Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Anti-Creationists Backed Into a Corner?
AgapePress ^ | February 24, 2003 | Jim Brown

Posted on 02/24/2003 1:25:18 PM PST by Remedy

More than 200 evolutionists have issued a statement aimed at discrediting advocates of intelligent design and belittling school board resolutions that question the validity of Darwinism.

The National Center for Science Education has issued a statement that backs evolution instruction in public schools and pokes fun at those who favor teaching the controversy surrounding Darwinian evolution. According to the statement, "it is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible" for creation science to be introduced into public school science textbooks. [See Earlier Article]

Forrest Turpen, executive director of Christian Educators Association International, says it is obvious the evolution-only advocates feel their ideology and livelihood are being threatened.

"There is a tremendous grouping of individuals whose life and whose thought patterns are based on only an evolutionary point of view," Turpen says, "so to allow criticism of that would be to criticize who they are and what they're about. That's one of the issues."

Turpen says the evolution-only advocates also feel their base of financial rewards is being threatened.

"There's a financial issue here, too," he says. "When you have that kind of an establishment based on those kinds of thought patterns, to show that there may be some scientific evidence -- and there is -- that would refute that, undermines their ability to control the science education and the financial end of it."

Turpen says although evolutionists claim they support a diversity of viewpoints in the classroom, they are quick to stifle any criticism of Darwinism. In Ohio recently, the State Board of Education voted to allow criticism of Darwinism in its tenth-grade science classes.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 751-756 next last
FOSSIL THUMPERS UNITE WITH THEIR LIBERAL COMRADES IN THE MEDIA.

Media Bias Stifles Creationists' Scientific Findings, Perspective He explains that the secular media -- which he describes as atheistic and anti-Christian -- publishes most anything it can that appears to indoctrinate people and "hits against the Bible."


Institute for Creation Research

Christian Answers

Creation Research Society

True.Origin

CARM

Revolution Against Evolution

International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design (ISCID)

1 posted on 02/24/2003 1:25:18 PM PST by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Remedy
You forgot Answers in Genesis
2 posted on 02/24/2003 1:31:41 PM PST by P8riot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Remedy
>>In Ohio recently, the State Board of Education voted to allow criticism of Darwinism in its tenth-grade science classes.<<

You mean the vote students were not allowed to criticize Darwinism?

Holy cow that is sleasy science, in any free mans mind!
3 posted on 02/24/2003 1:36:12 PM PST by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Remedy
Just out of curiosity, what would the curriculum in a Creation Science class consist of?
4 posted on 02/24/2003 1:46:01 PM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Remedy
Why should anyone study creationism or intelligent design ?
It has no use.

At least evolution (even if flawed or even totally wrong) is useful from the stand point of comparetive anatomy, genetics and population dynamics.

Intelligent design merely says, "god did this", end of discussion. It is just not useful.
5 posted on 02/24/2003 1:50:23 PM PST by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
I don't think the folks in Ohio wanted a "creation science class" nor did they want creation taught in biology class per se, but rather wanted a disclaimer placed in the textbooks that stated that evolution was only a theory, and not necessarily scientifically established fact.
6 posted on 02/24/2003 1:52:35 PM PST by realpatriot71 (legalize freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
"Just out of curiosity, what would the curriculum in a Creation Science class consist of?
"

First two chapters of Genesis. That's it. Memorize 'em and you get an "A".
7 posted on 02/24/2003 1:57:02 PM PST by MineralMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Remedy
Good find.
8 posted on 02/24/2003 1:57:56 PM PST by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
These disciplines are the exclusive realm of evolution??
really.
9 posted on 02/24/2003 1:59:06 PM PST by USMA83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
"Just out of curiosity, what would the curriculum in a Creation Science class consist of?"

It would consist of a textbook entitled, "1001 creation myths from 1001 one-and-only-true-religions throughout the world."
10 posted on 02/24/2003 2:00:31 PM PST by mg39
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
Hey Atlaw

From the article. it is obvious the evolution-only advocates feel their ideology and livelihood are being threatened.

Just out of curiosity, what would the curriculum in a Creation Science class consist of?

If you haven't got a clue, you are ignorant of the opposition's position. Subject-changing questions are a poor substitute for homework.

11 posted on 02/24/2003 2:02:26 PM PST by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
It is the same study of science but in Creation we know where we came from.
12 posted on 02/24/2003 2:03:30 PM PST by mamalujo (turn off the television and read......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
Maybe you should consider changing your handle because you just said something untrue. Creationists do not stop at "god did this". It is simply our philosophical foundation and starting point, just like yours is apparently that there is nothing but sensory experienced nature, i.e., 'naturalism'.
13 posted on 02/24/2003 2:04:20 PM PST by MoGalahad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
Just out of curiosity, what would the curriculum in a Creation Science class consist of?

"God said it, I believe it, and that settles it. Repeat this five hundred times daily."

14 posted on 02/24/2003 2:05:55 PM PST by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: realpatriot71
Will this propsed disclaimer apply to all scientific theories, or just evolution?
15 posted on 02/24/2003 2:06:21 PM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
At least evolution (even if flawed or even totally wrong) is useful from the stand point of comparetive [sic] anatomy, genetics and population dynamics.

Comparative anatomy needs evolution like a rocket needs a sofa.

Genetics needs evolution like Ted Turner needs Jane.

Population dynamics needs evolution like a pencil needs a steering wheel.

16 posted on 02/24/2003 2:07:19 PM PST by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Remedy
"so to allow criticism of that would be to criticize who they are and what they're about. That's one of the issues."

No, it isn't. The issue is that if you want to try to criticize a scientific viewpoint, do it in the peer-reviewed science journals where it belongs. Don't try to make science classrooms your battleground -- schoolkids don't have the background to be the jury on that debate, which is probably why creationists are trying to drag their challenge there instead of doing it in front of actual scientists.

17 posted on 02/24/2003 2:08:20 PM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimt
Creation - science . . . reveal a Creator - Designer - - - continously !
18 posted on 02/24/2003 2:08:24 PM PST by f.Christian (( + God *IS* Truth + love *courage*// LIBERTY *logic* *SANITY*Awakening + ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: dd5339
ping
19 posted on 02/24/2003 2:08:31 PM PST by Vic3O3 (Texan-to-be...at least there's CCW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimt
or as my husband would say,"God said it and that settles it"
20 posted on 02/24/2003 2:09:00 PM PST by mamalujo (turn off the television and read......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Turpen says although evolutionists claim they support a diversity of viewpoints in the classroom, they are quick to stifle any criticism of Darwinism. In Ohio recently, the State Board of Education voted to allow criticism of Darwinism in its tenth-grade science classes.

ain't that nice... I hated calculus, but my criticisms fell upon deaf ears. oh well, maybe my kid will be able to take the easy way out.
21 posted on 02/24/2003 2:09:23 PM PST by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: atlaw; MineralMan
Body by Design - Biology Curriculum, Anatomy, Physiology
22 posted on 02/24/2003 2:09:25 PM PST by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MoGalahad
Creationists do not stop at "god did this".

They know that. It's just easier for them to mock than to think.

23 posted on 02/24/2003 2:09:58 PM PST by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
First two chapters of Genesis. That's it. Memorize 'em and you get an "A".

I really hope you are being sarcastic. But then again, if you're not, at least you're showing the true intent of anti evolutionists.
24 posted on 02/24/2003 2:10:23 PM PST by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: P8riot
I saw one of Ken Ham's lectures on video, it was pretty neat stuff.
25 posted on 02/24/2003 2:10:48 PM PST by Commander8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
See media bias link in post#1
26 posted on 02/24/2003 2:11:42 PM PST by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
Will this propsed disclaimer apply to all scientific theories, or just evolution?

Only blind faith religions like evolutionism that are dressed up as "science."

27 posted on 02/24/2003 2:11:59 PM PST by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Comment #28 Removed by Moderator

To: Dataman
Dataman,

I know it hurt your brain to come up with those Steinham-esque colloquialisms, but they are just plain wrong. You find one "comparative anatomist," or geneticist who believes in the literal creation myth, and I'll eat my shirt.
29 posted on 02/24/2003 2:12:53 PM PST by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: realpatriot71
but rather wanted a disclaimer placed in the textbooks that stated that evolution was only a theory, and not necessarily scientifically established fact.

If so, then it's clear that they don't understand the meaning of the words "science", "theory", or "fact", and have no place trying to impose their ideas about them onto science classrooms.

For primers in what all is wrong with the "only a theory" canard, see:

Evolution is a fact and a theory

Five major misconceptions about evolution

Scientific proof?

The general anti-creationism FAQ

Evolution and philosophy

30 posted on 02/24/2003 2:13:36 PM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
Hey Dataman. The real world has been hectic of late, so I haven't been able to freep as much as I'd like.

I'm serious, though. I am supposing that the "threat" to the "evolution-only" advocates that is being posited here is either Creation Science or Intelligent Design. Sticking to Creation Science, I really am curious -- what would its curriculum consist of? And yes, I am woefully ignorant of the opposition's position.
31 posted on 02/24/2003 2:14:18 PM PST by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
peer reviewed, that is.
32 posted on 02/24/2003 2:14:23 PM PST by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
Turpen says although evolutionists claim they support a diversity of viewpoints in the classroom, they are quick to stifle any criticism of Darwinism.

Sound familiar? Afraid of criticism? Evolution is like a tropical flower in Churchill MB. Even if you protect it from the elements it will soon die.

33 posted on 02/24/2003 2:14:36 PM PST by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan

>>>First two chapters of Genesis. That's it. Memorize 'em and you get an "A".<<<

That would be better than an artistic rendition of rock to man.

34 posted on 02/24/2003 2:15:02 PM PST by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
good question... one which has no answer. Since creation myths are a dime a dozen. geeze, even the bible has a couple competing ones!
35 posted on 02/24/2003 2:15:47 PM PST by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
You find one "comparative anatomist," or geneticist who believes in the literal creation myth, and I'll eat my shirt.

Get out the salt and pepper. Lets start with the father of modern genetics, Gregor Mendel, a Monk. You don't have to stop with your shirt.

36 posted on 02/24/2003 2:16:53 PM PST by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
Afraid of criticism?

ummm... no. try again. science is self correcting and eternally critical. that's what peer review and the scientific method is predicated upon. mistakes are made over the millenia, then they are corrected with better science. show me where religion does that, and i'll have my shoes for dessert.
37 posted on 02/24/2003 2:18:09 PM PST by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
And yes, I am woefully ignorant of the opposition's position.

And so are many others who feel free to criticize that of which they are ignorant. Why? What gives some of you the built-in superiority to pontificate the truth about matters of which you are ignorant?

38 posted on 02/24/2003 2:20:11 PM PST by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
Gregor Medel? He of the mid 19th century? Wow, good one. So next time someone says the earth revolves aroung the sun, you counter that with some 11 century star gazer? Sheesh.
39 posted on 02/24/2003 2:21:29 PM PST by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
"I really hope you are being sarcastic. But then again, if you're not, at least you're showing the true intent of anti evolutionists.
"

Well, I thought the sarcasm was obvious, but I guess not. I'll try to remember my /sarcasm \sarcasm switches from now on.
40 posted on 02/24/2003 2:22:01 PM PST by MineralMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
If so, then it's clear that they don't understand the meaning of the words "science", "theory", or "fact", and have no place trying to impose their ideas about them onto science classrooms.

It is an argument in semantics to be sure, but at the same time science cannot "prove" evolution anymore than it can "prove" any aspect of science.

41 posted on 02/24/2003 2:22:02 PM PST by realpatriot71 (legalize freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke; Dataman
show me where religion does that, and i'll have my shoes for dessert.

37 posted on 02/24/2003 5:18 PM EST by whattajoke

You just put both feet firmly in your mouth.

With An Apology to Arius: When and How Should We Deal with Heresies and Heretics?

42 posted on 02/24/2003 2:22:51 PM PST by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Remedy
"That would be better than an artistic rendition of rock to man."

Yes, right. Now, who teaches that humans came from rocks? That's a new theory on me. Oh wait....it's in Genesis...now I remember. Goddidit.
43 posted on 02/24/2003 2:23:02 PM PST by MineralMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Star gazing in box (( pinholes // evolution )) --- you !
44 posted on 02/24/2003 2:23:41 PM PST by f.Christian (( + God *IS* Truth + love *courage*// LIBERTY *logic* *SANITY*Awakening + ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
Will this propsed disclaimer apply to all scientific theories, or just evolution?

As far as I know, just evolution.

45 posted on 02/24/2003 2:23:55 PM PST by realpatriot71 (legalize freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
on these threads, there are enough folks who believe what you wrote that it's tough to decipher sometimes.
46 posted on 02/24/2003 2:24:22 PM PST by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: USMA83
I hardly ever post on these threads anymore. The arrogance of the evolutionists on FR and elsewhere is simply breathtaking. Nobody but they can be scientific in their self-centered eyes.
47 posted on 02/24/2003 2:25:17 PM PST by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
Chapter 7 Thermodynamics of Living Systems, p113

Chapter 8 Thermodynamics and the Origin of life, p127

Chapter 9 Specifying How Work is to be Done, p144
48 posted on 02/24/2003 2:26:38 PM PST by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
It would be just about what I had in a private Christian school in the 70's, i.e. full, complete instruction on where the SCIENCE is, including evolution as well as science that supports a Creationist point of view. Either viewpoint requires faith. Darwinism is not reproducible science. Darwin may claim to be consistent with Scientific fact, but it is not based on reproducible Science. Creationists can make the same claim.

My college science classes required an evolutionary viewpoint to attain a passing grade, period. You couldn't introduce other faith-based view points, based on science, if they differed from Darwinist dogma. You couldn't ask a question that pre-supposed a Creationist world view.

No Creationist wants to eliminate free and open discourse. No Creationist wants to prevent introduction of Scientific evidence on the origins of the Universe and man, even if they disagree with the theories offered with that evidence. We'd just like to have the same "1st Ammendment" rights that the rest of the Scientific world has. However, Darwinists can't tolerate dissent, because much of their "science" rests upon a foundation of half-truths, misinterpretations, and lies.

49 posted on 02/24/2003 2:27:20 PM PST by Steel and Fire and Stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
Evolution is like a tropical flower in Churchill MB. Even if you protect it from the elements it will soon die.

Yawn. Luddites have been predicting the imminent demise of evolution for 150 years now. "Yup, it'll happen Real Soon Now", they keep assuring us.

50 posted on 02/24/2003 2:27:21 PM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 751-756 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
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson