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

Skip to comments.

Oregon Biology Teacher Fired Over Bible References
Fox News ^ | Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Posted on 03/20/2007 2:02:43 PM PDT by Diago

During his eight days as a part-time high school biology teacher, Kris Helphinstine included Biblical references in material he provided to students and gave a PowerPoint presentation that made links between evolution, Nazi Germany and Planned Parenthood.

That was enough for the Sisters School Board, which fired the teacher Monday night for deviating from the curriculum on the theory of evolution.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: crevo; fsmdidit; idjunkscience; idlosesagain; yecapologetics
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-188 next last
To: RobbyS

All opinions, on any matter whatsoever, are shaped by the day and the culture in which they form.

That said, science is unique in human endeavor in that it actively works to remove blinders caused by that effect. Other endeavors, such as politics or religion, seem to glory in them.

It's the belief that slight, insurmountable cultural bias demolishes the truth in science or the value in modernity that is the basis of luddism.


61 posted on 03/20/2007 3:56:02 PM PDT by voltaires_zit (Government is the problem, not the answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: voltaires_zit

To the extent that it's true to say science is shaped by the day and culture in which [it forms], is to make an interesting but ultimately meaningless observation. No one is capable of working outside his time and place. On the other hand, if "day and culture" were able to distort science, why does science originating in, say, pre-Victorian England, still work in post-Mao China?


62 posted on 03/20/2007 4:01:28 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Scientists are as likely to abuse their positions as anyone else. They are just as greedy for fame and fortune as the average rock star. More to the point, they are sometime guilty of priestcraft, which is to claim magical powers.

One more time. Will you hold that hold to that opinion in the face of assertions that creationsists are not "anti-science"?

More relevant to the purpose of this forum, will you advocate that position as the correct political stance for passing legislation and forming public policy with regard to public support of science and the scientific community?

63 posted on 03/20/2007 4:01:32 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: voltaires_zit

The hubris of scientists is to claim that the scientific method is the only way we can know anything. This puts them in the unique position of claiming the right to say which questions are meaningful.


64 posted on 03/20/2007 4:05:17 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Gumlegs

> On the other hand, if "day and culture" were able to
> distort science, why does science originating in, say,
> pre-Victorian England, still work in post-Mao China?

Because, as I also noted, the endeavor of science (alone among human undertakings) actually takes meaningful steps to minimize the effects by, for example, insisting that observations or experiments be repeatable and reproducible.

Even so, some of the assumptions underlying Newtonian physics, that space could be adequately described using Euclidean geometry and that time progressed at a uniform rate, were clearly "time and place" sorts of assumptions that have measureable, negative, impact on the accuracy of his theory.

What assumptions do we make today?


65 posted on 03/20/2007 4:09:53 PM PDT by voltaires_zit (Government is the problem, not the answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

Creationists are not anti-science unless science demands that they accept that the scientific method is the only way we can know anything. As for the peculiar term "scientific community." is that politically-speaking simply another lobby, little different in its acivities from the gay-rights lobby in trying to get the law to silence its opponents?


66 posted on 03/20/2007 4:11:38 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Scientists are as likely to abuse their positions as anyone else.

That's because they're just as human as anyone else.

They are just as greedy for fame and fortune as the average rock star. More to the point, they are sometime guilty of priestcraft, which is to claim magical powers.

Is that why so many scientists have their own television shows on which they appear immaculately coiffed, sometimes with their wives interjecting, "Oh! Praise Pasteur!" every few moments while the scientist tearfully warns his viewers that unless the viewers send money, that science won't like them any more?

67 posted on 03/20/2007 4:13:00 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Creationists are not anti-science unless science demands that they accept that the scientific method is the only way we can know anything.

Is it all right if they demand that the scientific disciplines be based on the scientific method, or do you demand that theologians reserve the right to overrule their conclusions if they conflict with religious dogma?

As for the peculiar term "scientific community." is that politically-speaking simply another lobby, little different in its acivities from the gay-rights lobby in trying to get the law to silence its opponents?

The Founders specifically made reference to the legitimate role of government in advancing and supporting science and scientific inquiry. You tell me if it's "just another lobby".

68 posted on 03/20/2007 4:18:42 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: voltaires_zit
Because, as I also noted, the endeavor of science (alone among human undertakings) actually takes meaningful steps to minimize the effects by, for example, insisting that observations or experiments be repeatable and reproducible.

Of course.

Even so, some of the assumptions underlying Newtonian physics, that space could be adequately described using Euclidean geometry and that time progressed at a uniform rate, were clearly "time and place" sorts of assumptions that have measureable, negative, impact on the accuracy of his theory.

Yup. At present, we regard it as "true as far as it goes." Newton should never be underestimated, even though he modestly stated he was "standing on the shoulders of giants." We now have the advantage of standing on the shoulders of several generations of very intelligent and hard-working people who have been standing on Newton's shoulders.

What assumptions do we make today?

That will be more obvious in fifty or a hundred years.

69 posted on 03/20/2007 4:19:22 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

First of all what do you mean by "creationists?" That can mean just those who believe that the account of the creation in Genesis has to be taken as it is. More broadly, it is the theological doctrine that the universe is a creation, not just something that "happened." Another part of this is the belief that the universe had a beginning and will have an end. Many thinkers from Aristotle onward, and taught that the universe always existed. Scientists who accept the latter belief might be called anti-creationists, and they can hold to this even though it seems to go against what we now know. Fred Hoyle believed this, I think. Others try the end around notion of multiple universes or consecutive universes, which is also in one form or another a way of accounting for the counter-intuitive aspects of quantum theory. The way that human beings are made indictaes that we can never be satisfied with agnosticism about untilmate things, which is why Eveolutionists and therologicnas each go beyond what they actually know at any given moment.


70 posted on 03/20/2007 4:22:36 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Diago

That's a good post.


71 posted on 03/20/2007 4:24:27 PM PDT by RightWhale (Treaty rules;commerce droolz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Diago; All

Why do these idiots always bring up eugenics and what the Nazis did in their opposition to evolution theory? Social conservatives complain all the time about liberal teachers with agendas; why should kooks from the right get a free pass?


72 posted on 03/20/2007 4:29:04 PM PDT by WestVirginiaRebel ("...Mindless pack of trained Maoist circus seals."-www.iowahwk.typepad.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
If you are going to teach in a government school, you have to stick to godlessness. You cannot mention God or anything from the traditional biblical perspective that has served as the underpinning of American civilization for four hundred years.

For the entire history of the country until quite recently you could mention God and refer directly to biblical principles concerning the origins of man because that was the kind of schools that communities "freely" chose to create since the beginning of this country.

This is no longer the case, for you must now lead children to believe that science has proven that the only reasonable explanation for their existence must be given by naturalistic science, for they are the ultimate holders of all truth about past events that they did not observe or test and the Bible is merely a book of nonsense.

It was only recently that liberals have used the supreme court to overcome the will of most parents in the name of their own secular progressive revisionism.

The only solution is to phase out and discontinue the godless government school monopoly and let the parents choose a private godless school if that is their choice. At the same time the large majority of parents will get to choose a school that they favor as well. Goodbye to the forced godless indoctrination.

It is the only just solution, because the government schools are a political monopoly as dictated by the NEA and the ACLU playbook.

73 posted on 03/20/2007 4:31:36 PM PDT by Old Landmarks (No fear of man, none!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
First of all what do you mean by "creationists?"

I mean those who describe themselves as "creationists". You can't be that obsessed with measuring everything else by contemporaneous cultural and societal dynamics, and then pretend you don't understand that context here and now.

74 posted on 03/20/2007 4:34:23 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Old Landmarks

And you think the appropriate response to that situation is to hold science in the same contempt that liberals hold religion?


75 posted on 03/20/2007 4:36:17 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

You saw nothing of the kind in my post. This only proves that some people ignore an entire post and see what they want instead.


76 posted on 03/20/2007 5:03:46 PM PDT by Old Landmarks (No fear of man, none!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
First of all what do you mean by "[C]reationists?" That can mean just those who believe that the account of the creation in Genesis has to be taken as it is [interpreted by rustic American preachers a century ago]

Let's go with that, and ignore Creationist attempts to vague the term

77 posted on 03/20/2007 5:08:10 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy ("Red Meat. We were meant to eat it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Diago; Gelato

Filed under "reasons to kill off the government schools."

Entry number 10,485,339...


78 posted on 03/20/2007 5:08:28 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (If you want your eco-sins forgiven, just buy Carbon Indulgences...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diago
During his eight days as a part-time high school biology teacher, Kris Helphinstine included Biblical references in material he provided to students and gave a PowerPoint presentation that made links between evolution, Nazi Germany and Planned Parenthood.

ROFL

You look too small, to be a threat to the men in power ...


79 posted on 03/20/2007 5:09:55 PM PDT by af_vet_1981 (Waiting for Samson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Landmarks
You saw nothing of the kind in my post. This only proves that some people ignore an entire post and see what they want instead.

Not buying it. I saw not only the entire post, but the post it was in response to that established the context. Thou doth protest too much.

80 posted on 03/20/2007 5:24:37 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-188 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