Keep Darwin's 'lies' out of Polish schools: education official

AFP via Yahoo! News ^ | October 14, 2006

[lizol]

Keep Darwin's 'lies' out of Polish schools: education official 2 hours.

WARSAW (AFP) - Poland's deputy education minister called for the influential evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin not to be taught in the country's schools, branding them "lies."

"The theory of evolution is a lie, an error that we have legalised as a common truth," Miroslaw Orzechowski, the deputy minister in the country's right-wing coalition government, was quoted as saying by the Gazeta Wyborcza daily Saturday.

Orzechowski said the theory was "a feeble idea of an aged non-believer," who had come up with it "perhaps because he was a vegetarian and lacked fire inside him."

The evolution theory of the 19th-century British naturalist holds that existing animals and plants are the result of natural selection which eliminated inferior species gradually over time. This conflicts with the "creationist" theory that God created all life on the planet in a finite number.

Orzechowski called for a debate on whether Darwin's theory should be taught in schools.

"We should not teach lies, just as we should not teach bad instead of good, or ugliness instead of beauty," he said. "We are not going to withdraw (Darwin's theory) from the school books, but we should start to discuss it."

The deputy minister is a member of a Catholic far-right political group, the League of Polish Families. The league's head, Roman Giertych, is education minister in the conservative coalition government of Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski.

Giertych's father Maciej, who represents the league in the European Parliament, organised a discussion there last week on Darwinism. He described the theory as "not supported by proof" and called for it be removed from school books.

The far-right joined the government in May when Kaczynski's ruling conservative Law and Justice (PiS) party, after months of ineffective minority government, formed a coalition including LPR and the populist Sambroon party.

Roman Giertych has not spoken out on Darwinism, but the far-right politician's stance on other issues has stirred protest in Poland since he joined the government.

A school pupils' association was expected to demonstrate in front of the education ministry on Saturday to call for his resignation.

[Stultis]

Also, modern man emerged in the cradle of civilization - Europe

Europe's was a late civilization. It there a point to denying the existence for numerous others from Ur and the Sumerians on?

Anatomically modern humans first appear in Africa, and appear in the Middle East before they begin to show up in Europe.

Is there some reason this troubles you?

[stultorum]

"The skulls are designed to demonstrate evidence of evolution. They are data points. There are millions of other data points. The theory of evolution explains that data.

There are no data points that prove how human organs such as the eye, heart, brain evolved from a single cell, nor are there data points that prove that apes evolved into humans. The apes are still here, hence they did not evolve into humans.

Also, data point don't prove anything. All they show is a skull at an erroneously estimated time. They don't show a continuous change of something evolving into another.

[Theo]

You're not worth my time, frankly. Sorry for being so crass. Trying to shed light into your darkened mind is just beyond me. You're on your own.

[Theo]

Yeah, I wish to b a creationist. Because God is a creationist.

You've got a a dead man on your side. I've got a living God on my side. You've chosen foolishly.

But that's entirely your choice.

As for me and my family, we choose the Lord and the evidence that slime to human is a fairy tale, and that "kinds" were created according to Scripture and the evidence, and the diversity we see is a result of subtle and gradual disarray of genetic information. Perfectly logica, compatible with the evidence, and compatible with Scripture.

FWIW, I used to believe Darwin and his flock. But after examining the evidence, had to conclude that Scripture is in fact right in how it describes creation.

How sad for you Darwinists to look at a sunset and not have anyone to thank for it.

[Coyoteman]

There are no data points that prove how human organs such as the eye, heart, brain evolved from a single cell,...

I do bones, not biology. Check with some of the other folks on this point.

...nor are there data points that prove that apes evolved into humans.

There is evidence that apes and humans share a common ancestor. It comes from fossils as well as genetics. You can ignore, but that won't make it go away.

The apes are still here, hence they did not evolve into humans.

This is an absolutely idiotic statement. Look at all the dog breeds; your argument would say that because there are collies there can't be huskies! With the common ancestors of ape and human, there was a split, with one group staying in the forests and another group heading for the grasslands. We evolved from the latter group. Why should the other group have disappeared? They had it good, fat and happy in the forests with little need to evolve.

Also, data point don't prove anything. All they show is a skull at an erroneously estimated time. They don't show a continuous change of something evolving into another.

OK, here are some additional skulls which do show continuous change. Anything else I can do to help?

Figure 1.4.4. Fossil hominid skulls. Some of the figures have been modified for ease of comparison (only left-right mirroring or removal of a jawbone). (Images © 2000 Smithsonian Institution.)

(A) Pan troglodytes, chimpanzee, modern
(B) Australopithecus africanus, STS 5, 2.6 My
(C) Australopithecus africanus, STS 71, 2.5 My
(D) Homo habilis, KNM-ER 1813, 1.9 My
(E) Homo habilis, OH24, 1.8 My
(F) Homo rudolfensis, KNM-ER 1470, 1.8 My
(G) Homo erectus, Dmanisi cranium D2700, 1.75 My
(H) Homo ergaster (early H. erectus), KNM-ER 3733, 1.75 My
(I) Homo heidelbergensis, "Rhodesia man," 300,000 - 125,000 y
(J) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Ferrassie 1, 70,000 y
(K) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Chappelle-aux-Saints, 60,000 y
(L) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, Le Moustier, 45,000 y
(M) Homo sapiens sapiens, Cro-Magnon I, 30,000 y
(N) Homo sapiens sapiens, modern

[Jaguarbhzrd]

What does you religous beliefs or mine for that matter, have to do with a scientific theory?

Why do you continue with the nonsense that if you understand the theory of evolution, a scientific theory, that you cannot be religious, or believe in God?

Where does such ignorance on your part come from?

Believe what you wish, but do not claim that science is wrong, because it hurts your faith in your religion.

That's your problem, not sciences.

[Theo]

The skulls are designed to demonstrate evidence of evolution

See -- even YOU know that the body was designed. But yet you stubbornly refuse to credit the Designer, instead giving credit to a random process proposed by a dead guy.

Yes, they are indeed designed, to demonstrate evidence of design.

Now go back and cover your ears and eyes and shout me down. But you know the truth, and the Creator will hold you accountable -- that "all this" was designed.

[Admin Moderator]

Knock it off or you'll face another in a long line of suspensions.

[Stultis]

Why? Do you believe the Constitution guarantees your version of science and history an exclusive hearing in public schools?

I believe the Constitution guarantees the State shall not establish a religion and attempting to do so, in the guise of ID, is against it.

I'd just add that, were Intelligent Design (or some other creationistic theory) to achieve genuine standing, on merit, and a successful scientific theory, there would be no constitutional prohibition against teaching it in public schools, even if it also was perceived to have religious implications.

The principle here is that the advancement (or inhibition) of religion by law or state policy is only prohibited where that is the primary or principle motivation and effect of the law or policy. To the extent that advancement or inhibition of religion is entirely incidental and secondary to some "valid secular purpose," there is no prohibition.

If ID really were science, there would obviously be a "valid secular purpose" to teaching it in a science classroom. The fact that ID has no standing as a theory actually utilized in scientific research is the reason that teaching it (in public schools) is unconstitutional. Ironically advocates of ID have only highlighted and exacerbated the fatality of this flaw by devoting virtually all their energies to popular and political controversialism, and few if any to scientific research.

[sobieski]

What is your proof that evolution (a new species coming from a separate species) exists? I have seen sites promoted by the believers in 'evolution', but they always are proof of only intelligent design; that is, it's only seen in labs, but the scientist there is the intelligent designer.

Now, 'reading' the fossil record is nothing more than seeing what you want to see.

So my question: in the wild, has there ever been a proven example of a species being born that cannot mate with the generation right before it? No lab work allowed.

[balrog666]

Yeah! No exposing the fundmentalists for the clowns they really are! /sarc

[sobieski]

One sees what one wants to...

[RunningWolf]

The Rise and Fall of Skull KNM-ER 1470, a glimpse  into some mens fancy, or rather 'the transitional'. The Rise and Fall of Skull KNM-ER 1470

In late 1972, an enigmatic fossilized skull was unearthed near Lake Turkana, Kenya. The skull, which was subsequently accessioned as East Rudolf specimen 1470 (or KNM–ER 1470 in abbreviated form), was unearthed by Bernard Ngeneo — a field worker for renowned paleoanthropologist, Richard E. Leakey.

original reconstruction of Skull KNM–ER 1470

The discovery was greeted with much enthusiasm by evolutionists the world over because it appeared to bridge the gap between the putative hominid line of ancestors (including the australopithecines and Homo habilis) and the decidedly more humanlike fossils designated Homo erectus

Leakey himself ended up back pedaling on this one..,

profile of 1470 Based on new bone-scanning techniques, typical australopithecine prognathicity is evident in this 1992 drawing

There is precious little evidence to show otherwise. For the present it should be quietly packed away and added to the long list of abandoned or downgraded hominid specimens, which once adorned our natural history textbooks.

---

The history is full of incidents like this, all cloistered away.

W.

[A. Pole]

There has never been any civilization in Ethiopia that I know of until us Europeans went there, colonized them, fed them, civilized, educated, and tamed them.

You mean when Mussolini invaded Ethiopia? Or earlier when Italians got beaten by Ethiopians. (See Battle of Adowa)

Ethiopia is an old Christian country with cultural roots deriving from southern Egypt and sharing faith with Coptic Christians.

[RunningWolf]

That skull might be a transitional in their flow chart with all its 'best guess dotted lines' but that is where it ends.

That skull is nothing but a composite (that they assert is 1.75 mya) 1.75 million years old, and is made up of a few hundred pieces that don't fit together all to well.



Just one place to start is that rear head area, another is the profile. But don't take my word for it, take the images they bring here as evidence, enlarge the images, and start taking a look. Put that in context to what they are suggesting. Then apply the most accurate dating methods to the pieces, and notice the margin of error applied to each piece.

W.

[RunningWolf]

Placemarker Ping List

---

A courtesy 'ping' service for everytime I might contemplate making a post so all affected evos can get their 'placemarkers' in

You have been added to this courtesy ping list by way of demonstrating an interest in my posts by use of the 'Message in a Placemarker' and/or having numerous sidebar conversations about me.

To assist beginners: But it's "just a placemarker" Evos are Troll's Toolkit
and how to marginalize science with religious fanaticism toward the monkey god of darwinist ideology.

[A. Pole]

Also, modern man emerged in the cradle of civilization - Europe

Cradle of civilization was in the Middle (Near) East. Same place where Christian religion was born. The oldest part was Mesopotamia/Sumer (todays Iraq)

[Stultis]

So my question: in the wild, has there ever been a proven example of a species being born that cannot mate with the generation right before it? No lab work allowed.

That would be pretty unusual, but probably happens sometimes. I would guess that the more typical situation, if you're talking about "sympatric" speciation (where the populations involved remain in contact) is that reduced fertility arises between populations within a species. IOW, if I as, say, a female, mate with a male from the other population, there is a lesser chance that I will have viable offspring than if I mate with a member of my own population. Under those circumstances there can arise a selective pressure to avoid and discourage such matings. This will further separate the populations genetically and greater of full infertility can emerge over time. Of course this can also happen if the populations are physically separated.

For some examples of observed, or recent and readily inferred, speciation, look here and here.

[Jaguarbhzrd]

I am amazed at how well creationist can quote mine, even from a post that can be looked back at to see the original.

Completely amazing is how you can ignore the science, because your religious faith is so weak.

Science has nothing to do with your religion, nor your religious faith, or in your case, lack thereof.

If you faith was indeed strong, as you so claim, you would not be threatened by a scientific theory.

It's science, and it has nothing to say about your religious beliefs or faith.

[siunevada]

Ethiopia is an old Christian country with cultural roots deriving from southern Egypt and sharing faith with Coptic Christians.

I guess you could also mention Acts Chapter 8 in the Bible, Philip talking to the Ethiopian court official who had come up to Jerusalem to worship.