Evolution? How?

"It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.

"We find that the secular purposes claimed by the board amount to a pretext for the board's real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom."

0 Replies

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:

"It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.

"We find that the secular purposes claimed by the board amount to a pretext for the board's real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom."

And who exactly stated this, may I ask?

0 Replies

Da judge

0 Replies

rosborne979 wrote:

timberlandko wrote:
Yup, Dover PA - while the ID-iots will howl, with this finding and the Supreme's 1987 smackdown of Creationism, ain't nobody of consequence gonna listen.

Let's hope not, because we need to get back to figuring out how to provide better education, both in science and philosophy, so that the next generation of adults knows better than to fall for ID and Creationism.

Hi Ros,

First, let me be the first from the other side to say I told you so. My prediction in this forum months ago was that the Dover school board would lose in court. That is absolutely no surprise to anyone who has watched this issue.

But your statement has got to be the laugh line of the day. You and I have discussed it before, I think. Science education FOR DECADES in public schools has been wall-to-wall evolution.

Why are evolutionists crying that students are so ill informed scientifically when they have owned the store?

Coincidentally, I received an email from a high school senior today. She wanted to show me the results of her ACT test taken earlier in the month. She is a life long homeschooler and knows the evolutionary and creation positions well. She is a creationist, looking forward to attending a Christian college next year and scored 36 on the Science portion of the test. (36 is a perfect score in ACT) She received a 32 composite score on the total test.

Why do evolutionists insist that students cannot be properly educated in science unless it's Evolution 24/7 ?

0 Replies

Where does the idiotic contention that students are subjected to "evolution 24/7" come from? Answers in Genesis? Is that where you get your talking points and buzz words and phrases?

Talk about laugh lines . . .

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Why do evolutionists insist that students cannot be properly educated in science unless it's Evolution 24/7 ?

I believe they actually insist that 'creationism' isn't science, since it's based on a book of spiritual literature containing tales of divinely impregnated women and an invisible man that can do anything he wants, but choses not to.

Quote:

First, let me be the first from the other side to say I told you so.

Since the 1st graders don't much care about this topic, the lines' all yours.

0 Replies

Gotta love the ID-iot's complaint that the finding is the product of "Judicial Activism" - Jones, a 2002 Bush appointee, has a broad and very respectable record of decisions consistent with the Conservative point of view.

At the close of the trial, Judge Jones complimented the parties to the action, referencing the "great lawyering" he'd been "privileged to see". Had there been a doubt at that time in Judge Jones' mind concerning which way he might rule, the leading attorney for the ID-iots, Patrick McGillen of the Thomas More Law Center, settled the matter with his comment "By my reckoning, this is the fortieth day since the trial began and tonight will be the fortieth night."

Judge Jones' reply was "Mr. Gillen, that is an interesting coincidence, but it was not by design."

ID-iots indeed, counsel and defendants both.

0 Replies

This was a great day for reasonableness .It has been decreed by the Pa Court that It is no longer "morally reprehensible " to be an evolutionary scientist, in fact, the judge really took the IDers apart fopr being the liars they really are. Im quite satisfied that he really combined the two strongest positions that he could have taken
1That ID was actually religion
2That the IDers were motivated by religious fervor and not an interest in science.
The entire 139 page decision of Judge Jones is in the Updates section of the Pa Court webpage that wandeljw posted on the other thread about ID.

I hope we can get on to more real-world problems and some areas in education that need additinal improvement.

I dont believe that the court will impose the max "treble damages and costs" , neither do I think that the ACLU will seek costs either. The schoolboard has been changed overwhelmingly and everything the case could hope for has been achieved, and more.

Phil Johnson will have to rethink his mission in life now.

0 Replies

timber, one of the key pieces of evidence that was quietly introduced under " evidence which noone disputes" It was the earliest editions through the present editions of "Of PAndas and People" (which was the reccommended resource text for ID).
The earliest editions clearly had the word "Evidence for Creation" which was , in later editions changed to "evidences of Intelligent Design".

OOOPS.

0 Replies

The defense was the equal to anything the Marx Brothers ever came up with. Behe's under-oath concession that astrology would have to be considered a science under the same reasoning required to consider ID-iocy a science didn't help their case much either.

0 Replies

What on earth has astrology to do with this.That's like saying that because Behe wore a blue tie his side was discredited.

I can't even see why somebody telling lies has anything to do with it either.

0 Replies

I'm sure the war-room at ID-iot Central is buzzing with the same questions.

0 Replies

I'm not convinced they are up for that.

0 Replies

Oh, the lot are a subtle, devious, and intractable bunch. They'll fume and seethe a while, then try some other tack. Count on it.

0 Replies

spendi and timber. I can answer from a "Popcorn gallery point". The entire lines of questioning by the plaintiffs and then thed efense was that ID was clearly religion by the two tests
1whats its pupose and
2 Does ID enforse religion in violation of the establishemnet clause and "free practice clause'

The plaintiifs, on cross exam of Minnich, Behe and reading Dembski into record (Discovery Institute pulled out of Dodge), all agreed that for ID to be valid, the definition of science would have to be broadened to include
Minnich:-the supernatural , Behe-astrology (It wasnt a big point, but the judge picked up on it and included it in his sections about
"Would a reasonable interested citizen of Dover be convinced that this was religion?"

spendi , the opinion is 139 pages of well reasoned good thinking , and I for one find it a page turner. Im only on page 75 and I took a break..
I slipped to the end

I,B. da judge
1 Find for the plaintiffs
2 The defendants are enjoined and not permitted to teach ID since it is religion , relabelled
3The plaintiffs are entitled costs.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Hi Ros,

Hi RL,

real life wrote:

First, let me be the first from the other side to say I told you so. My prediction in this forum months ago was that the Dover school board would lose in court.

Congrats. You didn't even have the brass to stand up for your own viewpoint. I'm glad you're not on my side.

real life wrote:

But your statement has got to be the laugh line of the day. You and I have discussed it before, I think. Science education FOR DECADES in public schools has been wall-to-wall evolution.

Yeh, and for good reason as we've seen.

But if the general population still understands so little of science that they think they can foist off this ID crap into science class, then there is obviously a deficiency in our education system when it comes to teaching what science is (and as I said: Philosophy as well).

real life wrote:

Coincidentally, I received an email from a high school senior today. She wanted to show me the results of her ACT test taken earlier in the month. She is a life long homeschooler and knows the evolutionary and creation positions well. She is a creationist, looking forward to attending a Christian college next year and scored 36 on the Science portion of the test. (36 is a perfect score in ACT) She received a 32 composite score on the total test.

Good, she sounds like a smart girl. Maybe she's smart enough to understand the difference between creationism and science. If not, tell her to drop into A2K and we can add to her education.

0 Replies

With people liike real abound in this country, we can bet your bottom dollar that ID will show its head again with another guise. LOL

0 Replies

rosborne979 wrote:

real life wrote:
Hi Ros,

Hi RL,

real life wrote:
First, let me be the first from the other side to say I told you so. My prediction in this forum months ago was that the Dover school board would lose in court.

Congrats. You didn't even have the brass to stand up for your own viewpoint. I'm glad you're not on my side.

real life wrote:
But your statement has got to be the laugh line of the day. You and I have discussed it before, I think. Science education FOR DECADES in public schools has been wall-to-wall evolution.

Yeh, and for good reason as we've seen.

But if the general population still understands so little of science that they think they can foist off this ID crap into science class, then there is obviously a deficiency in our education system when it comes to teaching what science is (and as I said: Philosophy as well).

real life wrote:
Coincidentally, I received an email from a high school senior today. She wanted to show me the results of her ACT test taken earlier in the month. She is a life long homeschooler and knows the evolutionary and creation positions well. She is a creationist, looking forward to attending a Christian college next year and scored 36 on the Science portion of the test. (36 is a perfect score in ACT) She received a 32 composite score on the total test.

Good, she sounds like a smart girl. Maybe she's smart enough to understand the difference between creationism and science. If not, tell her to drop into A2K and we can add to her education.

Hi Ros,

Yeah, I did ( and do ) stand up for my viewpoint. But I am also discerning enough to know which way the wind blows.

It was also kind of a joke, Ros. Lighten up. You know, the loser telling the winner "I told you so." A joke. Get it? *sigh* You evolutionary types are so uptight.

Let's try again......It's like the loser in an election telling the winner to "get over it".........Get it?

BTW that is now what evolutionists will have to do. Get over it. Now there is no one to blame but yourselves, right?

Which brings us back to my questions, which you didn't have the brass to answer

real life wrote:

Why are evolutionists crying that students are so ill informed scientifically when they have owned the store?......................

Why do evolutionists insist that students cannot be properly educated in science unless it's Evolution 24/7 ?

Another thing the loser usually tells the winner in an election is

Quote:

Congratulations.....but now you have to govern.

Well, congratulations evolutionists. But now you have to produce results.

No more whining about how big bad creation/IDers are holding you back from teaching kids science.

Now you've got to come up with credible explanations WHY kids are so poorly educated in science when it's YOU who are in control of science education and HAVE BEEN IN CONTROL FOR DECADES.

So what's the problem?

0 Replies

Why do you assume children are poorly educated in science?

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know