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

Skip to comments.

Florida will teach evolution but only as theory
Reuters ^ | February 19, 2008 | Michael Peltier

Posted on 02/19/2008 5:54:12 PM PST by DaveLoneRanger

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 241-245 next last
To: Soliton
Yes of course I am wrong -- what other view could a dogmatic priest of evolution take! I am a heretic to that poisonous dogma!
141 posted on 02/20/2008 9:04:05 AM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Soliton; metmom
Here is observable evidence of evolution equivalent to watching apples fall from trees

I'd say that it's more like the equivalent of watching an apple hang from a tree. This type of "micro-evolution" is not obviously going anywhere...
142 posted on 02/20/2008 9:42:00 AM PST by Sopater (A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left. ~ Ecclesiastes 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: shuckmaster; wintertime
It’s the forces of ignorance who have for years deprived children of an education by using the power of the state to keep the word “evolution” out of textbooks like they thought their little act of fascist thought control would eternally keep inquisitive minds from finding out that evolution is the very foundation on which all modern scientific study of biology is based.

And where has that happened in the last few decades?

You keep making those claims that creation is being taught in public schools and evolution hasn't been allowed in. On the contrary, evolution alone has been taught in public high schools for decades and creation not. It was that way when I was in high school in the 70's.

Show us where evolution has been kept out and what public high school textbooks have been teaching creation to the exclusion of evolution. The information should be available. Give us some sources to back up your hysterical, untrue claims.

143 posted on 02/20/2008 10:16:08 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: TaxCuts
The problem with this is the fact that taxpayer dollars are beign used to fund religious education. I don’t care if all 3 major religions agree on the creationism theory- it is religion-based and I do not see why it is being taught in public schools on the taxpayer dime.

My, oh my. How far has been the fall.

Art. 3. Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.
(The Northwest Ordinance, adopted July 13, 1787, by the Second Continental Congress, chartered a government for the Northwest Territory, provided a method for admitting new states to the Union from the territory, and listed a bill of rights guaranteed in the territory.)
That sure sounds like "taxpayer funded education" to me. Your ecclesiastical appeal fails as a matter of history.

Evolution is the only non-religious theory that offers an explanation of how we got to be where we currently find ourselves today.

Why is there a need for a "nonreligious" theory of origins? In the first place, your statement itself is not a statement of science. It is a philosophical statement about science that presupposes philosophical naturalism. You're just taking it for granted as an unargued philosophical bias that all events have purely natural causes. As long as you succeed in imposing apriori metaphysical constraints that by definition exclude any possibility of contrary evidence, I guess you can continue begging the question.

But why should government schools and judges in black robes be imposing metaphysical assumptions that automatically rule out the possibility that mind or spirit preceded matter?

In the second place, it is a logical fallacy to assume that because no alternative theory to ones pet version(s) of evolution seems to exist, that it/they is/are therefore true, because there is always the possibility of some countervailing data that has not been observed yet. Your a priori exclusion of any possible contrary evidence by mere definition, is the equivalent of insisting that a defendant may not establish his innocence unless he can produce a suitable substitute to be charged with the crime.

Cordially,

144 posted on 02/20/2008 10:18:45 AM PST by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: metmom
And where has that happened in the last few decades?

Do you even have a clue what the thread is about? Yesterday, the Florida school board for the first time, voted that the word "evolution" should appear in school science books instead of the "changes over time" clause that the forces of ignorance have been requiring in heir sneaky underhanded attempt to deprive students of an honest education.

145 posted on 02/20/2008 10:29:32 AM PST by shuckmaster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Show us where evolution has been kept out and what public high school textbooks have been teaching creation to the exclusion of evolution. The information should be available. Give us some sources to back up your hysterical, untrue claims.

Evolution was completely absent from high school text books from the time of the Scopes trial until about 1960, depending on the state. Even today, most textbooks relegate evolution to "optional" chapters, instead of presenting it as the central unifying concept in Biology. It's like teaching the distance of the planets without mentioning gravity.

But thanks to Dover, states are coming out of the dark ages. The Florida decision is a stunning defeat for the anti-science crowd, and if you check out the Discovery Institute blog, you will find that they have noticed this. Of course, without the Discovery Institute, this would not have reached legal resolution, and states would still be wimping out.

146 posted on 02/20/2008 10:40:25 AM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: dan1123
[A]rguments in favor of evolution are fraught with negative theological appeals ("God wouldn't have done it this way, therefore God didn't do it"). Which hinge on a host of other philosophical beliefs that are extra-scientific.

Who (besides you) is making these particular "arguments"?

Perhaps you could browse through the approximately 88,400 articles available here and point where the authors have indulged "negative theological appeals" and how their articles "hinge on a host of other philosophical beliefs that are extra-scientific."

147 posted on 02/20/2008 10:49:25 AM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: bvw

I see you got pummeled by the made up by FRevos only used on FR definitions that are claimed to be widely used. They reject impartial, widely recognized reputable sources like Merriam-Webster yet expect people to accept their definitions as gospel.

Kind of like a little boys club where they have their own secret meanings for words so that if someone new comes in and doesn’t know how they’re used but uses the common definitions instead, they can mock and ridicule them and tell them how stupid and ignorant they are. It merely gives them a false sense of superiority.


148 posted on 02/20/2008 11:01:12 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: shuckmaster

Merely a matter of semantics. It’s not that they are actually just starting to teach evolution or anything new. Changing a word means nothing.

As far as evolution being kept out of the schools, that’s a crock. Creation has been bullied out of the schools long ago, to the point that if creation is even mentioned, school boards capitulate out of fear of lawsuits, evos foam at the mouth at the mere thought of anything having to do with any religion even coming near the school doors,(which shows their true agenda), and the ACLU starts salivating like a bunch of Pavlovian trained dogs.

And it is no win for public school students, because private Christian school and homeschool students who are taught creation instead of, or with evolution, consistently out perform public school students on standardized test, SATs and ACTs.

If the teaching of creation is really the bane and downfall of a good science education, then the public school students should have a better showing on those tests and there shouldn’t be so many high school graduates so woefully ignorant of science in general. Evos bemoan the state of science in public schools today and claim that more teaching of the ToE is needed to correct it, but the ToE has had a stranglehold on public education for decades to no avail. On the contrary, it’s only gotten worse.

All the dire, hysterical warnings about what will happen to this country if creation, or religion, is allowed to be taught in schools, have no basis and have no evidence to support them. Public education in this country was far superior to what it is today, when the Bible was allowed to be read in schools, prayer was allowed, and creation was taught. Adding those things back in can certainly not make public education any worse than it has become under the atheistic, evolution taught scheme.


149 posted on 02/20/2008 11:25:01 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman; bvw

Which explains why the US with its great Christian heritage and morals and values has been among the leaders in the world in scientific research. Right?

Perhaps then, you would care to explain why Newton, certainly known as a man who had deeply held religious beliefs, was able to create the scientific method.

Why wasn’t his faith a hindrance to his scientific inquiry?

Why didn’t the faith of other great men of science hold them back from making the discoveries they did?

They lived and worked in a culture far more saturated with religion and religious belief than we have today and yet they laid the foundations for much of modern science.

You have yet to demonstrate in any way how religious belief hinders education and scientific research and how it will result in a return to the Dark Ages.


150 posted on 02/20/2008 11:26:49 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: metmom
How about this, from Merriam-Webster:

Synonyms hypothesis, theory, law mean a formula derived by inference from scientific data that explains a principle operating in nature. Hypothesis implies insufficient evidence to provide more than a tentative explanation (a hypothesis explaining the extinction of the dinosaurs). Theory implies a greater range of evidence and greater likelihood of truth (the theory of evolution). Law implies a statement of order and relation in nature that has been found to be invariable under the same conditions (the law of gravitation).

"A greater range of evidence and greater likelihood of truth"--in other words, not speculation, not a guess, not unsupported by the evidence. Is that definition okay with you?

The original article says the TOE "is relegated to a place among a host of ideas, including Albert Einstein's theory of relativity." If they teach evolution as an idea comparable in influence and predictive value to Einstein's, I think that's a fine thing.
151 posted on 02/20/2008 11:32:57 AM PST by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody

Yes humans evolved from the big bang.


152 posted on 02/20/2008 12:07:54 PM PST by Soliton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

“This type of “micro-evolution” is not obviously going anywhere...”

So observable evidence of the evolution of species (Darwin’s point) isn’t evidence?


153 posted on 02/20/2008 12:09:25 PM PST by Soliton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: Soliton

It seems you believe computers did as well.


154 posted on 02/20/2008 12:19:28 PM PST by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody

You really should read a little before you try to discuss science. If you are genuinely interested in learning, look up the history of the word “soliton” (my screen name) and I will happily correspond with you, step by step, about how nothing becomes something and give you hundreds of real world examples that will prove to you that everything you can see or touch has “evolved” over time.

I am writing a collection of essays for my kids called “the essential meme” that uses “natural selection” as the engine allowing the universe to become aware of itself. It is 90% accepted science and 10% extrapolation.


155 posted on 02/20/2008 12:39:36 PM PST by Soliton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Soliton
So observable evidence of the evolution of species (Darwin’s point) isn’t evidence?

It's evidence, however, it is not moving in an obvious direction. Lateral changes are not sufficient for demonstrating the type of changes required for single-celled organisms to become multicellular organism, for example. Ring species are examples of lateral changes in species, or speciation.
156 posted on 02/20/2008 1:05:36 PM PST by Sopater (A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left. ~ Ecclesiastes 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: bvw

>> Proofs are proved in observational fit to theory.

As an example: Gravity is proved by such as apples falling or planets in orbits whose dimensions and dynamics that are predicted to a workable enough degree by a theory. And so is Newton’s model proved. <<

Yeah... that was a distinction that shows how the Florida board is at least 100 years behind. Once we understood, in the very early 1900’s that mass, and thus grvaity, varies slightly when the objects are in motion, we realized that Newton’s equations would need modifications for very fast objects.

So Newton’s theory of gravity is absolutely not a fact - it is accurate only limited circumstances.

Fortunately those limited circumstances cover most every day earth behavior so Newton’s theories are still useful. We even have a name for older physics that does not take into consideration modern physics - “Newtonian Physics.”

So, sadly the Florida board just really doesn’t seem to understand facts versus theory.


157 posted on 02/20/2008 1:10:56 PM PST by gondramB (Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Soliton
You really should read a little before you try to discuss science.

LOL Oh please. We were discussing your post, and you know it.

158 posted on 02/20/2008 1:27:55 PM PST by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Sopater

Pure nonsense, any differentiation of species will be “lateral” until a selection event takes place. Then it becomes vertical.


159 posted on 02/20/2008 1:28:15 PM PST by Soliton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: metmom

>>Why wasn’t his faith a hindrance to his scientific inquiry?

Why didn’t the faith of other great men of science hold them back from making the discoveries they did?<<

I would say its because belief in God and science (including evolution) are not in conflict.

What is in conflict and is something Newton rebelled against is church dogma that makes scientific assumptions not based on evidence. Thus Newton was somewhat at odds with being a conventional English Christian but was a Christian.

For example he may not have believed in the Trinity and was accused of being a Rosicrucian.


160 posted on 02/20/2008 1:33:06 PM PST by gondramB (Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 241-245 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