TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- creationism making a comeback in texas
Pages (9): [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 »

creationism making a comeback in texas

quote:

The Texas Board of Education approved a science curriculum that opens the door for teachers and textbooks to raise doubts about evolution. Critics of evolution said they were thrilled with Friday's move. "Texas has sent a clear message that evolution should be taught as a scientific theory open to critical scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can't be questioned," said Dr. John West, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, a Seattle think tank that argues an intelligent designer created life. Kathy Miller, president of the pro-evolution Texas Freedom Network, said, "The board crafted a road map that creationists will use to pressure publishers into putting phony arguments attacking established science into textbooks." Science standards in Texas resonate across the U.S., since it approves one set of books for the entire state. That makes Texas the nation's single largest market for high-school textbooks. In the past, publishers often have written texts to its curriculum and marketed them nationally rather than spend time and money reworking them for different states and districts. That influence has diminished, said Jay Diskey, executive director of the Association of American Publishers' school division, as districts and statewide boards of education have become more likely to scrutinize texts approved in other states. Desktop publishing also has made it easier for companies to amend textbooks to suit different markets. "It's not necessarily the case" that the Texas curriculum will pop up in other states, Mr. Diskey said. But within Texas, what the board says, goes. Several years ago, the board expressed concern that a description of the Ice Age occurring "millions of years ago" conflicted with biblical timelines. The publisher changed it to "in the distant past." Another publisher sought to satisfy the board by inserting a heading about "strengths and weaknesses of evolution" in a biology text, drawing condemnation from science organizations. The board will use the new standards to choose new textbooks in 2011. Friday's meeting started with a victory for backers of evolution. The board voted to remove a longstanding requirement that students analyze the "strengths and weaknesses" of the theory. Mainstream scientists resoundingly reject that language, saying there are no weak links in the theory of evolution, which has been corroborated by discoveries in fields ranging from genetics to geology. Through the afternoon, board members offered up a series of amendments and counter-amendments designed to shape presentations in biology classes across the state. The board voted down curriculum standards questioning the evolutionary principle that all life on Earth is descended from common ancestry. Yet the board approved standards that require students to analyze and evaluate the fossil record and the complexity of the cell. Social conservatives on the board, led by chairman Don McLeroy, have made clear they expect books to address those topics by raising questions about the validity of evolutionary theory. For instance, they want textbooks to suggest the theory of evolution is undercut by fossils that show some organisms -- such as ferns -- haven't changed much over millions of years. They also want texts to discuss the explosion of life forms during the Cambrian Era as inconsistent with the incremental march of evolution. Scientists respond that the fossil record clearly traces the roots of Cambrian Era creatures back as far as 100 million years. It isn't just evolution at issue: The board also approved an earth-science curriculum that challenges the widely accepted Big Bang Theory. Students are expected to learn that there are "differing theories" on the "origin and history of the universe." Board members also deleted a reference to the scientific consensus that the universe is nearly 14 billion years old. The board's chairman has said he believes God created the universe fewer than 10,000 years ago.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123819751472561761.html

i dont really have anything to say. i mean, what is there to say?

FUCK

quote:

It isn't just evolution at issue: The board also approved an earth-science curriculum that challenges the widely accepted Big Bang Theory. Students are expected to learn that there are "differing theories" on the "origin and history of the universe."

Wow..... like the theory that some God created the whole entire universe in 7 days?

quote:

Board members also deleted a reference to the scientific consensus that the universe is nearly 14 billion years old. The board's chairman has said he believes God created the universe fewer than 10,000 years ago.

*cry*

Oh well, at least Alex is happy about this.

they took errr jerrrbbs

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt *cry* Oh well, at least Alex is happy about this.

You're an idiot.

Since when have I ever defended creationism as an alternative to evolution?

I agree with the first few lines of the article, that's it. Every theory should be put under scrutiny and I don't see why evolution should be any different if we're to better understand it.

quote:

Originally posted by Alex You're an idiot. Since when have I ever defended creationism as an alternative to evolution? I agree with the first few lines of the article, that's it. Every theory should be put under scrutiny and I don't see why evolution should be any different if we're to better understand it.

Evolution is not under scrutiny here. It is being attacked as false from the basis of an unscientific ancient religious text, when clearly evolution is the truth in explaining what we see today. There is no "alternative theory". I'm not saying you believe in creationism, but I'm just saying why the creationists, and especially the Texas Board of Education is so flat out wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Evolution is not under scrutiny here. It is being attacked as false from the basis of an unscientific ancient religious text, when clearly evolution is the truth in explaining what we see today. There is no "alternative theory". I'm not saying you believe in creationism, but I'm just saying why the creationists, and especially the Texas Board of Education is so flat out wrong.

w0rd. When they say 'students need to know other theories are out there' the only opposing theory they're offering is 'god'

Its not like the science community have a small handful of various theories other than evolution. Stupid design is the only other alternative they're offering, and any refutation of the extremely probably theory of evolution comes from creationists. Some of those poor children are doomed.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Evolution is not under scrutiny here. It is being attacked as false from the basis of an unscientific ancient religious text, when clearly evolution is the truth in explaining what we see today. There is no "alternative theory". I'm not saying you believe in creationism, but I'm just saying why the creationists, and especially the Texas Board of Education is so flat out wrong.

I agree that they are wrong.

I just wanted to point out that people shouldn't just accept evolution based on the fact they hate religion. Especially when the vast majority of people understand neither.

quote:

Originally posted by Alex I just wanted to point out that people shouldn't just accept evolution based on the fact they hate religion. Especially when the vast majority of people understand neither.

Of course not. They should accept it because of the vast innumerable pieces of evidence which support evolution by natural selection. I also want to point out that evolution says nothing about the origin of the universe or god. I really don't understand this false dichotomy of creationists who equate the truth of evolution as the refutation of god. If God really did create the universe, it's obvious that evolution is the mechanism by which he did it.

I don't see evolution as a threat to the existence of God either. It's just stupid that many theists and atheists think it to be, without understanding either side and deciding one's right based on evidence they've never analyzed themselves.

I mean shit, Darwin was a bloody Anglican

quote:

Originally posted by Alex I don't see evolution as a threat to the existence of God either. It's just stupid that many theists and atheists think it to be, without understanding either side and deciding one's right based on evidence they've never analyzed themselves. I mean shit, Darwin was a bloody Anglican

To pretend they are on equal footing however is ridiculous. This is what most religious people want to do..pretend that there just happen to be different theories and that either of them could be correct. They want to pretend that the scales of probability are 50/50 when in fact there are MOUNTAINS of scientific evidence supporting evolution..and zero evidence supporting creationism.

Most religious people? Do you have any proof of this?

There is a world outside of the evangelical United States. The religious you're thinking of are about 80 million people in the USA.

I cant stand these pricks that use "theory not fact!" as an arguement. if i had a godamn nickel...do they even know some of the phenomena that consitute as theory?

anyways, this is definately a stepback, but its the homeschooled kids i worry about most. I came across a survey which i cant locate that said 75 percent of homeschooled kids in the US were from the bible belt region and evangelical. How on earth will you ever be able to influence their world view when barriers are erected everytime anything darwinian related is mentioned?

the last sentence in that article made me puke a little in my mouth.

have you guys heard this argument-"why can we see light from galaxies hundreds of millions of light years away if the earth is 6 000 years old?"

"God can do anything. he can tamper and create this illusion to test our faith."

faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaakkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

atleast Hovinds in jail

The truth is Evangelicals actually have huge drop off numbers.

They convert millions but lose millions a week later, simply because their views are so outlandish and in many regards stupid. There is no way an atheist can talk to an Evangelical about anything, for the most part they will not listen and simply call you a heathen.

I've been called a heathen many many times by Evangelicals, Baptists and Pentecostals, but at the very least they gave me the time of day. An atheist/agnostic wouldn't stand much chance talking to these types of people because they believe in only ONE thing as truth and that's The Bible.

For the most part if you were able to show them right in front of their eyes that something in the Bible is without a doubt a mistake, they will cease being Christian immediately because that's how much importance they put on Biblical literalism.

You can try and distinguish yourself from them if you want alex, but the fact is you share their beliefs on the major myths of the bible..the stories about Jesus that completely defy logic and the laws of physics. If you are religious at all, you can't be that much of a heathen.

quote:

Originally posted by Alex I just wanted to point out that people shouldn't just accept evolution based on the fact they hate religion. Especially when the vast majority of people understand neither.

quote:

Originally posted by Alex Most religious people? Do you have any proof of this?

quote:

Originally posted by Alex The truth is Evangelicals actually have huge drop off numbers. They convert millions but lose millions a week later, simply because their views are so outlandish and in many regards stupid. There is no way an atheist can talk to an Evangelical about anything, for the most part they will not listen and simply call you a heathen. I've been called a heathen many many times by Evangelicals, Baptists and Pentecostals, but at the very least they gave me the time of day. An atheist/agnostic wouldn't stand much chance talking to these types of people because they believe in only ONE thing as truth and that's The Bible. For the most part if you were able to show them right in front of their eyes that something in the Bible is without a doubt a mistake, they will cease being Christian immediately because that's how much importance they put on Biblical literalism.

Anyone know what kind of hit the evangelical community took when they found out one of their front men was a meth-smoking pole smoker? I remember seeing Jesus Camp when he was still a leader of the church. Scary stuff

Is anyone planning to take them to Court on this issue ?

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt You can try and distinguish yourself from them if you want alex, but the fact is you share their beliefs on the major myths of the bible..the stories about Jesus that completely defy logic and the laws of physics.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt You can try and distinguish yourself from them if you want alex, but the fact is you share their beliefs on the major myths of the bible..the stories about Jesus that completely defy logic and the laws of physics. If you are religious at all, you can't be that much of a heathen.

Logic? What's that? Can you prove to me that logic exists please?

Just because you repeat how the bible is myth over and over doesn't make it more of a compelling argument. Time and time again you offer zero reasoning, arguments, or anything to back up your nonsensical discarding of religion and Christianity in particular.

Oh wait, was it you that read one Richard Dawkins book and now bases his entire view of religion on it? Oh bravo

You're a joke.

I know you love Dawkins so I'll use a quote from his book to demonstrate the ridiculous beliefs held by those who want "alternative" theories taught alongside evolution.

quote:

"The findings of anthropologists seem weird to us only because they are unfamiliar. All religious beliefs seem weird to those not brought up in them. Boyer did research on the Fang people of Cameroon, who believe... ...that witches have an extra animal-like organ that flies away at night and ruins other people's crops or poisons their blood. It is also said that these witches sometimes assemble for huge banquets, where they devour their victims and plan future attacks. Many will tell you that a friend of a friend actually saw witches flying over the village at night, sitting on a banana leaf and throwing magical darts at various unsuspecting victims. Boyer continues with a personal anecdote: I was mentioning these and other exotica over dinner in a Cambridge college when one of our guests, a prominent Cambridge theologian, turned to me and said: 'That is what makes anthropology so fascinating and so difficult too. You have to explain how people can believe such nonsense.' Which left me dumbfounded. The conversation had moved on before I could find a pertinent response." Assuming that the Cambridge theologian was a mainstream Christian, he probably believed some combination of the following: - In the time of the ancestors, a man was born to a virgin mother with no biological father being involved. - The same fatherless man called out to a friend called Lazarus, who had been dead long enough to stink, and Lazarus promptly came back to life. - The fatherless man himself came alive after being dead and buried three days. - Forty days later, the fatherless man went up to the top of a hill and then disappeared bodily into the sky. - If you murmur thoughts privately in your head, the fatherless man, and his 'father' (who is also himself) will hear your thoughts and may act upon them. He is simultaneously able to hear the thoughts of everybody else in the world. - If you do something bad, or something good, the same fatherless man sees all, even if nobody else does. You may be rewarded or punished accordingly, including after your death. - The fatherless man's virgin mother never died but 'ascended' bodily into heaven. - Bread and wine, if blessed by a priest (who must have testicles), 'become' the body and blood of the fatherless man. What would an objective anthropologist, coming fresh to this set of beliefs while on fieldwork in Cambridge, make of them?

These are MAINSTREAM Christian beliefs..beliefs that the religion is based on, and all of them defy the physical laws of our universe.

Most Christians believe Jesus was the son of God (and that he also was God) They believe in the miracle (fatherless) birth, that Jesus performed miracles such as creating food from thin air and bringing the dead back to life. They believe he was killed and came back to life himself, and that God can hear the thoughts of all believers and that he answers prayers by intervening in the physical world on their behalf, etc. My "logic" is based on the observable behavior of the universe and that these things simply don't happen. When religious wackos try to pretend these myths (yes, they are myths..read the definition ) have ANY place alongside evolution in the classroom, they deserve to be called out on it and the insanity of their beliefs deserves to be questioned.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt When religious wackos try to pretend these myths

Ah, now we have it. Anybody who believes in the divinity of Jesus is a "religious wacko". Good work.

What whoever it was that you chose to quote seems to forget - the cornerstone of Christianity I might add - was that your "fatherless man" was no mere man at all.

Atheists appear increasingly dumb when they conflate radical literalism with contemporary forms of Christian theology.

ffs, you believe in the "myth" that the gold standard is panacea for man's problems - that, like Christianity, is based on zero empirical evidence and goes against the "Cambridge" standard you've thrown forth.

I'm not even going to bother, I have never been confronted with such a stupid atheist.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Ah, now we have it. Anybody who believes in the divinity of Jesus is a "religious wacko". Good work.

Thanks, and yes indeed they are wackos in my opinion..The core beliefs of mainstream christians have just as much factual backing as the Fang people of Cameroon. I consider that wacky.

quote:

What whoever it was that you chose to quote seems to forget - the cornerstone of Christianity I might add - was that your "fatherless man" was no mere man at all. Atheists appear increasingly dumb when they conflate radical literalism with contemporary forms of Christian theology. ffs, you believe in the "myth" that the gold standard is panacea for man's problems - that, like Christianity, is based on zero empirical evidence and goes against the "Cambridge" standard you've thrown forth.

Ah but there is all the difference in the world between holding a belief that can be debated based on historical data and observing human behavior (economic issues) and holding a belief that not debatable, period. You can debate the merits of capitalism vs communism in a classroom but you can't debate evolution vs "God did it" because the "God did it" side has no evidence at all..nothing to bring forward except the repetition of old myths and faith in events that go against every observable phenomena in the natural world.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.