Creationism in Oklahoma Schools?

Can anyone give us an example of a fact that is not "theory" in a similar way that evolution is? Facts are supported by evidence. There is plenty of evidence to support evolution, and NONE to support that the Earth is 6000 years old.

Integrating religion into education this way, is like a corporation that loses sight of its product, and starts thinking that it exists to make everyone happy. Pretty soon another company will come along to make the neglected product, making the "happy people" company irrelevant.
 
Sunni Man said:
Theory means there is a "possibility"

But it in No way means "Fact"
Click to expand...

So gravity, germs, and relativity are "possibilities?"

Wrong.

In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable 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 theories commonly used to describe and explain this behavior are Newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and the theory of general relativity.

In common usage, the word theory is often used 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. This usage of theory leads to the common incorrect statements. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them.

According to the National Academy of Sciences,
Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature that is supported by many facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena.
Click to expand...
Source.
Click to expand...

If you're going to lie about science, just like you lie about homosexuals, the very least you can do is make it a convincing lie by knowing how science really works.
 
Last edited:
"Students shall not be penalized or rewarded on account of the religious content of their work."

I fail to see how labeling something wrong as right is not a reward of the wrong and punishment of the right.
 
Mark A. Siefert said:
If you're going to lie about science, just like you lie about homosexuals, the very least you can do is make it a convincing lie by knowing how science really works.
Click to expand...
You my friend are the one telling the lie.

Did I once use the word "scientific" in my refering to theory?
 
Sunni Man said:
You my friend are the one telling the lie.

Did I once use the word "scientific" in my refering to theory?
Click to expand...

First of all, I'm not your "friend," so don't call me one. I prefer to keep better company than the likes of you.

Secondly, you misused the word "theory." That is a scientific concept.
 
Last edited:
Sunni Man said:
You my friend are the one telling the lie.

Did I once use the word "scientific" in my refering to theory?
Click to expand...

You're being disingenuous. The word "theory" is being used in reference to evolution, as you well know. Evolution is a scientific theory.
 
Last edited:
Sunni Man said:
Why be so hateful and intolerant of others, just because they disagree with you?
Click to expand...
You have a lot of gall (none of the other thing, just gall) writing about hateful and intolerant to anyone. And you are still avoiding a certain reference I have provided for you in several place. No surprise, but...
 
After googling and reading Oklahoma House Bill 2211 I hit the following link

webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2007-08HB/HB2211_int.rtf

Which, in brief, allows students who wish to discuss religious matters to enjoy the same privilages as students who wish to discuss secular matters. It allows students who speak publically in normal student capacities (class officers, valedictorians, club leaders, etc.) and students who gather and interact in normal student capacities (Sports teams, Chess Club, Book of the Month Club) to also or instead gather to speak of their own personal religious topics. Doing so requires a disclaimer that the student is speaking of their own opinion ans does not reflect the student body or the school itself (yes, even for valediction speaches and assemblies of the like)

Sure, it might be a can of worms in the future, but it appears the intent is just to let everyone try to get along. If we want to chat about the latest Star Wars rumors, we can hang out by the bike rack and chat about Star Wars. Likewise, they can hang out and chat about Jesus Camp, if they like, with no consequenses so long as they follow other rules for hanging out at the bike racks.

Regarding actual educational content, this is all I could find (bolding mine)...

SECTION 4. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 27-104 of Title 70, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:
Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions. Homework and classroom assignments shall be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school district. Students shall not be penalized or rewarded on account of the religious content of their work.
Click to expand...

ARTICLE IV. RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION IN CLASS ASSIGNMENTS
Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of the submission by the student. Homework and classroom work shall be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school. Students shall not be penalized or rewarded on account of religious content. If the assignment given by a teacher involves writing a poem, the work of a student who submits a poem in the form of a prayer (for example, a psalm) should be judged on the basis of academic standards, including literary quality, and not penalized or rewarded on account of its religious content.
Click to expand...

It seems the intent is not to undermine the education process, but to simply prevent classwork being graded for good or bad solely based on the religious content or lack thereof. The world was still formed 4.5 billion years ago, Washington was still the first president, etc. Again, maybe it opens up a can of worms, but the writing seems to be specific enough that the material needs to be graded for accuracy based on the school's curriculum, not based on the individual student's beliefs as has been mentioned previously.

Should there be a more current and accurate copy of the bill, please clue me in so I can revise.
 
SezMe said:
Sunni Man, how old is the Earth and on what do you base that answer?
Click to expand...



Islam does not have a set position on the actual age of the Earth, leaving such knowledge to God alone.

The Qur'an does describe the creation of the universe in "six days," but then in other passages indicates that a "day" to us is different than a "day" in God's reckoning of time.

In other words, a day could be a million years or a billion years.
 
So much for Oklahoma.

Diplomas and grades from schools there were will be more worthless than they already are.

So it goes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom