Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A column about Kansas Science Standards
EducationNews.org ^ | November 14, 2005 | State Board Chairman Steve Abrams, DVM

Posted on 11/14/2005 8:06:26 AM PST by Exigence

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281 next last
To: Exigence

Then I'm sure you'll be pleased to know that it was your post #30 that inspired it.


41 posted on 11/14/2005 8:49:49 AM PST by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Exigence
... we ask that the evolutionists reveal what they are doggedly hiding, ...

There is nothing being hidden. This is one of the facets of scientific inquiry; it's all published (unless The Government suppress things about weapons or something.) Mr Abrams's claim is vacuous. If he wants to make claims of things hidden, he can publish his research on the topics.

42 posted on 11/14/2005 8:50:34 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Exigence
Just because someone disagrees with the god of naturalism...

Yet another example of a creationist trying to insult evolution by calling it a religion. Tells you a lot about them....

43 posted on 11/14/2005 8:50:46 AM PST by highball ("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: aft_lizard

I'l ba-aack.

Here's another gem:

Obviously, that is one of the reasons that we tried to further define evolution. We want to differentiate between the genetic capacity in each species genome that permits it to change with the environment as being different from changing to some other creature. "

In other words we would like to redefine evolution out of existence and hide behind a flurry of words whilewe do so.


44 posted on 11/14/2005 8:51:57 AM PST by From many - one.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp

I think that the Kansas state board has drafts posted on their website. Try google.


45 posted on 11/14/2005 8:52:38 AM PST by Chiapet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

Probably at a DU fundraiser.


46 posted on 11/14/2005 8:53:42 AM PST by Mamzelle (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Exigence

You are hardly a neutral source


47 posted on 11/14/2005 8:54:59 AM PST by From many - one.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Exigence
Maybe if you read the article I posted.

I did read what you posted. Next time you post an excerpt, identify it as such. I always go to the source if the post is an excerpt.

48 posted on 11/14/2005 8:55:22 AM PST by wyattearp (The best weapon to have in a gunfight is a shotgun - preferably from ambush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan
The simplified definition of a species is usually: can they have viable children?

Too simplified to be operational; it doesn't apply to two men but it does to two earthworms.

49 posted on 11/14/2005 8:56:53 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Yeah. Just call them the experts and ignore the world.

I named no one, so go ahead and "cherry pick" those who you think fit your argument. That's not an intellectually honest method, but, hey, all loose reasoning is fair when we're talking about "science," eh?

Let's not forget the Board chair holds a doctrate in the sciences and I have friends and acquaintances on the faculties of or who are alums with doctrates in the sciences from major universities who have no problem with the new standards... they just can't get interviewed by the "unbiased" press.

It's also interesting how foreign science journals are more honest about printing research that might chip away at evolution. Only the politically motivated US journals man the portal of scientific publications so voraciously and politically. Of course, that has no effect on "science," right? Long live the god of naturalism, eh?

(And, of course, we know that university profs as a body are diverse in their views. It's not like it's hard to get tenure if you hold different viewpoints than the liberal agenda dictates, right?)

50 posted on 11/14/2005 8:57:57 AM PST by Exigence
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Gish has a degree in engineering.

And amazingly, he doesn't seem to understand the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (or he deliberately distorts it - I'm not sure which).

51 posted on 11/14/2005 8:58:07 AM PST by Quark2005 (Science aims to elucidate. Pseudoscience aims to obfuscate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan
I was more asking about why you'd have any sort of distinct categories of "microevolution" versus "macroevolution" ... how the process of evolution itself could be bounded into such distinctions ...

What you stated is basically how I unserstand evolution, I was just amazed by the article's statement: We want to differentiate between the genetic capacity in each species genome that permits it to change with the environment as being different from changing to some other creature.

And was curious how they could define a "genetic capacity" when one of the things evolution could do is change the "genetic capacity", and what would regulate such "permission to change" if such permission is contained in DNA and thusly could itself be changed ...

52 posted on 11/14/2005 8:58:24 AM PST by bobhoskins (?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Behe is a real biochemist.

Just not a particularly good one, it seems.

53 posted on 11/14/2005 8:59:04 AM PST by RogueIsland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: From many - one.
You are hardly a neutral source.

Are you saying that the link provided in the article to the State of Kansas website has to be provided by a neutral source? You're kidding, right? Sheesh...

54 posted on 11/14/2005 8:59:26 AM PST by Exigence
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
The science standards, approved 08 November, are linked at this website under "Hot Topics":
Kansas State Department of Education.
55 posted on 11/14/2005 9:00:12 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Expect no response if you're a troll, lunatic, retard, or incurable ignoramus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: From many - one.

This is truly classic!


56 posted on 11/14/2005 9:00:15 AM PST by blowfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
Next time you post an excerpt, identify it as such.

What excerpt? I posted the entire text. Check the link!

57 posted on 11/14/2005 9:00:34 AM PST by Exigence
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Exigence
It's also interesting how foreign science journals are more honest about printing research that might chip away at evolution.

Any specific citations? This would be more effective than an apocryphal reference. I'm all for peer-reviewed literature being used in the context of proper science education. I'm aware of none that exists supporting ID or creationism.

58 posted on 11/14/2005 9:00:39 AM PST by Quark2005 (Science aims to elucidate. Pseudoscience aims to obfuscate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Quark2005
I may have confused him with Dr. Walt Brown, who at least got his engineering degree from MIT. I should go Google before I post but sometimes don't realize what's getting jumbled in the old head.

I'll be back in a sec.

59 posted on 11/14/2005 9:01:02 AM PST by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Exigence

BTTT.


60 posted on 11/14/2005 9:01:39 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (The nastiness of evolutionists proves one theological point: human depravity..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson