Natch!It never entered my head to think otherwise.
What's a FUNDY christian?
A fundamentalist christian, JLN . . . were you just being disingenuous for a yet to be revealed brilliant rhetorical reason, or did you really not know that?
Please note, in some limited contexts, a Fundy christian could be Newfie of deep religious conviction living on the sea shore . . .
Set, I confess. I really didn't know what it meant? It seems so obvious now.
No biggie, JLN, it's good to see you in the thread . . .
The Darwin exhibition frightening off corporate sponsors
The Darwin exhibition frightening off corporate sponsors
By Nicholas Wapshott in New York
(Filed: 20/11/2005)
Telegraph UK
An exhibition celebrating the life of Charles Darwin has failed to find a corporate sponsor because American companies are anxious not to take sides in the heated debate between scientists and fundamentalist Christians over the theory of evolution.
The entire $3 million (£1.7 million) cost of Darwin, which opened at the American Museum of Natural History in New York yesterday, is instead being borne by wealthy individuals and private charitable donations.
The failure of American companies to back what until recently would have been considered a mainstream educational exhibition reflects the growing influence of fundamentalist Christians, who are among President George W Bush's most vocal supporters, over all walks of life in the United States.
While the Darwin exhibition has been unable to find a business backer - unlike previous exhibitions at the museum - the Creationist Museum near Cincinatti, Ohio, which takes literally the Bible's account of creation, has recently raised $7 million in donations.
The outbreak of corporate cold feet has shocked New York's intellectuals. "It is a disgrace that large companies should shy away from such an important scientific exhibition," said a trustee of another prominent museum in the city, who was told of the exhibition's funding problem by a trustee of the AMNH.
"They tried to find corporate sponsors, but everyone backed off."
Creationism is increasingly widely backed in America. A CBS News poll last month found that 51 per cent of Americans reject the theory of evolution, believing instead that God created humans in their present form. Another poll in August found that 38 per cent of Americans think that creationism should be taught in schools, instead of evolution.
In Dover, Pennsylvania, last week, a jury began considering a case brought by parents against a school board that insisted that "intelligent design," which argues that a supernatural force populated the earth, be taught alongside evolution in science classes.
The AMNH is coy about its failure to find corporate money to mount the exhibition, which will tour the US before moving to London's Natural History Museum in 2009 to mark the bicentenary of Darwin's birth.
Asked which companies had refused to give money, Gary Zarr, the museum's marketing director, said he would have to ask those concerned before he could identify them.
Steve Reichl, a press officer for the AMNH, said a list of forthcoming exhibitions was sent to potential sponsors and none wanted to back the Darwin exhibition. He declined to reveal which companies, or how many, had been approached.
The Bank of America previously sponsored a similar exhibition on Leonardo da Vinci and the financial services provider TIAA-CREF funded an Albert Einstein show.
A prominent Metropolitan Museum donor said: "You can understand why the Museum of Natural History might not want to admit such a thing.
"They are concerned about finding corporate funding for exhibitions in the future."
The museum will have to depend more heavily upon the profits of its Darwin-related merchandise to finance the cost of staging the exhibition, including a 12-inch Darwin doll, Darwin finger puppets and, for a $950, a replica of the vessel Beagle, made in China and assembled in Vietnam.
Niles Eldredge, the exhibition's curator, confirmed that the exhibition was intended to redress the balance in the battle between scientists and creationist Christians being fought across the country.
"This is for the schoolchildren of America," he said. "This is the evidence of evolution."
Quote:What's a FUNDY christian?
It is a person who,by dint of careful study,has discovered how much fun one can derive from The Bible and the literary conjurations of assiduous students of that mystical work.Obviously,it is one of those terms which is relatively easy to claim title to,much like "scientist".
In its perfect manifestations,which are the only ones of any validity,it gets beyond the mere mechanical operations of youth in relation to sensations which, if any prolongation into maturity is to be acheived,must derive from intellectual processes.
The fact that evolution can be easily explained to teenagers is quite sufficient evidence of its aridity and of its attractiveness to those in search of wisdom without effort.Its reach extends to the slime rather than to the glorious numinosities so cutely symbolised by a firework display.How does evolution explain the seemingly universal magnetism of those.
BBB
You have to laugh.
What were the working conditions in the assembly plants where the replica of The Beagle was produced.
Money doesn't talk,it swears.--Bob Dylan.
Gasp! I just swallowed a fly in my beer can, and now I've got to put up with this.
As I understand it you need put up with nothing you are allowed to choose to not put up with.
JLN, Just be assured that flies don't drink much.
What happened to the LOL?
Shhhhh .... you'll disturb the flies.
Newspaper Group Charts Evolution Teaching in Schools
Newspaper Group Charts Evolution Teaching in Schools
Published: November 26, 2005 1:00 PM ET
E & P
NORFOLK, Va. A new national study, conducted by the Editorial Projects in Education Research Center, culled 10 evolution-related themes from the National Research Council's recommended standards for science education.
Editorial Projects in Education is a nonprofit which produces school-oriented publications, including the newspaper Education Week.
It found, for example, that students in Virginia public schools may be getting only a portion of the proper education about evolution, putting the commonwealth in the bottom half of 41 states surveyed.
It found Virginia covered just five of the 10 themes. Those included biological adaptation and survival and the evidence for extinct life forms in fossils.
Not covered, according to the report, were such themes as common ancestry of species and the time frame of biological evolution.
The report focuses on Virginia's Standards of Learning, which provide a basic outline for how to cover topics in schools.
It's unfair, especially since the state's curriculum framework expands to cover all 10 themes in evolution, said Jim Firebaugh, Virginia's director of middle and high school instruction.
"Our framework is where much of the detail is provided," he said. "In our framework, it's pretty clear we match up very well."
In terms of common ancestry of species, for example, students in high school biology are expected to learn that millions of different organisms on Earth today share many structural and metabolic features.
The framework touches on the time frame of evolution delicately, saying, "structural adaptations may take millions of years to develop."
And teachers have no reason to depart from the framework when it comes to evolution.
That's because anything in the framework could appear on the SOL tests, said Charles Pyle, a spokesman for Virginia's Department of Education.
The report set aside the framework, however, in favor of state curriculum standards bearing a more official seal of approval, explained Christopher B. Swanson, the director of the research center at Editorial Projects.
He called the SOLs the state's foremost statement about educational expectations.
State SOLs are not due to be revised until 2010, Pyle said.
But some argue even the report's analysis of SOLs could be inaccurate. For instance, the report used keyword searches to determine whether the 10 themes were covered.
For "common ancestry," it looked for "ancestry" and "kinship." For the time frame, it sought "billions."
That method, said Virginia science coordinator Eric Rhoades, hardly offers a full snapshot of science education in the commonwealth.
It's not the first time a report has brought commonwealth evolution education standards into question.
A 2000 study by the Fordham Foundation think tank gave Virginia a "D" for its treatment of evolution _ which it said state schools only grazed.
Its author, retired California professor Lawrence Lerner, said Tuesday that the curriculum has since shown signs of improvement.
"...shown signs of improvement..." doesn't say much, and he was supposedly a "retired California professor."
Re: Newspaper Group Charts Evolution Teaching in Schools
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:It found, for example, that students in Virginia public schools may be getting only a portion of the proper education about evolution, putting the commonwealth in the bottom half of 41 states surveyed.
I don't remember my highschool doing a particularly good job of teaching evolution either. Although I think we got enough exposure to understand the basic idea.
I wonder where Massachusetts ranks in all this.
Steven Gey is a professor of law at Florida State and was the attorney who argued Edwards v. Aguillard (the case that struck down attempts to put creationism into science classrooms). He made an interesting comment recently regarding the anti-evolution "teach the controversy" tactic: "It's like saying we want to be able to teach that the earth is round, but also that it's flat, that it revolves around the sun, but also that the sun revolves around the earth. Science doesn't work that way. We know these things are wrong."
