Posted on 03/30/2009 12:58:22 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
The New York Times got the preview story wrong, and the Washington Post editorial writer probably was too rushed to question the charges of "creationism" coming from the National Center for Science Education, the Darwin-only lobby. So this week's important decisions by the Texas Board of Education (TBOE) on how to teach evolution were predicated in the media by the big question of whether teachers should provide both "strengths and weaknesses" of Darwin's theory. Those words might sound benign, readers were told, but they really are "code words" (take the press' word for it) for creationism and religion.
To the media left, any questioning of Darwin is reserved for denizens of Dogpatch.
So, what did the TBOE do? Well, it turns out that they are fairly adroit politicians. They did remove language providing for "strengths and weaknesses" and then added new language--quite a lot of it--providing that students will learn, for example, to "analyze, evaluate and critique scientific explanations…including examining all sides of scientific evidence… so as to encourage critical thinking by the student." Perfect! A policy distinction without a difference! In fact, the new standards are just fine, an improvement, in fact. Now teachers can tell the kids about the scientific evidence in a variety of fields that seems to contradict the Darwinian account as well as the supposed evidence in support.
Once again the NCSE was too-smart-by-half. It ran blogs making fun of religion, while organizing public speakers who gave fulsome testimony to their Christian faith and how compatible it is with "evolution" (meaning Darwinian evolution). To the purists like Richard Dawkins and P.Z. Myers it probably makes them look like toadies.
In the end, the rhetoric meant to evoke fundamentalist cranks was mixed with pious statements doing the very kind of religious posturing the Darwinists project onto their foes, and reminding me of the church scenes from Blazing Saddles. It all backfired.
By demonizing specific words--and making the elimination of them the test of "science"--the NCSE and its state distributor, the Orwellian-named Texas Freedom Network, simply allowed the Board to do the obvious word shuffle. Okay, no "strengths and weakness, " but instead, we'll pass similar ideas in different words, and everyone will be happy. Except, of course, the NCSE and the TFN.
Don't expect the media to figure this out from the NCSE Talking Points memo, but the insiders get the picture. Dawkins must be enjoying a caustic chuckle at the expense of the NCSE.
Ping!
Do you oppose the teaching of Evolution?
==Do you oppose the teaching of Evolution?
I oppose the teaching of evolution unopposed. If Darwood’s materialist creation myth is forced to contend with its main competition on the merits, it will collapse like a house of cards IMHO.
“I oppose the teaching of evolution unopposed.”
Finally, I think we almost agree on something. I think that creation and evolution should both be taught.
I’ll ignore your use of the word “unopposed” for now in the spirit of kumbaya.
global warming should also be taught with opposing views.
Do you oppose the teaching of the oblate spherical Earth unopposed? Should the spherical Earth and flat Earth both be taught?
“Should the spherical Earth and flat Earth both be taught?”
Not in science class.
The earth ‘looks’ flat. Students should understand how we reached the conclusion that is is round before the advent space travel. They shouldn’t simply parrot off science facts.
I do not claim to be a scientist...but since the advent of space travel, have we not gathered enough conclusive evidence to conclude that an oblate spherical earth is a fact rather than a theory?
Once either evolution or intelligent design achieves the same level of conclusive evidentiary support, I would support unopposed teaching of the same.
Amen to that! I know teachers who teach both sides, but they try to keep it on the down-low.
Creationism should not be taught in any class that calls itself “Science” class. Creationism is the antithesis of science.
Fixed it: Evolution should not be taught in any class that calls itself “Science” class. Evolution is the antithesis of science.
I’m sure your posts and comments wil go far to dispel the notion that teaching the “strengths and weaknesses” of evolution is not and in no way should be associated with “creationism and religion”.
The Temple of Darwinistic Materialism is a religion. Creation Science is based on God’s Word. It is a very specific hypothesis that explains and predicts the evidence far better than does the Evo-religion. As such, they should both be taught so students can see for themselves that Darwood’s materialistic creation myth is no match for biblical creation.
You just keep repeating that, loud and often. In no time at all you'll have people convinced you're not really a religious fanatic.
Science is based upon finding natural causes to explain natural phenomena.
Creationism is based upon discounting natural causes and attempting to explain any contradictions by supernatural agency.
Science is based upon not being married to any particular interpretation but being willing to go where the data takes you; thus no theory is ever “proven” but accepted provisionally awaiting further data to either reject or refine the theory.
Creationism is based upon blind adherence to a literal interpretation (where it serves), and attempting to fit the “round peg” of the data into the “square hole” of their adamant unchanging and inflexible assumptions of innerency in scriptural interpretation.
But it is not just Evolution you and your ilk oppose GGG. It is Astronomy, Physics and Geology.
Should those also not be taught in any class that calls itself “Science” for the identical reason that they also do not subject their data and theories to your literal interpretation?
read later
Great--that's what science class is for; this is hardly a great victory for creationism. Note, though, that I highlighted scientific above. Any alternative explanation that is based on Genesis will not be legal. As a proud Texas Christian, I'll work to ensure that the bible stays out of science class.
Blah, blah, blah...
So I thought we were going to debate the relative merits of Creation vs. Evolution. I’m still waiting for you first argument.
Teach evolution with epistemology and I’m happy.
I didn’t see that. Ok, since you’re not up to the challenge, I will go first. How about we start with the fossil record, shall we? I have to go for a few hours, but if your up to it, we will start there.
Oops. In retrospect, probably not such a great idea for the creationist crowd. After all, once kids start taking a close look at creationism, they're going to turn up stuff that makes scientology look sane. You know, like your Islamic mentor GGG.
I worship Jesus Christ, the Creator of the Universe and everything in it. However, I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that Harun Yahya et al are performing a wonderful service re: the War on Terror. When Muslim’s become creationists, they tend to openly and publicly denounce terror carried out in the name of Islam. As such, the more Muslims who become creationists (even if it’s of the Muslim variety) the more that helps the US and its allies in the War on Terror. It also increases the likelihood that many of those same Muslims will become Christians, for they will find that the first Creationists-proper were all BIBLICAL creationists. Once they realize that their creationist ideas came from Christendom, this will cause many of them to pause and compare the Qu’ran to the Bible. Once they realize that the Qu’ran is inferior to the Bible, some of those very same seekers will come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. As such, many souls will be saved, and it will help us win hearts and minds in the War on Terror even more once they realize the Jews are God’s chosen people (and doubly so once they realize that their Lord and Savior was born a Jew!).
“I worship Jesus Christ, the Creator of the Universe and everything in it.”
Then you don’t know Christian theology very well.
Jesus Christ taught to worship G-d the Father, through Christ (in the “name” of Christ, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
I’m Jewish and know that much.
Have a blessed day!
GGG: I worship Jesus Christ, the Creator of the Universe and everything in it.
MWT: Then you don’t know Christian theology very well...Jesus Christ taught to worship G-d the Father, through Christ (in the “name” of Christ, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit...I’m Jewish and know that much.
It’s always best to turn to Scripture in such matters, and the scriptures are clear...
JESUS CHRIST IS THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE AND EVERYTHING IN IT:
John 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
Colossians 1
13 He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, 14 in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins. 15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.
Hebrews 1
1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high
I am having a blessed day. How about you?
Wonderful.
Thank you for asking.
Still pushing this little lie for Mr. Yahya, eh GGG? Well, I guess you don't want to piss off the guy who's paying your bills.
As you well know (and as your Islamic buddy Mr. Yahya has undoubtedly told you), radical Islam is creationist to the core.
So please, Mr. Islamic shill, tell us all about these peace-loving Islamic creationists. And while you're at it, fill us in on the names of the radical Islamic groups who reject creationism and are instead adherents to western science and the theory of evolution. You'll make history.
==As you well know (and as your Islamic buddy Mr. Yahya has undoubtedly told you), radical Islam is creationist to the core.
Actually, the majority of radical Islamist terrorists despise creation, and are materialist to the core. Therefore, by your own leap of logic, that makes them your buddies in crime.
liberals projecting?
Noooooooo.....do tell!
So I thought we were going to debate the relative merits of Creation vs. Evolution. I’m still waiting for you first argument.
My advice would be to forget all about it GGG.
==Please, name these mysterious, materialist, non-radically-religous and non-creationist Islamic radicals, GGG. They’re utterly unknown to the rest of the world.
How far do you want to go back, Mr. Islamo-Commie terrorist lover? Shall we start with the “Islamic Marxist” movement set up by the Bolsheviks in 1916? Or how about the PLO? Would you like to trace their Commie-Terrorist roots? Or how about your buddy Abbas Zamani, the KGB organizer of Hezbollah in Lebanon and Pakistan. Or how about all the Hezbollah suicide bombers that turned out your fellow traveling materialist commies and socialists. Or how about Bin Laden’s right hand man, KGB agent Ayman al-Zawahiri. All of them are hardcore Commie-Materialists who worship at the alter of evolutionary materialism, just like you.
I’m tired of these evo-atheist loving “Christians” who do nothing but go around insulting genuine Christians for believing God’s Word. I think it is time for the Buck Ws of the world to put up or shut up. Let Mr. Buck prove that Darwood’s godless evolution cult is “scientific fact” and “perfectly compatible with Christianity.”
==So please, Mr. Islamic shill, tell us all about these peace-loving Islamic creationists.
PS Just keep it up, Mr. Sharia Law.
Thanks for the ping!
The words of GGG:
I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that Harun Yahya et al are performing a wonderful service re: the War on Terror.When Muslim’s become creationists, they tend to openly and publicly denounce terror carried out in the name of Islam. As such, the more Muslims who become creationists (even if it’s of the Muslim variety) the more that helps the US and its allies in the War on Terror.
Actually, the majority of radical Islamist terrorists despise creation, and are materialist to the core. . . . All of them are hardcore Commie-Materialists who worship at the alter of evolutionary materialism . . .
Harun Yahya must be proud of you, GGG. Here you've reiterated perfectly his fraudulent and bizarre Islamic apologetics. For example, in Mr. Yahya's screed entitled "Islam Is Not The Source of Terrorism, But Its Solution", we find an overflowing bucket of the very bilge-water that you are carrying for him:
The words of Mr. Yahya:
One point that should be stressed at the outset is that the identities of the perpetrators of the acts of terrorism which targeted the United States are not yet determined. There is a chance that these horrible attackers are linked to quite different centres. It may well be a communist organization harboring rage and hatred against American values, a fascist organization opposing federal administration or a secret faction in another state. Even though the hijackers have Muslim identities, the questions regarding by whom and for what purposes these people were used will probably remain to be a mystery. . . .[W]hile looking for the perpetrators of a terrorist act, its origins should be sought in disbelief rather than in religion. People with a fascist, communist, racist or materialist outlook on life should be suspected as potential perpetrators. The name or the identity of the triggerman is not important. . . .
Actually, the materialist, irreligious philosophies and ideologies that prevailed in the 19th century are responsible for these dismal acts. . . . At the roots of the greatest brutalities of the 19th century lies the Social Darwinist ideology. . . . As a matter of fact, the main disagreement is not between the West and Islam. Contrary to the general opinion, it is between the religious people of the West and of the Muslim world on the one hand, and the people opposing religion (like materialists and atheists) on the other.
Support should be provided for the spread of "True Islam", which is a religion of love, friendship, peace and brotherhood, and for its true understanding by Islamic societies.
And in the surreal interview that Mr. Adnan Oktar (qua Harun Yahya) gave to Azernews, which he subsequently posted on his equally surreal HarunYahya.Tv website as "AN INTERVIEW WITH MR. ADNAN OKTAR BY AZERNEWS (October 23, 2008)", we hear your esteemed Islamic-Creationist mentor say:
“But what is even more interesting is that Darwinists have not a single transitional form fossil they can use. They have not a single fossil they can call a transitional form to prove Darwinism. What kind of theory is that? It is total nonsense, a complete lie. Can you have a theory with absolutely zero supporting evidence? You may say that something is a theory if there are two or three bits of evidence for it. But this one has none, no evidence at all. And it is total nonsense.”"All those who perpetrated the September 11 attacks were people who had received a Darwinist, materialist and atheist education, who had been educated in Europe and who held materialist views. Their identity papers may describe them as Muslims, but that is irrelevant...”
“It was the Masons who controlled Saddam. They used him, and then cast him off like an old shoe. They first used him in massacres, but Saddam was nothing without Masonic support. He could do nothing.”
“The public imagine that Masons are perfectly rational people, but they are actually materialists and this and that. They are people who directly worship Shaytan.” “But Shaytan cannot vanquish the followers of Allah. The prophets were followers of Allah, for instance, and could not be vanquished”
“The whole question is one of being a supporter of Allah. The supporters of Allah are invincible. So long as we genuinely love Allah, are genuinely on His side, fear Allah and genuinely believe in Allah, then we can never be laid low.”
“These things happen in cold, materialist politics. There are no such problems in politics in which religious faith and love prevail.”
As Mr. Yahya's "Baghdad Bob" you are truly doing a stellar job of spreading his whopping lies, but the question remains: How did an Islamic apologist like you find such a comfortable and prominent home at Freerepublic?
Nothing you posted changes what I said.
I suggest reading the entire book of Hebrews, carefully.
Sowing.
Hebrews has no bearing and should not be introduced into an evolution thread. It is irrelevant.
I imagine a less intelligent Laura Richmond “The movement “Islamic Jihad” is neither Islamic or Jihadist; discuss amongst yourselves.”
It bears on his bad theology, which is the subject of a sub-discussion, which you are not a part of.
Atlaw is being deliberately disingenuous. He is so consumed by hatred for biblical creationists that he will do anything, no matter how sick, no matter how twisted, no matter how morally repugnant...to include falsely linking Christians to Islamist Terrorists..
This all began, when atlaw falsely tried to imply that the Muslim creationist, Harun Yahya , is somehow my mentor.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218326/posts?page=36#24
I replied to this unfounded accusation with the following:
“I worship Jesus Christ, the Creator of the Universe and everything in it. However, I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that Harun Yahya et al are performing a wonderful service re: the War on Terror. When Muslim’s become creationists, they tend to openly and publicly denounce terror carried out in the name of Islam. As such, the more Muslims who become creationists (even if it’s of the Muslim variety) the more that helps the US and its allies in the War on Terror. It also increases the likelihood that many of those same Muslims will become Christians, for they will find that the first Creationists-proper were all BIBLICAL creationists. Once they realize that their creationist ideas came from Christendom, this will cause many of them to pause and compare the Qu’ran to the Bible. Once they realize that the Qur’an is inferior to the Bible, some of those very same seekers will come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. As such, many souls will be saved, and it will help us win hearts and minds in the War on Terror even more once they realize the Jews are God’s chosen people (and doubly so once they realize that their Lord and Savior was born a Jew!).”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218326/posts?page=36#25
Atlaw, who behaves just like a slimy lawyer, ignores my reply above and pretends like I just admitted that I’m on the payroll for Harun Yahya!:
“Still pushing this little lie for Mr. Yahya, eh GGG? Well, I guess you don't want to piss off the guy who's paying your bills.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218326/posts?page=36#31 I would also like to show how Mr. Lawyer deliberately takes my quotes out of context in order to smear me, and gain unfair advantage for his materialist, anti-creationist agenda. For instance Mr. Lawyer takes quotes from two different replies and fuses them together to make it look like I am saying something I am not. Here is how Mr. Lawyer quotes me:
“Actually, the majority of radical Islamist terrorists despise creation, and are materialist to the core. . . . All of them are hardcore Commie-Materialists who worship at the alter of evolutionary materialism . . .”
The first part is accurate. I truly believe that the majority of radical Islamist terrorists despise creation, are primarily politically motivated, and are materialist (and nihilist) to the core. However, Mr. Lawyer snatched the second part of the quote was from a TOTALLY DIFFERENT REPLY, and is trying to deliberately deceive the reader into believing that they both dealt with the same subject. In reality, the second part of the quote that Mr. Lawyer took out of context was in response to specific question directed at me from Mr. Lawyer:
“Please, name these mysterious, materialist, non-radically-religous and non-creationist Islamic radicals, GGG.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218326/posts?page=36#33
My reply:
“All of them are hardcore Commie-Materialists who worship at the alter of evolutionary materialism”) was specifically referring to a list of Islamo-Commie terrorists and terrorist groups going all the way back to the Islamic Marxist movement that was started by the Bolsheviks in 1916. In that same reply, I spoke of the Commie-Terrorist roots of the PLO, how Bin Laden’s right hand man, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is a known KGB agent, and finally how a study found that the majority of Lebanese Hezbollah suicide bombers turned out to be secular Communists and socialists. I was referring to these specific terrorists when I said “All of them are hardcore Commie-Materialists who worship at the alter of evolutionary materialism.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218326/posts?page=36#36
In the end, whether you agree with me or disagree with me, it is clear that Mr. Lawyer is willing to engage in slimy, dishonest, slanderous and disruptive behavior in the service of his agenda to discredit Christian creationists.
==Atlaw writes: "Let's compare your words to those of your Islamic-Creationist mentor, shall we?"
Atlaw is being deliberately disingenuous. He is so consumed by hatred for biblical creationists that he will do anything, no matter how sick, no matter how twisted, no matter how morally repugnant...to include falsely linking Christians to Islamist Terrorists..
This all began, when atlaw falsely tried to imply that the Muslim creationist, Harun Yahya , is somehow my mentor.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218326/posts?page=36#24
I replied to this unfounded accusation with the following:
“I worship Jesus Christ, the Creator of the Universe and everything in it. However, I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that Harun Yahya et al are performing a wonderful service re: the War on Terror. When Muslim’s become creationists, they tend to openly and publicly denounce terror carried out in the name of Islam. As such, the more Muslims who become creationists (even if it’s of the Muslim variety) the more that helps the US and its allies in the War on Terror. It also increases the likelihood that many of those same Muslims will become Christians, for they will find that the first Creationists-proper were all BIBLICAL creationists. Once they realize that their creationist ideas came from Christendom, this will cause many of them to pause and compare the Qu’ran to the Bible. Once they realize that the Qur’an is inferior to the Bible, some of those very same seekers will come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. As such, many souls will be saved, and it will help us win hearts and minds in the War on Terror even more once they realize the Jews are God’s chosen people (and doubly so once they realize that their Lord and Savior was born a Jew!).”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218326/posts?page=36#25
Atlaw, who behaves just like a slimy lawyer, ignores my reply above and pretends like I just admitted that I’m on the payroll for Harun Yahya!:
“Still pushing this little lie for Mr. Yahya, eh GGG? Well, I guess you don't want to piss off the guy who's paying your bills.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218326/posts?page=36#31 I would also like to show how Mr. Lawyer deliberately takes my quotes out of context in order to smear me, and gain unfair advantage for his materialist, anti-creationist agenda. For instance Mr. Lawyer takes quotes from two different replies and fuses them together to make it look like I am saying something I am not. Here is how Mr. Lawyer quotes me:
“Actually, the majority of radical Islamist terrorists despise creation, and are materialist to the core. . . . All of them are hardcore Commie-Materialists who worship at the alter of evolutionary materialism . . .”
The first part is accurate. I truly believe that the majority of radical Islamist terrorists despise creation, are primarily politically motivated, and are materialist (and nihilist) to the core. However, Mr. Lawyer snatched the second part of the quote was from a TOTALLY DIFFERENT REPLY, and is trying to deliberately deceive the reader into believing that they both dealt with the same subject. In reality, the second part of the quote that Mr. Lawyer took out of context was in response to specific question directed at me from Mr. Lawyer:
“Please, name these mysterious, materialist, non-radically-religous and non-creationist Islamic radicals, GGG.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218326/posts?page=36#33
My reply:
“All of them are hardcore Commie-Materialists who worship at the alter of evolutionary materialism”) was specifically referring to a list of Islamo-Commie terrorists and terrorist groups going all the way back to the Islamic Marxist movement that was started by the Bolsheviks in 1916. In that same reply, I spoke of the Commie-Terrorist roots of the PLO, how Bin Laden’s right hand man, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is a known KGB agent, and finally how a study found that the majority of Lebanese Hezbollah suicide bombers turned out to be secular Communists and socialists. I was referring to these specific terrorists when I said “All of them are hardcore Commie-Materialists who worship at the alter of evolutionary materialism.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218326/posts?page=36#36
In the end, whether you agree with me or disagree with me, it is clear that Mr. Lawyer is willing to engage in slimy, dishonest, slanderous and disruptive behavior in the service of his agenda to discredit Christian creationists.
(There is a sharp difference between these Turkish creationists, who in my experience have dressed in 3-pc. business suits and are impeccable in their behavior, and the Islamist fanatics we are so rightly concerned about in other contexts.)
Anyway, the idea that Christian creationists are taking marching orders or even are much influenced by Islamic creationists is just silly. Most Christian creationists are not even aware of their Islamic counterparts, who are clearly getting their ideas from the larger and better established Christian organizations, not vice versa. Atlaw is pushing a rather ridiculous and untenable line of reasoning, and I think the average reader will perceive that easily enough just based on simple logic and common knowledge of the creation/evolution topography.
Doesn’t matter.
Half the kids still won’t be able to read at a 4th grade level.
One quarter of them won’t even finish high school.
It’s still public school.
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.