Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:58 pm Posts: 1148 Location: Green Bay
I know there are a few different threads related to this, but I thought the decision deserved its own new thread.
Quote:
Kansas education board downplays evolution State school board OKs standards casting doubt on Darwin MSNBC News Services Updated: 6:53 p.m. ET Nov. 8, 2005
TOPEKA, Kan. - Risking the kind of nationwide ridicule it faced six years ago, the Kansas Board of Education approved new public-school science standards Tuesday that cast doubt on the theory of evolution.
The 6-4 vote was a victory for “intelligent design” advocates who helped draft the standards. Intelligent design holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by a higher power.
Critics of the new language charged that it was an attempt to inject God and creationism into public schools in violation of the separation of church and state.
All six of those who voted for the new standards were Republicans. Two Republicans and two Democrats voted no.
“This is a sad day. We’re becoming a laughingstock of not only the nation, but of the world, and I hate that,” said board member Janet Waugh, a Kansas City Democrat.
Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, said the decision would encourage school districts in Kansas and elsewhere to make similar moves, distracting and confusing teachers and students.
“It will be marketed by the religious right ... as a huge victory for their side,” she said. “We can expect more efforts to get creationism in.”
Supporters of the new standards said they would promote academic freedom.
“This is a great day for education. This is one of the best things that we can do,” said board chairman Steve Abrams. Another board member who voted in favor of the standards, John Bacon, said the move “gets rid of a lot of dogma that’s being taught in the classroom today.”
The Seattle-based Discovery Institute, which supports challenges to Darwinian evolutionary theory, praised the Kansas effort. “Students will learn more about evolution, not less as some Darwinists have falsely claimed,” institute spokesman Casey Luskin said in a written statement.
What the new standards say The new standards say high school students must understand major evolutionary concepts. But they also declare that the basic Darwinian theory that all life had a common origin and that natural chemical processes created the building blocks of life have been challenged in recent years by fossil evidence and molecular biology.
In addition, the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.
The new standards will be used to develop student tests measuring how well schools teach science. Decisions about what is taught in classrooms will remain with 300 local school boards, but some educators fear pressure will increase in some communities to teach less about evolution or more about creationism or intelligent design.
The vote marked the third time in six years that the Kansas board has rewritten standards with evolution as the central issue.
Educational deja vu In 1999, the board eliminated most references to evolution. Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould said that was akin to teaching “American history without Lincoln.” Bill Nye, the “Science Guy” of children’s television, called it “harebrained” and “nutty.” And a Washington Post columnist imagined God saying to the Kansas board members: “Man, I gave you a brain. Use it, OK?”
Two years later, after voters replaced three members, the board reverted to evolution-friendly standards. Elections in 2002 and 2004 changed the board’s composition again, making it more conservative.
The latest vote likely to bring fresh national criticism to Kansas and cause many scientists to see the state as backward.
Many scientists and other critics contend creationists repackaged old ideas in new, scientific-sounding language to get around a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1987 against teaching the biblical story of creation in public schools.
The Kansas board’s action is part of a national debate. In Pennsylvania, a judge is expected to rule soon in a lawsuit against the Dover school board’s policy of requiring high school students to learn about intelligent design in biology class. In August, President Bush endorsed teaching intelligent design alongside evolution.
In an effort to fight back against intelligent-design advocates, a grass-roots group calling itself Campaign to Defend the Constitution said Tuesday that it was launching a $200,000 online ad campaign “to combat a threat posed by the religious right to American democracy.”
“This is a significant attack on science,” said Jack Krebs, vice president of Kansas Citizens for Science. “They really are advancing a sectarian religious view. They’re treading on constitutional grounds.”
_________________ When the last living thing Has died on account of us, How poetical it would be If Earth could say, In a voice floating up Perhaps From the floor Of the Grand Canyon, "It is done. People did not like it here.''
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:18 am Posts: 3920 Location: Philadelphia
I like the title of the thread. I read this earlier and I'm glad I live in a blue state where my child can one day learn science and truth. I'm kind of indifferent to this story really, sorry to say, but i don't give two fucks about Kansas and don't really care what they are teaching. I guess I should really, but I don't.
My only thought is. When a question comes up on a test, such as
1. "Is it possible for anything to travel at the speed of light?" Can an answer be "Yes, but only if God wants it to."?
It just seems like a cop-out for when you don't know an answer or when you don't feel like thinking too hard. Well, Happy 1892 Kansas, one day, hopefully you'll catch up.
_________________ I remember doing nothing on the night Sinatra died
And the night Jeff Buckley died
And the night Kurt Cobain died
And the night John Lennon died
I remember I stayed up to watch the news with everyone
Post subject: Re: Kansas...don't do the evolution...
Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:12 am
Got Some
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:58 pm Posts: 1148 Location: Green Bay
Quote:
In addition, the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.
This is the part that astonishes me the most. The previous definition doesn't allow your ideas to be taught, so you just change the definition? How handy.
_________________ When the last living thing Has died on account of us, How poetical it would be If Earth could say, In a voice floating up Perhaps From the floor Of the Grand Canyon, "It is done. People did not like it here.''
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:02 am Posts: 1918 Location: Ephrata
I will never understand why people are so against science and it's quest for truth. If there's anything that will prove the existence of God it will be science. In fact, it's science that's helping us to even understand what questions we should ask.
i think the greatest sin is not using your brain to its full potential
_________________ no need for those it's all over your clothes it's all over your face it's all over your nose
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
ranting in e-minor wrote:
My only thought is. When a question comes up on a test, such as 1. "Is it possible for anything to travel at the speed of light?" Can an answer be "Yes, but only if God wants it to."?
Let there be Quantum Physics!
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:58 pm Posts: 1148 Location: Green Bay
Peeps wrote:
so let me get this straight......
celebrating xmas is bad, because it forces your ideas of religion onto kids
but teaching that theres no such thing as religion is good, because it debunks religious beliefs
*head explodes*
I think it's safe to say that you've completely missed the point.
_________________ When the last living thing Has died on account of us, How poetical it would be If Earth could say, In a voice floating up Perhaps From the floor Of the Grand Canyon, "It is done. People did not like it here.''
celebrating xmas is bad, because it forces your ideas of religion onto kids
but teaching that theres no such thing as religion is good, because it debunks religious beliefs
*head explodes*
I think it's safe to say that you've completely missed the point.
no i didnt...give it time, there will be people bashing the teaching of a higher power being taught in schools. i happen to believe in a higher power and that he created everything, but did so through evolution
I'm still uncertain as to why some people are so desperate to ensure that time in schools get devoted to teaching theistic beliefs. It's not like there aren't venues for that already in place, and it's odd to present a belief-centered idea as being equally scientifically valued as the notion of biological change. I would think that you start to risk warping children's notion of scientific process.
Also, where's the love for the flying spaghetti monster in all of this?
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:18 am Posts: 3920 Location: Philadelphia
In my eyes this is also nothing more than a way of teaching Genesis and Adam and Eve and serpant's in a public school. I'm sure people will disagree, but im not so naive. I do not look down on any believing in what they want, but to teach, to this point, unproven things such as god created the earth, etc. is wrong in a public tax funded school. In your church or private school, more than fine. But to think that this is nothing more than another Scope's Monkey Trial vibe of god created everything and science is wrong is absurd.
_________________ I remember doing nothing on the night Sinatra died
And the night Jeff Buckley died
And the night Kurt Cobain died
And the night John Lennon died
I remember I stayed up to watch the news with everyone
In my eyes this is also nothing more than a way of teaching Genesis and Adam and Eve and serpant's in a public school. I'm sure people will disagree, but im not so naive. I do not look down on any believing in what they want, but to teach, to this point, unproven things such as god created the earth, etc. is wrong in a public tax funded school. In your church or private school, more than fine. But to think that this is nothing more than another Scope's Monkey Trial vibe of god created everything and science is wrong is absurd.
tell me this, can you prove 100% that there is no GOD, and he didnt create man through evolution?
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:18 am Posts: 3920 Location: Philadelphia
Quote:
ranting in e-minor wrote: In my eyes this is also nothing more than a way of teaching Genesis and Adam and Eve and serpant's in a public school. I'm sure people will disagree, but im not so naive. I do not look down on any believing in what they want, but to teach, to this point, unproven things such as god created the earth, etc. is wrong in a public tax funded school. In your church or private school, more than fine. But to think that this is nothing more than another Scope's Monkey Trial vibe of god created everything and science is wrong is absurd.
tell me this, can you prove 100% that there is no GOD, and he didnt create man through evolution?
Absolutely not. No more than you can disprove that a unicorn sneezed and out of it an awesome bang was created and the tiny particles created what we know as the universe. Are they going to teach that? Of course not, but I think it could of happened so they should, to atleast be fair to me. We already know that they are going to teach God created everything and that this is his master plan. Well, I'm now offended because I happen to think that god is a woman, so the word "it" should be substituted, no? Do we make ID as credible as Darwin or science, then where does that stop. Are the Laws of Gravity no good now because God makes apples fall from trees? Are you seeing how ridiculous (sp?) ID will turn out to be.
Peeps, I happen to have a similar viewpoint to yours on the beginning of the universe, but I just think teaching it in public schools only leads to more confusion and speculation and a loss for what is proven fact and what is someones religious or spiritual belief. If you want your child to learn about God, then he/she should be taught at home or a church about those beliefs. Unfortunately, too many of those families are busy getting everyone in America to boycot girl inc. babydolls.
_________________ I remember doing nothing on the night Sinatra died
And the night Jeff Buckley died
And the night Kurt Cobain died
And the night John Lennon died
I remember I stayed up to watch the news with everyone
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:58 pm Posts: 1148 Location: Green Bay
Peeps wrote:
ranting in e-minor wrote:
In my eyes this is also nothing more than a way of teaching Genesis and Adam and Eve and serpant's in a public school. I'm sure people will disagree, but im not so naive. I do not look down on any believing in what they want, but to teach, to this point, unproven things such as god created the earth, etc. is wrong in a public tax funded school. In your church or private school, more than fine. But to think that this is nothing more than another Scope's Monkey Trial vibe of god created everything and science is wrong is absurd.
tell me this, can you prove 100% that there is no GOD, and he didnt create man through evolution?
Is this where we tell our kids it's okay to believe in anything they want, as long as nobody else can prove it wrong? You can do that at your home and at your church, but not at my school and not to my kids.
_________________ When the last living thing Has died on account of us, How poetical it would be If Earth could say, In a voice floating up Perhaps From the floor Of the Grand Canyon, "It is done. People did not like it here.''
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:58 pm Posts: 1148 Location: Green Bay
Peeps wrote:
energystar wrote:
Peeps wrote:
so let me get this straight......
celebrating xmas is bad, because it forces your ideas of religion onto kids
but teaching that theres no such thing as religion is good, because it debunks religious beliefs
*head explodes*
I think it's safe to say that you've completely missed the point.
no i didnt...give it time, there will be people bashing the teaching of a higher power being taught in schools. i happen to believe in a higher power and that he created everything, but did so through evolution
Let me say this again...you've missed the point. The whole point of this argument is centered around people's dislike of teaching supernatural phenomenon in a science class. You know...science...the search for natural explanations to phenomena (unless you live in Kansas).
_________________ When the last living thing Has died on account of us, How poetical it would be If Earth could say, In a voice floating up Perhaps From the floor Of the Grand Canyon, "It is done. People did not like it here.''
Last edited by energystar on Wed Nov 09, 2005 12:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:54 am Posts: 7189 Location: CA
Peeps wrote:
ranting in e-minor wrote:
In my eyes this is also nothing more than a way of teaching Genesis and Adam and Eve and serpant's in a public school. I'm sure people will disagree, but im not so naive. I do not look down on any believing in what they want, but to teach, to this point, unproven things such as god created the earth, etc. is wrong in a public tax funded school. In your church or private school, more than fine. But to think that this is nothing more than another Scope's Monkey Trial vibe of god created everything and science is wrong is absurd.
tell me this, can you prove 100% that there is no GOD, and he didnt create man through evolution?
Peeps, you know I love you, but do you think that the possibility of a higher power creating the universe needs to be discussed beyond a one sentence overview such as: "Evolution and the possibility of a higher power / higher powers / your mom creating all living organisms are not mutually exclusive." ?
Peeps, you know I love you, but do you think that the possibility of a higher power creating the universe needs to be discussed beyond a one sentence overview such as: "Evolution and the possibility of a higher power / higher powers / your mom creating all living organisms are not mutually exclusive." ?
i honestly couldnt tell you with being 100% positive, how the universe was created, but i do know there are two prevailing theories. i would see no problem in saying, the first theory that people believe is in the garden of eden (and all that stuff, i would cut short of anything after the garden) .......and then say, and another group of people believe this dirt ball we call home is an extrodinary coincidence of such a magnitude that its very possible that it never ever ever happened again in the universe
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
