Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

What happens if 7 member boards vote evolution unanimously out in 25 states and other 7 member boards vote evolution unanimously in in the rest?

I hope we haven't got another of those "edge of your seats" operations underway where each sides main protagonists are never out of the news.

Out of curiosity, has there ever been any long term concerted efforts to breed for longevity?

Example: dogs?
Example: upper echelon of human social structures?

I find it interesting that the only states where evolution has been an issue state wide has been in states that elect their board of education.

Anyone care to address this further (famerman perhaps)?

Chumly wrote:

Out of curiosity, has there ever been any long term concerted efforts to breed for longevity?

Example: dogs?
Example: upper echelon of human social structures?

A genetically engineered organism that lives 10 times longer than normal has been created by scientists in California. It is the greatest extension of longevity yet achieved by researchers investigating the scientific nature of ageing.

If this work could ever be translated into humans, it would mean that we might one day see people living for 800 years. But is this ever going to be a realistic possibility?

Valter Longo is one of the small but influential group of specialists in this area who believes that an 800-year life isn't just possible, it is inevitable.

Typical liberal. 'We have problems when we have to listen to someone other than ourselves.'

4 extra words in Florida science proposal rankle educators
(Leslie Postal, Orlando Sentinel, February 17, 2008)

Some of the educators who helped devise Florida's new science standards said Saturday that they object to a last-minute alternative put together by the state Department of Education, which would insert "the scientific theory of" before the word evolution.

They said the phrase compromises scientific knowledge merely to mollify those who oppose making the teaching of evolution a requirement in Florida's public schools.

Gerry Meisels, a professor of chemistry at the University of South Florida, urged the state board in an e-mail to adopt the version his group finalized in January, which does not refer to evolution as a theory.

"We can send men to the moon, probes to Mars, design drugs that relieve suffering and pain and cure illness, and so on. All that is based on scientific facts," he wrote. "Should we allow facts to be beaten down by uninformed people just because they are in a majority? Questions of fact, nature and science cannot be answered by majority vote."

The standards -- to be voted on Tuesday by the State Board of Education -- have created statewide controversy because they would, for the first time, require teaching evolution in Florida's public schools.

In the alternative version, the phrase "the scientific theory of" would also go in front of some other topics. The revision was a response to "public input," state officials said Friday. Many of the opponents of the new standards have argued that evolution is not a fact and they do not want it taught that way.

But several of the more than 60 scientists and science teachers who helped devise the new standards said Saturday that they were not happy with those changes and that, based on their own e-mails and phone calls, thought a majority of the group disapproves.

Debra Walker, a member of the Monroe County School Board, said she e-mailed state officials just before 11 p.m. Friday.

"There is no scientifically sound reason to make these changes," she wrote. "To edit it without specific expertise makes no sense, diminishes our work, and, more importantly, sets a dangerous precedent belittling the value of scientific knowledge in Florida for this generation and the next."

Meisels wrote that he did not "like the compromise document because it is clumsy, makes too much of science questionable [given public understanding of theory] and fails to clearly distinguish between scientific fact and scientific theory."

Five of the educators who helped devise the new standards initially were asked to review sections of the alternative document to determine whether adding the phrase "the scientific theory of" or the "law of" in places was still scientifically accurate, said Tom Butler, spokesman for the Florida Department of Education.

After their review, the entire group was sent the full alternative version late Friday and asked to give their views by noon Monday. If members are unhappy, those opinions will be conveyed to the seven-member board, Butler said Saturday.

Ahhh, the protective insulation of inebriation. Lots of input, but never any value.

Quote:

Typical liberal. 'We have problems when we have to listen to someone other than ourselves.'

Thats why airliners arent flown by the passengers.

Elementary and secondary education isn't the highly technical profession that you compare it to.

rl wrote-

Quote:

Elementary and secondary education isn't the highly technical profession that you compare it to.

That's an understatement.

All that high-sounding stuff in wande's posts is self delusion. A form of talking up self-importance.

Bearing in mind the number of teachers required and the salary scales I would think that the average IQ of ordinary teachers is lower than the average in their classes. Modern science leaves them stupified which is why they latch on to the simplicities of Darwin and pretend it is science.

It's like pretending your posh by dabbing some cheap scent behind your ears. Biology is based on physics these days.

Blurting out that evolution theory is a pillar of biology is a joke.