• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Kansas anti-darwinism

Deetee

Illuminator
Deetee
Joined
Jul 8, 2003
Messages
3,789
Seems like its woo time over in the southern USofA again - now Kansas are trying it on:

The Times (UK) May 07, 2005

Scientists protest as school chiefs put Darwin on trial
From James Bone in New York

CHARLES DARWIN’S theory of evolution is facing a new challenge in America from Christians who argue that life shows an “intelligent design”.

The Kansas Board of Education has begun taking evidence from anti-evolution scientists in a bid to rewrite the state’s teaching standards to ensure that pupils learn alternatives to evolution that suggest a guiding hand in the origin of life.

etc etc.

Can individual school boards take these steps whenever they feel like it? Surely someone can come up with a solution to this type of nonsense and abuse of the educational system?

see also: http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3271910a12,00.html
 
I grew up in the Kansas School district.

Fortunately my Science teachers weren't persuaded by the fringe fanatics.

I got some excellent learning in biology, and later in High School, a class on genetics and the origin of species. In fact our high school was one of two in the state that had a genetics curriculum, involving hands-on experiments with DNA testing and sitting in on Genetics Seminars. Unfortunately the teacher who wrote the curriculum passed away several years ago, and I'm not sure there's been anyone to pick up the torch.
But there are great science teachers in those schools, and hopefully the no-nonsense science instruction can withstand the misguided superstitious individuals who are afraid of what they don't understand. (In this day and age, you'd think that they would be the exception instead of the norm.)

And calling them Scientists...They're doing backwards science...They have a conclusion then are looking for 'scientific evidence' to support it. Of course they're going to find it, and incredibly they won't find any evidence that disputes their conclusion. :eek:
 
How much autonomy do the school boards have? Do they control the curriculum, or do they have to conform to certain subjects?
It seems strange a board can decide what is to be taught - Could they for example decide to teach that the world was flat?
 
It seems they have quite a bit of power over curriculum requirements. If you take a look at the business with the stickers in text-books. That's just one example of how a group of politicians can meddle in education. I know my Genetics teacher was constantly under presure to do things he didn't want to do in his class, and he refused to them, and we thanked him for it. And the man was Catholic! Born, raised, living believer, and so am I! (Not Catholic, but Methodist) But we know the difference between science and religion. Oh, I'm on a tangent...But appearantly the Board has quite some weight to lean with, fortunately they had more important battles to fight while I was in HS, so they pretty much left us alone to learn proper science.
I'm sure that the teachers I'm familiar with, if required, would pay lip-service to the alternate "theories" then move on to serious science.
And really, most of the students know what the score is...We got enough of a foundation in the Scientific Method in elementary school to know the difference between Science and Psuedo-Science. It seems to me that the strongest voices are those who've forgotten what it means to test a hypothosis subjectively, without fixing the results so the conclusion matches the hypothesis.

I mean, fudging the facts to match a predetermined answer is all well and good if you're just trying to get a good grade on a project... but real life doesn't work that way.

I honestly believe the majority of people in this fight are well-meaning people who have been mislead by their leadership. And unfortunately the average High Schooler's parents are so far out of the loop in science and technology that they have no idea where to begin in their quest for answers. So instead of setting off on a wild goose chase, they accept whatever people are offering them, and as usuall, the fanatics are making the most noise.
 
Creationist are always saying that they have all the evidence they need in the Bible, so why don't they just teach their "science" in their sunday schools?
 
??? "Intelligent Design" is not "anti-evolution."
 
Keneke said:
Just a small pet peeve: Kansas isn't in the South. Nowhere near.
Click to expand...

The North calls us the South, the south Calls us the North the East calls us the West, and the West calls us the East....

We're MIDWEST BABY!

:D
 
bigred said:
??? "Intelligent Design" is not "anti-evolution."
Click to expand...

Itelligent Design is based entirely on evolution's "short comings". ID makes no predictions and, as such, there will never be evidence that favors that hypothesis.

Intelligent design is anti-evolution in every way.
 
I'm with KingMerv00. I saw a copy of the ID curriculum. They spun evolution in a way that made it meaningless. Everything was taken out of context. It would be like taking a carburator out of a car and telling kids there's no way an engine could work because "just look at this lifeless carburator".

It was totally 100% anti-evolution.

For example, in Sunday school they will take a broken up clock and shake it around in a bag. Then they'll go on about how evolution is nonsense because it is like trying to make a clock by shaking its parts around in the bag. The school curriculum was no better.
It tries to prove “intelligent design” true by disproving something else.
Click to expand...

http://www.pandasthumb.org/pt-archives/000577.html
 
If you want to read some of the proposals that Kansas is considering, take a look at this document. This is "Proposed Revisions to Kansas Science Standards Draft 2." Be warned: you will need a strong stomach, because much of the text is nauseating.

The document begins with a nod to the oddly named No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, in which the Congress offered the following advice:
"The Conferees recognize that a quality science education should prepare students to distinguish the data and testable theories of science from religious or philosophical claims that are made in the name of science. Where topics are taught that may generate controversy (such as biological evolution), the curriculum should help students to understand the full range of scientific views that exist, why such topics may generate controversy, and how scientific discoveries can profoundly affect society."
Click to expand...
These two sentences are contradictory. Religion should not be taught as science, except where there is a controversy. It does not matter whether the controversy has validity or not; it matters only that there is a controversy.

The document then proposes that natural explanations for things are not the only possible scientific explanations:
Opponents seek to significantly limit the amount of scientific information provided to students about the most fundamental question humanity may address–-What is the origin of life and its diversity? Where do we come from? They would narrow the scope of information to that which will not contradict the naturalistic claim that life is adequately explained by chance interactions of matter according to the laws of physics and chemistry. This philosophy allows only "natural" or mechanistic material causes for the origin and diversity of life. It requires that evidence and criticisms that challenge Darwinian evolution (the primary theory that supports the philosophy of Naturalism) not be permitted.
Click to expand...
Limiting students to natural explanations is "discrimination," and causes students to be uninformed. And as if this isn't bizarre enough, the document goes on to say that "an indoctrination in the philosophy of Naturalism would seem to offend Constitutional principles." In other words, the explanation that biological effects have natural causes is actually a religious explanation!

Welcome to the Bizarro world, where everything is backwards! Students who learn natural explanations are being indoctrinated with religion, while students who learn intelligent design become "informed."

Will Kansas teach, I wonder, my theories that compete with evolution? My evidence in support of my theories is just as good as the evidence supporting intelligent design. If I tell Kansas that my theories hold that both evolution and intelligent design are wrong, have I created a "controversy?" Would not the students be ignoramuses if they didn't at least get presented with my theories as well?
 
Deetee said:
The Kansas Board of Education has begun taking evidence from anti-evolution scientists in a bid to rewrite the state’s teaching standards to ensure that pupils learn alternatives to evolution that suggest a guiding hand in the origin of life.
Click to expand...

Taking evidence my @$$. There is no legitimate anti-evolution evidence. Whatever the Kansas Board of Eduction is happily taking is not evidence.

Anti-evolution scientists? Not by any legitimate definition of scientist. Has one of them actually done any actual peer-reviewed research in the field they are 'giving evidence' about?
 
Keneke said:
Just a small pet peeve: Kansas isn't in the South. Nowhere near.
Click to expand...

Sorry - its been a long time since my last alien abduction visit. Anal probing revealed cerebral neurodepletion in the earthlings from Kansas that was equivalent to those from Alabama. So I just assumed....
:)
 
I went to Central Christian Acadamy in Wichita Kansas. My teacher said, as best as I can remember, that scientists explain snow as being made in the clouds where water and ice is combined.

She said that this is impossible. She demonstrated how this is impossible by putting icecubes in a pitcher of water and stirring it around. She let us all look and said something like "see, no snow".

Her conclusion; God makes snow.
 
This story is not being covered in any meaningful way by the major news media. And for good reason. Dembski, Meyer and company are showing themselves for the flagrant liars and cheats they really are. The Discovery Institute, amongst others are in a place of extreme conflict of interest as they stand to make millions of dollars both in donations and the sale of phony science text books to already strapped educational systems. From Panda's Thumb:
http://www.pandasthumb.org/
There are two bloggers reporting from Kansas. Apparently Meyer did not even bother to show up, and teleconferenced in. He then spewed out his usual propaganda and refused to answer questions about his presentation.
What is more bizarre is that the creationists have hired the spokesperson for an islamic terrorist group to represent ID. The link is here: http://www.pitch.com/issues/2005-05-05/news/feature_print.html
What next? I suppose Meyer could not bring in Osama Bin Laden as it might be too "high profile."
The islamic guy stated that one of the major reasons islamic countries hate america is that we teach science to children, and that if we teach creationism they will like us. This is the most absurd thing ever.
The idea that an islamic terrorist, people with virtually no science education and the documented liars of the DI writing science standards (or any school standards) for Kansas is obscene.
What is worse is that Bush will just let it happen, because it is obvious he also wants creationism in public schools. His silence is the loudest noise in Kansas.
The obsession of the ID proponents on "naturalism" and "scientific materialism" is laughable. It is clear they do not understand either theology or science. There is an interesting tactic of the IDers who claim science is "scientific materialism" and is a religion similar to a fundamentalist biblical worldview. Because of this, changes should be made to geology, biology and physics classes to support ID (erase damning evidence supporting evolution.) I just have to throw my arms up in the air here at how the public puts up with this circus act.
 
Deetee said:
Anal probing revealed cerebral neurodepletion in the earthlings from Kansas that was equivalent to those from Alabama. So I just assumed....
:)
Click to expand...

I'm from Kansas! :mad:
 
Quasi said:
What is worse is that Bush will just let it happen, because it is obvious he also wants creationism in public schools. His silence is the loudest noise in Kansas.
Click to expand...
What's Bush got to do with it? He has no authority, and a president has never taken sides in school debates.

There was an interesting interview on NPR yesterday, in which Slate's Will Saletan makes the case that the Creationists are evolving, and it's the evolutionists who can't see it. From the interview:
The people who testified... this time seemed to accept that the Earth is four and a half billion years old, and once you accept that, you're on the slippery slope to reality.

...

They already accepted there is microevolution, that there is natural selection and adaptation, they've accepted conventional fossil dating, and most important, they've accepted the idea that every hypothesis has to be falsifiable, and if it's falsified, whether or not it's in the Bible, it goes out the window. Once you accept those things, you are on the way to accepting the principle of evolution.
Click to expand...
You can hear the interview at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4648173

Also be sure to read the Slate article at http://slate.com/id/2118320/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom