Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Now, Im sure spendi is even more confused.

Now, Im sure spendi is even more confused.

The folk music scene had been like a paradise that I had to leave, like Adam had to leave the garden. It was just too perfect. In a few years’ time a **** storm would be unleashed. Things would begin to burn. Bras, draft cards, American flags, bridges, too-everybody would be dreaming of getting it on. The national psyche would change and in a lot of ways it would resemble the Night of the Living Dead. The road out would be treacherous, and I didn’t know where it would lead but I followed it anyway. It was a strange world ahead that would unfold, a thunderhead of a world with jagged lightning edges. Many got it wrong and never did get it right. I went straight into it. It was wide open. One thing for sure, not only was it not run by God, but it wasn’t run by the devil either.

Traditional Aristotlean two-valued logic is completely useless for many real-world decisions

everything is not necessarily either ture or false

and many decisions can only be probabilistic

the so-called "fuzzy" logic is all you can employ

And further logic is only as good as the initial postulates you reason from.

Craig, from the little I could stomach, starts with a number of unverifiable and indeed unlikely initial premises, which he seems to treat as inherently true, a dubious proposition.

In the computer biz that's known as GIGO--Garbage in, Garbage out.

I enjoy the way he talks in circles in his attempts to make his point

What's funnier is his use of the word "logic" to support what he's trying to say. His use of 1,000 dollar words only gets in the way of simple communication.

They (the religious and agnostics) continue in their attempts to tie evolution into ID. The fundamental problems being all the foundation from which they try to rationalize how evolution was always been part of ID has too many holes and contradictions in the bible itself.

Trying to infuse philosophy into the mix only proves they don't understand science or philosophy.

Anything having to do with creation is based on religious faith; nothing more, nothing less. Evolution is evidenced through science.

A Tennessee bill meant to protect teachers who allow students to question and criticize "controversial" subjects such as evolution and climate change became law on Tuesday after Gov. Bill Haslam (R) declined to act.

The state legislature had sent the bill to Haslam earlier this month. He had until Tuesday to veto it, sign it or allow it to pass without his signature.

Critics of the legislation have dubbed it the "Monkey Bill" and charge that it is anti-science, backdoor approval of the teaching of religion in schools that reminds of the state's history with the Scopes Trial.

"It would open the door to creationism, it would open the door to climate change denial, and to other sorts of pseudosciences being introduced into Tennessee classrooms," Josh Rosenau of the National Center for Science Education told The Huffington Post last month.

Haslam claimed to have looked into the potential effects of the legislation and had determined that opponents' worries about the broader impacts on the state's public school curriculum were unwarranted. But on Tuesday, Haslam expressed "concern" about potential "confusion" stemming from the measure in a statement regarding his inaction

I thought you to be a global warming denier fm.

In which case you should welcome Gov. Haslam's decision. A court decision against him would legally sanction man made global warming as scientific fact according to your position on Judge Jones's decision.

Allow me to clarify, I am arguing philosophy of science, this is abstract, my arguements have no implications of contemporary scientific practices.

I see many potential law suits on the event horizon.

Gov. Haslam allows evolution bill to become TN law
(Chas Sisk, The Tennessean, April 11, 2012)

A bill that encourages classroom debate over evolution will become law in Tennessee, despite a veto campaign mounted by scientists and civil libertarians who say it will reopen a decades-old controversy over teaching creationism to the state’s schoolchildren.

Gov. Bill Haslam said Tuesday that he will allow House Bill 368/Senate Bill 893 to become law without his signature, a symbolic move that signals his opposition but allows the measure to be added to the state code.

The bill will create confusion over the state’s science curriculum, Haslam said. But he also acknowledged that he lacks the votes to prevent the measure from becoming state law.

“The bill received strong bipartisan support, passing the House and Senate by a 3-to-1 margin,” he said, “but good legislation should bring clarity and not confusion. My concern is that this bill has not met this objective.”

The decision followed criticism of the bill from national organizations and local scientists, who said it is a cover for reintroducing creationism in Tennessee schools. They linked the measure to the 1925 Scopes Trial in Dayton, Tenn., in which a schoolteacher was tried for breaking a state law then on the books that banned the teaching of evolution.

“It was presented as giving more flexibility to teachers to discuss controversies, but really this has always been about evolution,” said Barry Lynn, executive director for Americans United for Separation of Church and State. “This has always been a way for teachers to interject their religious viewpoints if they contradict evolution.”

Unlike the law used to try John Scopes, a biology teacher who flouted the state’s ban on evolution nearly 90 years ago, the current bill does not require teaching any view of creation.

Instead, it encourages students to question accepted scientific theories — listing as examples evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming and cloning — and it protects teachers from punishment if they teach creationism. Proponents say it will encourage critical thinking and give teachers license to discuss the holes in scientific theories if they choose to do so.

But the bill has drawn national attention.

Eight Tennessee members of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences, including a Vanderbilt University Nobel laureate, signed a letter urging lawmakers to vote it down, saying it would hurt students, the state’s reputation and its efforts to recruit science companies. The National Center for Science Education said it would allow teachers to introduce any idea they want into the science curriculum, religious or not.

More than 3,000 Tennesseans signed a petition delivered to Haslam last week urging him to veto the measure. Larisa DeSantis, the Vanderbilt scientist who started the petition drive, said Haslam’s decision not to veto the measure was a disappointment.

“It doesn’t solve any problems; it only creates problems,” DeSantis said. “It is going to bring political controversy into the classroom.”

The bill is the first that Haslam has let become law without his signature. Previous governors have used the technique to distance themselves from bills they disagree with, when it has been apparent that they could not win an override vote.

The Tennessee Constitution says the legislature can override a veto with a simple majority. Bills become law automatically if the governor fails to sign them within 10 days.

In his message, Haslam portrayed the bill as essentially meaningless.

“I do not believe that this legislation changes the scientific standards that are taught in our schools or the curriculum that is used by our teachers,” Haslam said. “However, I also don’t believe that it accomplishes anything that isn’t already acceptable in our schools.”

But the measure could trigger litigation, Lynn said.

Americans United has frequently joined in lawsuits that challenge schools and districts for teaching evolution. He said it expects such a suit to be filed once districts try to implement the new law.

“He should have been clear from the beginning what he wanted to do, and this result could have been different,” Lynn said. “Now some small district is going to have to figure out what this statute means, and it will become a party to a very expensive lawsuit.”

However, I also don’t believe that it accomplishes anything that isn’t already acceptable in our schools.”

This has always been a way for teachers to interject their religious viewpoints if they contradict evolution.”