Whats wrong with this statement?

[Stu Pidasso]

Here is the text of the statement on intelligent design that Dover Area High School administrators currently have to read to students at the start of biology lessons on evolution:

"The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin's theory of evolution and eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution is a part.

"Because Darwin's theory is a theory, it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered. The theory is not a fact. Gaps in the theory exist for which there is no evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations.

"Intelligent design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view. The reference book, 'Of Pandas and People,' is available for students who might be interested in gaining an understanding of what intelligent design actually involves.

"With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of the origins of life to individual students and their families. As a standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on standards-based assessments."


Stu

[tolbiny]

this leaps out as overexaggeration "Gaps in the theory exist for which there is no evidence". There is a lot of new work out (self alteration in plants comes to mind), i would be a lot more accepting of a statement talking about grey areas which i feel would be more accurate.

""With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of the origins of life to individual students and their families. As a standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on standards-based assessments."'

I think the whole statement could have been summed up with these lines and left at that.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the whole statement could have been summed up with these lines and left at that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Be honest now, did you really feel threatened by the rest of that statement? Was it so offensive as to have compelled you to seek the protection of the courts?

Stu

[PoBoy321]

How offensive the statement may or may not be is irrelevant. It is unconstitutional to teach creationism in schools and these "Intelligent Design" movements are merely a thinly veiled attempt at just that.

I am really surprised that with as many highly educated, seemingly intelligent people there are on this board, that this whole ID nonsense gets any voice at all.

Also, with regards to this statement:

[ QUOTE ]
"With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of the origins of life to individual students and their families. As a standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on standards-based assessments."

[/ QUOTE ]

Why doesn't the school board just say "Yeah, well, y'know, we'll teach you stuff to pass a test, but it migh be true, or it might not, y'know, it's really up to you."

[lehighguy]

If someone demands X non-religous viewpoint to be taught in school why are they treated any differently. Why is religion so diffucult to deal with.

If we keep trying to ignore these ideas, instead of face tehm head on and expose them for what they are, we will forever be left in this struggle.

[PoBoy321]

It's not about some random non-religious viewpoint being taught, it's about teaching well-regarded theories with some epmirical evidence to back them up. I don't see why any crackpot theory should be allowed to be taught in schools at the whim of the legislators who, apparently, don't know Darwin from a hole in the ground.

[lehighguy]

Because if ID is taught in schools kids will get to see what a joke it is. They will have to review it at the same time they review evolution, and it shouldn't be hard to see which is the better theory. In order to beat it you have to face it head on.

[PoBoy321]

So for the same reason, you're saying that naziism should be taught as an equal alternative to democracy?

[lehighguy]

Who said anything about equal. Education presents facts and viewpoints and lets the user decide.

The history of Nazi germany and its philisophical history is taught in every history class in the US. This is done SPECIFICALLY because people need to know about it and understand it so that it doesn't happen again.

If you simply don't talk about something it doesn't go away. In fact, censorship usually gives credibility to ideas that don't deserve it.

[PoBoy321]

OK, then I completely agree with you. However, ID does not belong in a science class because it has no base in science. It could be taught in a philosophy class, a class on world religions, whatever, that's fine, but it has no place in a science class.