61
   

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

 
 
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 07:37 am
@reasoning logic,
Excuse me Reasoning Logic - haven't read your posts in quite a while, but when you first showed up on this thread you distinctly mentioned being in (or at any rate from) India and a devout believer in an elephant-headed Indian deity whose name I forget. Have you since become an expert on Christian theology?
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 07:42 am
Ganesh?
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 07:47 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

High Seas, Your assumptions make a lot of sense, but we are also not aware of other conditions that might prevail to allow life.

That Journal of Cosmology is supposed to be a serious publication, so I read the article, but I question the nitrogen argument made by the author. Farmerman is off on a trip; hope he'll answer whenever he looks in here again. I'm also not sure how the author (a NASA exobiologist) can absolutely exclude contamination of his sample by earthly microorganisms; that meteorite was found on our planet, not in outer space. Looking around the net I also noticed widespread scepticism - one scientist even suggested the claim of extraterrestrial life may be some desperate ploy to increase NASA's funding Smile
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 07:47 am
@High Seas,
I am no expert on any religion but I do have a few thousand hours studying many different religions and their history, but this does not qualify me to be a expert in my opinion.
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 07:53 am
@MontereyJack,
Yes, thank you! The Indians have more deities than the Greeks and the Romans combined - it's hard to remember all their names.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 07:55 am
ILLINOIS UPDATE
Quote:
District 95 candidates back off creationism comments
(By Russell Lissau and Abby Scalf, The Daily Herald, March 5, 2011)

Three candidates for the Lake Zurich Unit District 95 board are distancing themselves from comments they made about creationism’s role in school.

Two of them now say they misunderstood the question asked by a Daily Herald reporter about the issue.

In a Feb. 24 interview at the Daily Herald’s Lake County office, all four candidates were asked, “Do you believe that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in science classes?”

All four — incumbents Jim Burke, Doug Goldberg and Tony Pietro and newcomer Chris Wallace — said “yes” and explained their stances. When the group was reminded that teaching creationism in science class has been ruled unconstitutional, some amended their answers.

Burke and Wallace were the only candidates to acknowledge the law’s limitations on teaching creationism. Burke said he wouldn’t try to get around the law, while Wallace said people must work within the law, “or you change the law.”

Pietro said creationism should still be taught, but only if it’s explained as a theory.

Goldberg said he hadn’t studied the legal ramifications of teaching creationism in science classes.

The comments were reported in the Feb. 26 Daily Herald and online at dailyherald.com; a digital audio recording of the full exchange is available at dailyherald.com.

Since that discussion, the issue has been picked up by bloggers focused on the creationism-vs.-evolution debate and other media.

The candidates — who are running for three seats on the board — also have spoken about the issue on Facebook, on Chicago-area radio and at a public forum Thursday night in Lake Zurich.

At that forum, Burke, Goldberg and Pietro each said they do not believe creationism should be taught in science classes.

Wallace was the only candidate not to reverse his stance at the forum. He read a statement and quoted comments he’s made on a Facebook page dedicated to the controversy, facebook.com/NoCreationismAtD95.

“It is unfortunate that the question that should have been asked was not: ‘Does this candidate support the teaching of a unilateral curriculum of creationism vs. the current theory of evolution in a science class,” Wallace’s posting reads, in part. “The answer to that question is most assuredly no.”

In a follow-up interview Friday, Wallace said he stands by the statements he made on Facebook but would not address his Feb. 24 comments to the Daily Herald.

In a separate telephone interview, Goldberg said he misunderstood the context of the original question.

Goldberg said he’s researched the issue since the original Daily Herald interview session and understands teaching creationism in science class is against the law.

In a separate telephone interview, Pietro said he misunderstood the question and didn’t remember that it specifically referred to science classes.

“I would like to retract the comment as it pertains to creationism in the science classroom,” he said. “Creationism is not a scientific theory, and creationism has no place in a science classroom.”

If creationism is taught at school, it would have to be in a world culture or sociology class that gives all religions equal time, Pietro said.

He apologized for the confusion.

Burke could not be reached for comment Friday. At the previous night’s public forum, he said he has never supported creationism in science class and that “any quote that may make it look like I do has been taken out of context.”

On Feb. 24, Burke said creationism should be taught “but with the caveat that it’s a belief and doesn’t have the scientific backing that evolutionism does.”

On Thursday, a letter from the entire District 95 school board to the community was added to the district’s website, lz95.org.

It states the district’s curriculum follows state standards and the laws of Illinois, which do not allow for the teaching of creationism in science class.

Additionally, creationism has never been discussed by the board during the six years the current board members have served, the letter states.

“No sitting board member has ever asked to have the issue of creationism put on a meeting agenda, nor has any current board member expressed plans to do so,” the letter reads.

However, the issue has surfaced in school districts across the country and in Lake County. This week, Libertyville-Vernon Hills Area High School District 128 officials, prompted by a public complaint, found a science teacher at Libertyville High was referencing creationism in a unit on evolution.

The district has since taken steps to ensure no science teachers reference or teach creationism in class, a District 128 spokeswoman said Friday.
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 09:52 am
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
I am no expert on any religion but I do have a few thousand hours studying many different religions and their history.


I bet you know which one drove a buggy around on the moon. Is there anything else worth knowing? Does the evolutionary record have any examples of mal-adaptations? You've been studying mal-adapted religions and perfect fossil specimens of life forms. There's an unconscious bias at work there.

If love is to triumph over evil then what use is a Darwinian who has no alternative than to think love a hallucination, the ancients said a madness, and the concept of evil to be meaningless.

To a Darwinian/materialist/ atheist ANYTHING is possible within the laws of nature. Which is one end of a spectrum. At the other end is dogma where only one thing is possible.

Anti-IDers are very fond of attacking the dogma end and have on Ignore the end they are standing on assuming they are not half-baked and that's a nothing position intellectually. And the attack on the dogma end is easy in the ears of those who find the dogmas inhibiting to their subjectivity and is consequently popular with those who also have on Ignore the ANYTHING GOES end. And the ANYTHING GOES end is what the real challenge to teaching evolution actually is. Every anti-ID post I have read is off topic, unscientific, trolling and a pile of dry straw needing only a spark to complete its mission.

The portrayal of evil in movies is a focus on the ANYTHING GOES end.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 09:54 am
@High Seas,
Somebody has counted Pagan deities at 30,000. I've forgotten who. Which is not to say that the Indians didn't have more. If they had it is understandable that you can't remember all their names.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 10:12 am
@wandeljw,
Lake Zurich Unit District 95 is a small town 40 miles NW of Chicago. Its school board members are elected and unpaid. And we all know the type. It has no relevance to a national debate on as important a matter as this. It is not only off topic--it is off the radar.

Have you got the vote count for when the board was elected wande? and any comments on the influence on it of how well or badly Mr Obama is doing with the unemployment figures. Straw men are bad enough but breeze borne chaff is going too far.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 10:19 am
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
I do have a few thousand hours studying many different religions and their history.


I have the Penguin Dictionary of Religions edited by John R. Hinnells right here in my hand. I don't know how you define "studying" but if it is a scientific usage your "many" must be a gross exaggeration or you are a few thousand years old.
reasoning logic
 
  0  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 10:35 am
@spendius,
I do at times enjoy reading your folk psychological point of views! I know of a lady who likes to have a drink every once in awhile, Maybe she can share her point of view with you. Her name is Pat!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzT0jHJdq7Q
reasoning logic
 
  0  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 11:01 am
@spendius,
Some people think that I am very old and that I stepped out of a super nova! What do you think?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yo7lxuwLC9I
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 12:22 pm
@reasoning logic,
I've studied Armstrong's Materialist Theory of Mind. Your Pat is a folk subset of that. My Pat was a right raver.

I'm interested enough in your neuro-science if you would tell us something about it rather than simply referring to it as if that is sufficient.

The materialist has no option but to assert that there are only physical aspects to brain/mind/body function. Anything immaterial and the materialist case vanishes. You're stuck with that.

But a spiritual dimension can be asserted. Or it can be pretended to exist as a scientific experiment of the "suck-it-and-see" variety to see whether it works better in terms of social consequences . Just as manners and etiquette work better at a White House dinner than the absence of them.

The desire to replace the Christian religion, which I think works scientifically, with something more or less untried, can only be entertained by those who think it hasn't worked.

A display cabinet full of fossils is not to be compared with what is out there on the streets just because it is easier to understand and write learned telological and tautological tomes about.
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 12:44 pm
@spendius,
Your equating atheism with materialism is a straw man of the same order as equating non-christians with evil.

It's of the same order as saying that atheists have no ethics and no morals.

Can you then explain why is there far less atheists in prison than atheists in the general population, percentage wise?

As far as I'm concerned, I don't mind that all religions exist and co-exist, their mere existence doesn't bother me.

What upsets me is the proselytizing they submit me to, not only on this forum but also in real life.

And the arrogance that they know what is better for me..

reasoning logic
 
  0  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 12:46 pm
@spendius,
Your quote: {I've studied Armstrong's Materialist Theory of Mind. Your Pat is a folk subset of that. My Pat was a right raver.

I'm interested enough in your neuro-science if you would tell us something about it rather than simply referring to it as if that is sufficient. }


I can only guess that by your use of subset you would also include that we are subsets of each other? Newton is a subset of Aristotle and so forth?

I study every thing in general so I can not share specifics in such a way as those who study them specifically! That is why I let the experts explain things rather than me.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 03:16 pm
@reasoning logic,
And your Pat's subset is only a fraction of the sub-sets she is lumbered with. My Pat was the whole caboodle of the reincarnated Great Mother in both her aspects. Your's has learned her lines. Mine improvised as she went along to suit a wide range of opportune moments.

If you asked your's why she dumped her school boyfriend she would say that she found he wasn't her type and were unsuited to each other or some other twaddle in a similar vein. Mine said "he only had a bike". Which do you think is scientific?

But you only showed her in that one subset. I daresay with six glasses of punch down her and a few times round the floor, in a Viennese Waltz at a masked ball, a gallant officer of the Hussars might disorient her sufficiently to guide her up the marble staircase and into one of the side rooms off the balcony and shag the arse off her.

We are all subsets of our experiences and of our biology. I have always preferred ladies in whom the latter has the upper hand. Jack Nicholson showed in Reds what you have to do with those whose experiences have priority and the next nearest lady is miles away and it's nearing bedtime.

I would think Newton was more a subset of his dad than of Aristotle. You're name dropping again.

I had the advantage of having such a wanker for a dad, and dittos for teachers, that I had to abolish the usual legacies and get my subsets from books, comics, movies and the like. And, at a very tender age, I read Frank Harris, to whom everybody was a wanker except Jesus, Shakespeare and himself. On the sword side I mean. One of the valuable lessons Frank taught me was that if things were going wrong it was my own fault.

It's a funny thing, maybe just a coincidence, but the words "The key is Frank" appear in the liner notes on the cover of Dylan's John Wesley Harding album.

Quote:
There were three kings and a jolly three too. The first one had a broken nose, the second, a broken arm and the third was broke. "Faith is the key!" said the first king. "No, froth is the key!" said the second. "You're both wrong," said the third, "the key is Frank!"




reasoning logic
 
  0  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 03:51 pm
@spendius,
Spendius I do apologize if I brought up a sore subject neuroscience or if I reminded you of a old flame but in either case I was not trying to upset you! Smile

reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 04:18 pm
A lively panel discussion between Steven Pinker, Sam Harris, Patricia Churchland, Lawrence Krauss, Simon Blackburn, Peter Singer. If human morality is an evolutionary adaptation and if neuroscientists can identify specific brain circuitry governing moral judgment, can scientists determine what is, in fact, right and wrong?

Part 1 of 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ScMJEVoj-s&feature=watch_response_rev
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 04:19 pm
@reasoning logic,
Listen mate--I've heard the "sorry, have I upset you? " gambit a large number of times in it's various literary disguises.

I'm eager to know anything about neuroscience that I don't already know. That you have in interest in the subject adds nothing to my knowledge once I have been informed of it. It is the ideal science I think. Discussion of the incomprehensible in a language which is esoteric enough to separate itself from the common run and bewitch it at the same time provides open-ended career opportunities. But that does not mean it is without value. If enough people engage in the discussion one of them might hit on the key idea from which a full understanding of the human brain could be derived.

And then where would we be?
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Sun 6 Mar, 2011 05:04 pm
@spendius,
What ever happened to the rights of the people at the funeral ? Isn't it an expression of free speech to bury a loved one with peace and dignity ? What was the court thinking......
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 07/24/2025 at 09:31:33