Posted on 08/23/2006 11:09:23 PM PDT by balch3
Evolutionary biology has vanished from the list of acceptable fields of study for recipients of a federal education grant for low-income college students.
The omission is inadvertent, said Katherine McLane, a spokeswoman for the Department of Education, which administers the grants. “There is no explanation for it being left off the list,” Ms. McLane said. “It has always been an eligible major.”
Another spokeswoman, Samara Yudof, said evolutionary biology would be restored to the list, but as of last night it was still missing.
If a major is not on the list, students in that major cannot get grants unless they declare another major, said Barmak Nassirian, associate executive director of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers. Mr. Nassirian said students seeking the grants went first to their college registrar, who determined whether they were full-time students majoring in an eligible field.
“If a field is missing, that student would not even get into the process,” he said.
That the omission occurred at all is worrying scientists concerned about threats to the teaching of evolution.
One of them, Lawrence M. Krauss, a physicist at Case Western Reserve University, said he learned about it from someone at the Department of Education, who got in touch with him after his essay on the necessity of teaching evolution appeared in The New York Times on Aug. 15. Dr. Krauss would not name his source, who he said was concerned about being publicly identified as having drawn attention to the matter.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I take note of your tagline, which reads...
"The bible is either 100% true, or in it's very nature it is 100% a lie"...
Now, whose interpretation of the Bible is 100% true?...I mean, whenever I read the threads on the religion forum here at FR, there is constant disagreement on what various passages actually mean...there is even disagreement on what individual words actually mean in their particular context...so granted that the Bible is 100% true, is it true according to your specific interpretations, or it is true according to the interpretation of someone who disagrees completely with you on a number of points...if you and others cannot agree on what a particular passage in the Bible, actually means, then you all have different interpretations, which represent the truth to you...is there, then, more than one truth...many of those on the religion forum are well read, well versed, and well educated in the Bible, and yet they come to entirely different 'truths' as you call them, from the Bible...
That's not evolution.
False. The theory of evolution follows standard scientific methods.
Why do you hate the theory of evolution so much that you spread untruths about it?
"Evolution is back on the PDF"
It was never off. There was ONE MAJOR that was removed, but the evolution category and subdisciplines were NEVER removed. The listing in my post is from the same day the article came out. The major they were complaining about missing is 26.1303, evolutionary biology. This was probably because it was horribly redundant with everything around it.
"Probably hastened back on due to the news article's outcry."
I don't doubt that the idiocy of the outcry led them to put back the needlessly redundant major. It's amazing that people can't clean up redundancies without crazy Darwinists finding conspiracy theories everywhere.
I'd hit the abuse button but it does no good against personal attacks by creationists.
There is no scientific distinction between, or definition of, "natural" and "supernatural." Otherwise, what is not supernatural about matter becoming self organized wholly apart from intelligence or design? If intelligent design is supernatural why don't we call your posts "miracles," since they, too, are a product of the same?
No flame suit required.
Heck, even the Pope says evolution is OK.
The only ones against it are the ones who think the universe was created in 6 days, and Noah lived 800 years.
It is OK. They mean well.
Some people like to be told what to do, and what to think. "Preachers" fill that purpose, and give them what they want.
They preach 6 days, and Noah, and the others will be damned. A lot of people eat it up, because it makes them feel good. They join in the parade.
Not to stereotype, well, heck, yes to stereotype: Fat chicks, and their support network.
Surely you've seen this example before:
If a genetic marker (like an ERV or a pseudogene) is found in the same location in the genomes of both a cow and a pig, but is not present in a horse, put these species and genera of animal into classThe question can be answered, but only by using the common descent part of the Theory of Evolution. None of the factions of anti-evolution activism, neither Christian, Islamic, or Hindu creationism, nor ID (except for Behe's version), has the power to answer this question.
a) will have the marker,
b) won't have it,
c) not enough data to tell.aardvark, bear, camel, deer, elephant, fox, giraffe, hippo, llama, panda, person, platypus, rat, rhino, whale, zebra.
(BTW, when the answers are checked against reality, they're right)
Therefore, your claim that evolution does not add to the study of genetics is false.
As for medicine, ...
Ok then; if that's what you believe.
Can these still be purchased at Victoria's Secret?
Since you have no way of knowing whether this is true or not....
NIV Hebrews 13:2
Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some people have entertained angels without knowing it.
Oh??
Where??
INDEED!
NIV Psalms 11:4
The LORD is in his holy temple; the LORD is on his heavenly throne. He observes the sons of men; his eyes examine them.
NIV Psalms 66:7
He rules forever by his power, his eyes watch the nations-- let not the rebellious rise up against him. Selah
Only if you're Muslim, then the 7th Century takes over, according to FR posters.
(IN validated, that is.)
We sure agree on this! ;^)
Are you saying you're NOT crazy, or, that you're NOT a Darwinist? ;^)
"(BTW, when the answers are checked against reality, they're right)"
Did you miss the conversation we had before when I pointed to the many instances where this does not pan out?
The fact is that genetic trees actually contradict morphological trees in significant ways. The only way to say one is right and one is wrong is to make an assumption about which one is right and which one is wrong.
Are you honestly saying that on FreeRepublic.com it is an
_abuse_ to make fun of the New York Times? I thought that was half of the reason for the site's existance!
No big deal the underlying courses are still around.
I knew you wouldn't let me down (LOL)
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.