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

Skip to comments.

Evolution Opponent Is in Line for Schools Post
The New York Times ^ | May 19, 2007 | CORNELIA DEAN

Posted on 05/23/2007 8:19:05 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 461-474 next last

1 posted on 05/23/2007 8:19:06 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: gobucks; mikeus_maximus; JudyB1938; isaiah55version11_0; Elsie; LiteKeeper; AndrewC; Havoc; ...


You have been pinged because of your interest regarding news, debate and editorials pertaining to the Creation vs. Evolution debate - from the young-earth creationist perspective.
To to get on or off this list (currently the premier list for creation/evolution news!), freep-mail me:
Add me / Remove me

2 posted on 05/23/2007 8:19:23 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (Gun-free zones are a mass murderer's first choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

KS people want to be liked and recognized by the rest of the country: Sam Brownback. I am sure this conservative will be dumped by these liberal school board members from the nation. He sounds like someone with backbone.


3 posted on 05/23/2007 8:21:36 PM PDT by Theodore R. (Cowardice is forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

...member of the Kansas school board who supported its efforts against the teaching of evolution.


Whoa there! IIRC the issue was stating that evolution was a theory while teaching it.

Is the argument against him so weak that they must resort to lies?


4 posted on 05/23/2007 8:22:45 PM PDT by Grizzled Bear ("Does not play well with others.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
The candidate is Kenneth R. Willard, a Kansas Republican who voted with the conservative majority in 2005 when the school board changed the state’s science standards to allow inclusion of intelligent design, an ideological cousin of creationism. Voters later replaced that majority, but Mr. Willard, an insurance executive from Hutchinson, retained his seat. If he becomes president-elect of the national group, he will take office in January 2009.

And based on the court decision he helped bring about, he will be powerless to push his anti-science agenda if he does get elected.

5 posted on 05/23/2007 8:23:19 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

Then why worry?


6 posted on 05/23/2007 8:45:12 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (Gun-free zones are a mass murderer's first choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Grizzled Bear
"Is the argument against him so weak that they must resort to lies?"

No. The argument is quite sound scientifically. It is they, themselves, who are so weak.

7 posted on 05/23/2007 9:25:17 PM PDT by YHAOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS

I don’t argue with morons. They like to drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.


8 posted on 05/23/2007 9:27:13 PM PDT by Grizzled Bear ("Does not play well with others.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Grizzled Bear

Bingo!


9 posted on 05/24/2007 12:09:37 AM PDT by RussP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger
Then why worry?

I don't think it's worry, it's just residual left over bigotry against folks who don't toe the evolutionist line.
10 posted on 05/24/2007 1:54:34 AM PDT by dbehsman (NRA Life Member, and loving every minute of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger; Aetius; Alamo-Girl; AndrewC; Asphalt; Aussie Dasher; AnalogReigns; banalblues; ...
"Scientists who have been active in the nation’s evolution debate say they want to thwart his candidacy..."

I think that we can be sure that these are certainly not scientists, but evolutionists. They are loosing their propaganda war precisely because of their rejection of real science to promote their man-as-god agenda.

11 posted on 05/24/2007 7:51:01 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Indeed, they are doing politics under the color of science.


12 posted on 05/24/2007 8:05:11 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; editor-surveyor; DaveLoneRanger; hosepipe
Indeed, they are doing politics under the color of science

I don't know why Darwinian evolution theory needs so much "defending," up to and including using crooked means, if it's so darned great. This is a scientific matter, not a political one; or ought so to be regarded. IMHO.

The vehemence (and even seeming desperation) of some of its supporters suggests religious passion, not scientific dispassion/objectivity.

Plus I don't understand why it wants to "exempt" itself from the normal course of science, which is evolutionary itself. Theories are improved upon over the course of scientific investigation. We now realize that even Newtonian mechanics is not exempt from this rule.

Well, FWIW my two cents....

13 posted on 05/24/2007 8:20:16 AM PDT by betty boop ("Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." -- A. Einstein.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: betty boop; hosepipe; Quix; marron; cornelis
Very well said as always, my dearest sister in Christ!

Happy Birthday!

14 posted on 05/24/2007 8:32:57 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; betty boop

Cake? Did someone say cake?

I’ll put the coffee on.


15 posted on 05/24/2007 8:59:56 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
I don't know why Darwinian evolution theory needs so much "defending," up to and including using crooked means, if it's so darned great. This is a scientific matter, not a political one; or ought so to be regarded. IMHO.

The theory of evolution is about the only scientific theory consistently attacked by organized religion using blatantly false, non-scientific and indeed anti-scientific propaganda. Just look over on AnswersInGenesis for examples of all of this.

If you want to consider "crooked means" then check out the deliberate misunderstanding of science, the blatant falsehoods repeated endlessly, the quote mining, and all the rest of the "crooked means" used by creationists to challenge the theory of evolution. You see everything but science.

You write, "This is a scientific matter, not a political one; or ought so to be regarded." To this I respond, "This is a scientific matter, not a religious one; or ought so to be regarded."


The vehemence (and even seeming desperation) of some of its supporters suggests religious passion, not scientific dispassion/objectivity.

That's the new talking point, eh? Folks defend science from years of gratuitous and poorly thought out religiously-based attacks and now they are going to be chided for "religious passion" (or even accused of doing religion). Is that the best you can do?


Plus I don't understand why it wants to "exempt" itself from the normal course of science, which is evolutionary itself. Theories are improved upon over the course of scientific investigation. We now realize that even Newtonian mechanics is not exempt from this rule.

Scientists know that. There are hundreds of journals and tens of thousands of researchers dedicated to working out the details of the theory of evolution, and they are testing and challenging everything.

The problem you seem to have with evolutionary science is that it is not willing to accept new age metaphysico-philosphical mumbo-jumbo or religious belief as valid scientific evidence.

16 posted on 05/24/2007 9:00:16 AM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

What a load of fertilizer!


17 posted on 05/24/2007 9:21:07 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor

Don’t ya know that repeatedly making false accusations about ID will render ID moot? No science to be found in ID lol- that’s precious. Repeat, repeat, repeat, click heels three times and whisper “Noone outside of evolution is ligit”, then get ready to be whisped away to never never land. While on the flight, keep fingers firmly inserted in ears and keep repeating the mantra of the dogmatic “Evolution is science, science presented against evolution is not science”


18 posted on 05/24/2007 10:44:13 AM PDT by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

[The problem you seem to have with evolutionary science is that it is not willing to accept new age metaphysico-philosphical mumbo-jumbo or religious belief as valid scientific evidence.]

Bzzzzt- the ‘only problem’ we have with evolutionary science is the fact that they keep presenting sketchy ‘evidence’ and suggesting that biological impossibilities need to be ignored in order to believe a rat sized animal’s jaw, when compared to a hippos sized animal’s jaw suggests that the ‘ear bones were evolving’ lol- Yup- that’s some perty serious ‘science’ right there brother.


19 posted on 05/24/2007 10:47:06 AM PDT by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
Plus I don't understand why it wants to "exempt" itself from the normal course of science, which is evolutionary itself. Theories are improved upon over the course of scientific investigation. We now realize that even Newtonian mechanics is not exempt from this rule.

You do realize that theories are improved by the introduction of additional "evidence". Do let us know when ID comes up with some.

20 posted on 05/24/2007 10:47:07 AM PDT by blowfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 461-474 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