not to think in your church if you will not preach to the children in our schools!! "
G. Tingey wrote on Mar 25, 2007 1:49 AM:
" "The christains" who decry rvolution should be made aware (reminded?) of an evbent that took place about two years ago.
Richard Dawkins (yes, hin!) and the then Bishop of Oxford, the right reverend Richard Hrries, made a joint public declaration, on the record.
It was to the effect that - notwithstanding our differences over religion and god, we wish to denounce the proposals brought forward by the Discovery Institute, and others, that life was created, rather than eveolved, and that there is no conflict with christian religious belief (if you havr
e it) and evolution.
Now, the question arises, why are some christians so eager to remove a well-tried, and many-times tested basis of a huge amount of the modern niological sciences (not just "the origins of species", so to speak) from a scholl curriculum? "
Not already registered?
this should be interesting wrote on Mar 19, 2007 12:13 AM: