|
|
#12
11-11-2005, 04:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Whats wrong with this statement?
[ QUOTE ]
Let it be. I wanna see someone go up there and try to explain it using scientific terms and evidence. It'll be a good laugh. [/ QUOTE ] I was, thankfully, in the advanced science classes throughout high school, and I know none of us would have taken it as anything but bogus. However, I know many students at my school who I wouldn't have been so confident about. The problem with letting someone try to defend it scientifically is that it cannot be done. Thus, is has as much place in a science class as Greek mythology (as much as I love Greek mythology). 
|
|
#13
11-11-2005, 05:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whats wrong with this statement?
[ QUOTE ]
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 [/ QUOTE ] "A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations." Intelligent design does not meet these criteria (specifically, well-tested), or other definitions of scientific theory. Therefore, it should not be taught in a science class.
|
|
#14
11-11-2005, 10:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whats wrong with this statement?
[ 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? [/ QUOTE ] Not only would I take my school district to court if it tried this nonsense, I would also name every school board member who voted in favor as an individual defendant so that I could force them to pay my attorneys' fees personally. And I would do so cheerfully.
|
|
#15
11-11-2005, 10:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whats wrong with this statement?
[ QUOTE ]
Not only would I take my school district to court if it tried this nonsense, I would also name every school board member who voted in favor as an individual defendant so that I could force them to pay my attorneys' fees personally. And I would do so cheerfully. . [/ QUOTE ] Why? Its not like ID was actually being taught. The school board was basically saying, "Hey if you want to know about ID look here were not discussing it in biology class". Your attitude is typical of the left. Stiffle any ideals or thoughts that don't you don't agree with. Stu
|
|
#16
11-11-2005, 10:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whats wrong with this statement?
[ QUOTE ]
"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." [/ QUOTE ] It's wrong because it gives the impression that ID is science. Instead of [ QUOTE ] 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. [/ QUOTE ] replace it with the flying spaghetti monster is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view. The reference site FSM is available for students who might be interested in gaining an understanding of what the flying spaghetti monster actually involves. You can. Scientifically they are identical.
|
|
#17
11-11-2005, 10:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whats wrong with this statement?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Not only would I take my school district to court if it tried this nonsense, I would also name every school board member who voted in favor as an individual defendant so that I could force them to pay my attorneys' fees personally. And I would do so cheerfully. . [/ QUOTE ] Why? Its not like ID was actually being taught. The school board was basically saying, "Hey if you want to know about ID look here were not discussing it in biology class". Your attitude is typical of the left. Stiffle any ideals or thoughts that don't you don't agree with. Stu [/ QUOTE ] Noone's saying ban the book. But since when is science class or biology class the place for recommending alternatives to science? I personally don't have a problem with religion being taught as religion in schools, so long as it's not taught in a "you must believe this" sense. But I can understand why others do. Perhaps a compromise would be some sort of "history of ideas" class.
|
|
#18
11-11-2005, 10:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whats wrong with this statement?
Hi Nicky. It's not often I get to post that I agree with you, so I figured I'd do it here. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
|
|
#19
11-11-2005, 11:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whats wrong with this statement?
[ QUOTE ]
Noone's saying ban the book. But since when is science class or biology class the place for recommending alternatives to science? [/ QUOTE ] Read that statement again, the school board never recommeded ID as an alternative to science. They don't even put ID on the same level as evolution. The school board calls evolution is a "theory" while they label ID as merely an "explaination". ID in some form is something believed by a majority of Americans. It likely to come up or at least be thought about in 9th grade science discussions concerning the orgins of life. Its certainly appropriate for the school board to say, "Hey were not going to teach ID in a science class but if you want to know about that look here instead". Whats troubling people think the ideal of ID is so dangerous that even this innocent statement needed to be suppressed. Stu
|
|
#20
11-11-2005, 11:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whats wrong with this statement?
[ QUOTE ]
"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. [/ QUOTE ] Hey, if christianity gets a plug in science class, why not let scientologists have theirs? Add a paragraph about how we were populated by aliens, and reference an appropriate book. Equal time seems fair. I mean if we are throwing science out the window in a _science_ class -- lets shoot for the stars.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
