Archive for Tuesday, November 8, 2005

Evolution showdown today

November 8, 2005

Advertisement

Reader poll
How do you think changing Kansas public school science standards to criticize evolution will affect the state?

or See the results without voting

-->
-->

— After months of debate, anger and confrontation, a 6-4 majority on the State Board of Education today is expected to embed criticism of evolution into school science standards.

Supporters of the standards say they contain important information about the shortcomings of evolution in explaining the origins of life, while opponents say the standards improperly open up science class to discussions about creationism and religion.

But despite the highly charged, political atmosphere, the vote will have no immediate practical impact on teaching science in Kansas classrooms, officials said Monday.

The standards are used as guidelines for school districts to prepare for statewide science tests.

None of the controversial parts of the standards are keyed to the tests, which aren't scheduled until 2007. Those linkages between standards and tests could happen later, but the composition of the board could change by then with four supporters of the standards up for re-election next year.

Still, critics of the standards say the measure could have short- and long-term consequences.

Erin Passman, of Lawrence, laughs as Allison Hughes, of Overland Park, places a see-through picture of a female chimpanzee over her face at the "Explore Evolution" exhibit at the Kansas Museum and Biodiversity Center at Kansas University. Evolution will be the hot issue today as the State Board of Education will discuss the teaching of evolution and intelligent design in Kansas public schools.

Erin Passman, of Lawrence, laughs as Allison Hughes, of Overland Park, places a see-through picture of a female chimpanzee over her face at the "Explore Evolution" exhibit at the Kansas Museum and Biodiversity Center at Kansas University. Evolution will be the hot issue today as the State Board of Education will discuss the teaching of evolution and intelligent design in Kansas public schools.

"It will weaken the teaching of science," Sen. Jean Schodorf, R-Wichita, chairwoman of the Senate Education Committee, said.

But the Seattle-based Discovery Institute, a major promoter of intelligent design, praised the proposed Kansas standards "because they expand the information presented to students about biological and chemical evolution by including some of the scientific criticisms of these theories."

Sen. John Vratil, R-Leawood, vice chairman of the education committee and a critic of the standards, said there is fear the measure is the "camel's nose in the tent and will lead to further inroads of religion in school."

He added, "The biggest impact will be on the reputation of the state of Kansas. It will reinforce in some people's minds that Kansas is backwards and illiterate."

State Board of Education Board member Bill Wagnon, whose district includes Lawrence, said the standards, which he opposes, will have no effect on good science teachers.

"Well-trained science teachers will ignore the state board; badly trained science teachers will be confused," Wagnon said.

At the college level, Craig Martin, chairman of the Kansas University Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Department, said the standards will have no effect on what KU offers.

Mark Anderson, of the Science Museum of Minnesota in St. Paul, left, who was contracted to set up the "Explore Evolution" exhibit at the Natural History Museum, surveys the construction Sept. 21 with Kansas University students and exhibit assistants Derick Schweppe, Topeka, and Jessica Braker, St. Louis. In the center sits a DNA double helix, which will showcase some of the past and present research methods on evolution.

Mark Anderson, of the Science Museum of Minnesota in St. Paul, left, who was contracted to set up the "Explore Evolution" exhibit at the Natural History Museum, surveys the construction Sept. 21 with Kansas University students and exhibit assistants Derick Schweppe, Topeka, and Jessica Braker, St. Louis. In the center sits a DNA double helix, which will showcase some of the past and present research methods on evolution.

"It just increases our frustration level in that we will get students who are poorly trained," Martin said. "They'll come in with religion and science mixed up in their heads."

If anything, the standards may force college instructors to include more evolution in their classes to compensate for the subject being de-emphasized at the lower level, he said.

But the Lawrence school board has planned no changes to the way it teaches science, which includes evolution instruction.

Just in case, however, Mark Desetti of Lawrence, a lobbyist for the Kansas National Education Assn., said he is thinking of writing a letter to the school district to make sure that if intelligent design is discussed, he wants his daughter to be allowed to leave.

"If they're going to teach religion, it has to be from the standpoint of the religion that I'm raising my daughter," he said.

Meanwhile, the controversy that has raged in Topeka and elsewhere has been little felt by the local school board.

"We really haven't heard any controversy in Lawrence, as far as people advocating one side or the other," said board president Leonard Ortiz. "It's our intent to continue teaching evolution within the context of biology unless (intelligent design) becomes mandatory."

John Olson, a physics teacher and head of the science department at Free State High School, also downplayed the significance of the state board's vote today.

"All it does is open the door for people to feel free to bring it (intelligent design) up in a school setting," Olson said. "It's not going to change the curriculum around here."

- Staff writer Dave Ranney contributed to this report.

Comments

Daniel Speicher 9 years, 9 months ago

Good luck getting western Kansas to vote out the ultra-ID candidates. It isn't our district that is giving Kansas a black eye here. It is the sea of red that is doing that for us. I still don't see why we can't compromise on this. Why can't we teach ID in the context of a required World Religions course? Yes, true... Christianity won't be the only thing taught... But, it still seems to solve the problem. Oh well, I guess I'm not in politics so it doesn't really matter. If they don't pass this today I might end up sending a letter to our school board or something of the like... If I had remembered this vote was coming up I would have done it before now. But, it kinda snuck up on me. I'm interested to see what goes on. Let the Springer show begin! "JERRY, JERRY, JERRY, JERRY..."

--Danny Speicher

AlexFenton 9 years, 9 months ago

Gee Danny, the vote "kinda snuck up on you"?

I guess the folks you ridicule in western Kansas might just be a little more politically aware than you.

Too much TV and not enough real life?

I don't agree with the state school board, but I also don't expect them to change on their own. And if comments like yours piss folks off enough, they'll vote for Morris just to spite you. Believe it or not, there's a movement out west for more sane representation. Snide comments from a Smurf won't help.

John1945 9 years, 9 months ago

I'm sorry, I think this is all much ado about nothing. The first time this came up I heard all these Chicken Little cries that the sky was falling, and quite frankly if no one had written a story about it you wouldn't have known it had happened.

The reality is that the standards that were passed by the Holloway board had more about evolution in them than the previous standards.

And do we remember here that the only thing the standards effects is what questions might be asked on the tests? This is not about what will be taught in the classroom, and if children aren't currently free to ask questions and criticize current scientific theories, I wouldn't want my children in them.

What stands out for me isn't the standards, it's the authoritarianism of a so-called scientific community that's afraid someone will ask them a question they can't answer.

I for one will be delighted when the vote is over so this tedious topic can be dispensed with.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

Science is all about criticism of theories. Thats the whole point. The Science community is not afraid, rather it is concerned that ID is being placed as an equal theory to Evolution.

But you know all know that. This is really just an attempt to inject faith into science. To politicize the scientific method.

There is a roadside "museum" in Ohio that shows the creation as fact. Noah had Braichiasaurs ( very young ) and Adam used one as a horse. (he also had no genitals until eve ruined everything) This is what you want, this is what get.

Idiot America

christie 9 years, 9 months ago

To John1945, Seems like we have a stand-off:

What stands out for me isn't the standards, it's the authoritarianism of a so-called I/D community that's afraid someone will ask them a question they can't answer.

hottruckinmama 9 years, 9 months ago

who cares? i don't care what they teach my kids about this. i can teach them what i want to teach them about this at home anyway. if i remember right from my high school biology the whole class on how the world began was contained in less then one chapter and took about one class. its all much ado about nothing as far as i'm concerned. its time to move on. i cannot believe we are spending this much time and money on such a none issue.

bankboy119 9 years, 9 months ago

Actually christie the IDers have answered the questions that have been thrown at them. If you actually paid attention to the debates that happened it was the evolutionists who could not answer the specific questions.

As for the article in the Houston paper....have they not looked at China's economy. The reason China opened up was because of the way they handled their economy, not because of the amount they poured into science. How they get that the children will come out substandard is beyond me. I was actually homeschooled the first half of my life and then went to public school. Because of my homeschooling I was years ahead of my peers. I could intelligently debate the "facts" that science teachers threw at their students. Not only in science did I over achieve but in mathematics, business, and english. If anyone should be concerned about having substandard students it would be America becuase of their public school system.

The other reason that China continues to have scientists above America is their rigorous study habits. From as young as 5 they go to math competitions and study for up to 3 hours a day outside of school to be at the top of their class. Instead of having a socialist government like you Dems want, they work for what they have and don't expect a hand out. China has begun to realize that their greatest asset is their people and they are releasing restrictions that they have on them. The Chinese government should be far ahead of where they are today but becuase of the restrictions of Communism they aren't. Communism restricts ideas and does not allow for open debate...kind of like evolution in schools.

John1945 9 years, 9 months ago

The sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!! Flee, if you're a liberal, quick, run to California where you'll be safe. Abandon Lawrence, don't even take time to pack. Run!!!! And take another liberal with you so they'll be safe too.

hottruckinmama 9 years, 9 months ago

why john? you called the wrath of god down on us today or what? i ain't goin' no where.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

Hahahah compare evolution to communism. hahahahah I also like the knee jerk love it or leave it. Well I love Kansas and I Love to make a profit! Whaaaa? How can this be? Oh here is another one. Conservatives like to be socialists to big corporations. Hurry ! give tax money to profitable companies or they will move to...CHINA? You commies...

You guys are the best. Maybe another link to some bible web page!

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

Wendt - well said.

BTW, I know that there is not Free Market (comment yesterday) Its a farce perpetuated by those who need to maximize short term profit

bankboy119 9 years, 9 months ago

There was no contradiction wendt. As usual, you like to twist words around. China could be and should be the most powerful, richest nation in the world at this time but is not becuase of the restrictions on them. The Chinese "system" that is beating America is that their students study study and study more. While Americans are mediocre in their studies. If you had the intelligence to understand the entire post you could have put it together yourself. Actually I take that back....if I could write better if would have been more simple so a simple mind could understand it.

bankboy119 9 years, 9 months ago

And BunE how does America give money to profitable companies? They give tax breaks but not actual money...it's the corporations that give the money to the politicians. Many corporations are already outsourcing to China because more profits are able to be made their. With that in mind....wouldn't we want to do something to keep the profits in America? What would you do let them all leave? Then we would have a great economy wouldn't we? Great idea.

Daniel Speicher 9 years, 9 months ago

Well, Alex... I'm actually away at college... But, still a resident of Kansas (and will probably never change that... Certainly not to be a resident in Oklahoma) So, yes... The vote snuck up on me. I try to keep up with stuff in Kansas... But, I suppose my schoolwork keeps me fairly involved in it for the most part. I do feel bad about not being more conscious of the election... That is why I mentioned it. I could care less if my post pisses people off... And, if someone votes for anyone just to spite another they are morons... There is no kinder way of putting that.

Furthermore, I am simply trying to find a middle ground... I can see why my post would anger those involved, however, as it seems like they are both far too concerned about proving a point than educating children. I'm not going to automatically assume you're in that group, Alex... However, I can assume that you assume too much and overreact to people and their thoughts and opinions. I can assume this as it is obvious that you have no desire to even look at my profile (which shows that I am not in Lawrence, but away at college) and assume that I am just at home frying my brain on television. I can assume you overreact by the harshness of your post and the way you mask your real argument... Which could also lead me to assume that you really have no basis for an argument. But, I won't go that far.

Here's hoping for AT LEAST some intelligent conversation about the topic tonight. Have a great day, ladies and gentlemen.

--Danny Speicher

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

Bankboy, bankboy, (emphasis on boy) you are kidding again right? It is a transfer of wealth from you and me to these companies. Almost theft. Very socialist. Very typical. You can stick your head in the sand, its cool.

Its all good. Profit above patriotism. Traitors...

hahahahahahah

badger 9 years, 9 months ago

Y'know, we can recover from teaching thinly veiled Creationism in our high school classes, because ID won't stand to real, critical analysis that serious students of biology, paleontology, and archaeology will face when they reach the collegiate level. Blather all you want about how the 'creation scientists' are publishing, but I don't see a whole lot of them publishing peer-reviewed articles in respected, established scientific journals, which have strict standards regarding references, data collection, and conclusions that can be drawn from data. Mostly I see them publishing in specialty sources put out by ID advocacy groups claiming their 'underground science' is too radical because it contradicts the status quo.

Albert Einstein contradicted a large part of Newtonian physics, the 'truth' as everyone in the scientific community knew it, a 'truth' older then than Darwinian theories are today. And yet, when he published his theories, despite the fact that they invalidated the life work of some of his peers, the scientific community was open to what he had to say, because he could back up his theories without resorting to a holy text of disputed accuracy and validity. This 'We are an underground science and no one wants to hear us because we're radical' garbage is just that, garbage. If they could prove their case without referencing the Bible, perhaps they'd have a leg to stand on.

What really bugs me the most is that I think this will seriously affect Kansas' effort to attract scientific businesses, especially bioscience ones. Science is where business is going now. I can see a lot of companies that are engaged in medical or bioscience research asking themselves if they really want to locate a multi-million-dollar research facility in a state that understands and respects the scientific community so little.

Every time I see someone railing against the 'scientific elitists' and their massive liberal conspiracy to keep the 'truth' of Creationism and ID out of the classrooms so they can promote their secular humanist agenda, I can literally feel money flowing out of Kansas as companies decide to relocate somewhere that doesn't hate, mock, and revile them while taking their money.

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

For some reason, you all think that you are "too intelligent" to believe in God. Well, I will have you know that evolution has never been proven, and neither has Intelligent Design, so if you ask me, they should be taught to our children as equally possible theories, and let THEM decide which they will believe. Evolution is just as much a religion as Creation. Evolutionists believe that nothing created everything, and Creationists believe that God created everything. Teach them both, and let the kids decide!!!

BTW, I know some idiot is going to say the evolution HAS been proven, but if he/she does, please know that they are wrong. And if it has....show me the proof.

bankboy119 9 years, 9 months ago

wendt I wasn't aware that I had to type with perfect English on a blog....which is exactly why I have used multiple periods to separate a few sentences instead of a semi-colon or plain period and capitilizing the next word. The writing I have done on here is in no way a representation of the work that I can do because if it is there is no way that I would have achieved positions that I have held in the real world. Again, a sentence that is a run on but not important in this situation.

To me, it sounds like you're jealous that people can come up with an alternative, not to mention better institution, to indoctrinating children with liberal crap for the first 18+ years of their lives for 8 hours a day.

And I have taken economics courses so I don't know why I would need you to explain the US system to me. I deal with it every day in my job. If you need some help in getting how the real world actually works instead of what goes on where you both have each others heads stuck let me know, I'll be glad to give you an intro course and then direct you to an expert in the field.

badger 9 years, 9 months ago

Hey, LocalYocal?

Out of curiosity, what is it that I said that makes you think I have no faith? In fact, I don't see a lot of people here at all saying that they don't believe, just that a matter of faith has no place in a place of science. Are you working on the assumption that all people opposed to teaching ID in public classrooms are atheists?

Because, well, you'd be wrong. Faith and one's perception of one's intelligence are certainly not mutually exclusive, and I view with concern anyone who believes that they are.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

what does teaching science have to do with being liberal or conservative? Teaching the scientific method builds in criticism of science. Teaching ID brings the supernatural into science. They don't mix.

Intelligence has nothing to do with believing in god. They have nothing to do with each other. Some smart people believe, some dumb people do not.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

I know that 'merica is the greatest...EVER...WOOO HOOO! I bet you believe everything GWB tells you and that Bill Clinton was sooooo bad for America. Fine. insert head one into sand dune 2.

But if you believe that there is an even economic playing field...

You learned nothing about economics. You probably think that repealing the inheritance tax will somehow help you or that corporate taxes are funding the goverment. That is what the talking heads want you to think and you bought it.

Idiot America

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

Badger, I think that YOU are all mixed up pal. What do you think it takes to believe in evolution??? Since it is considered science, believing it even though it is unproven is not considered faith. BUT IT IS. Faith is defined as: Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing. Just so you are clear on what I am trying to say, and you are not getting confused I am saying that: EVOLUTION REQUIRES JUST AS MUCH FAITH AS CREATIONISM, AND IF ONE IS TAUGHT, THE OTHER SHOULD BE TAUGHT. There are a lot of Cristian scientists that devote their life to the SCIENCE of Christianity. Go to www.drdino.com He is a Christian scientist who has proven evolution wrong and debated with many evolutionists. He SCIENTIFICALLY proves Creationism. So don't tell me that evolution is science and Creationism is merely faith.

bankboy119 9 years, 9 months ago

No wendt I just don't take this seriously enough to go through and reread and have a peer edit my post before I turn it in for you to grade. Also I don't see how you're equating my english writing mistakes to being homeschooled....would you care to explain? You have resolved to using personal attacks on me because you cannot come up with an acceptable counter to the points that I have brought up. Anytime that I post something you do not understand you say that I contradict myelf, though I have explained in a later post how a point you claim in contradictary is actually not when you look at it closer and with greater understanding. Now if you're claiming that my proficiency with writing English is below your standards you should look to review what some of your friends have posted

"what does teaching science have to do with being liberal or conservative?"

"I know that 'merica is the greatest...EVER...WOOO HOOO! I bet you believe everything GWB tells you and that Bill Clinton was sooooo bad for America. Fine. insert head one into sand dune 2."

For a minute after that last one I thought I had ended up in Arkansas (pronounced R-CANS-A$$ with the intelligence you both have displayed today.)

Now instead of resorting to personal attacks I ask again that you would get back to the issue at hand.

Linda Aikins 9 years, 9 months ago

I hate postings that are attacking and tell people they are morons or idiots. Golly gee. Aren't Christians supposed to be kind? Love one another?

Sandman 9 years, 9 months ago

Kudos for Rothschild writing an article without a lot of editorializing. Just the facts with quotes from both sides.

Very refreshing.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

OK, here it is. ID is not Science. I hope that BOE will not adopt this sort of information as part of the curriculum for the children of kansas.

I also hope that they teach better econ classes.

fossilhunter 9 years, 9 months ago

I don't know if it is funny or sad that the conservative BOE members think they know so much about science that they will save us from doing what is suggested by nobel scientists, Nat Science Teachers Assoc., and Nat Academy of Science. How arrogant can you be?

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

BunE, explain science! Intelligent design is just as much science as evolution!!! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE! <--BANKBOY EXCLUDED. I have studied both sides, and made my own decision and SO SHOULD YOU! I thought that you liberals were supposed to be "Open minded", but I guess that just applies to smoking pot, and having random "partners". Research Christian science, and get back to me when you people have an educated comment. Because you cannot say that one is right and the other is wrong, when you HAVE NOT EVEN STUDIED A WHOLE SIDE TO THE DEBATE! Too bad for you people, really...

pz5g1 9 years, 9 months ago

I think that no matter which of the big 3 theory of origins one subscribes to - be it id, creationism, or evolution - everyone could use a break from this controversy once the vote is done.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

No. ID has not been tested. Designists (is that the word?) refuse to test it. Anything based on the supernatural is not science.

I am not sure what smoking pot or random sex has to do with anything other than a weak attempt to frame the argument as some sort of moral stand.

Websters says:. Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin scientia, from scient-, sciens having knowledge, from present participle of scire to know; probably akin to Sanskrit chyati he cuts off, Latin scindere to split -- more at SHED 1 : the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding 2 a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study b : something (as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge 3 a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b : such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : NATURAL SCIENCE 4 : a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws 5 capitalized : CHRISTIAN SCIENCE

Local, you truly are a yocal.

badger 9 years, 9 months ago

LocalYocal-

Again, with the assumptions you go.

I don't have faith that evolution is The Only Fact There Is. I believe, because I understand the process of how scientific thought is developed, that it is the only explanation to which accepted techniques for scientific validation have been applied properly.

I have listened to Creation (in the, oh, what was it, eleven years of Sunday School and following years of church attendance?), I have listened to Intelligent Design advocates (because, you know, they keep throwing points at me and I keep considering them and coming back to their lack of appropriate review and application of the scientific method), and I have listened to evolution advocates. What I believe to be unassailable truth is only what has actually been proven, that changes in species' genotype pools occur over time in response to changes in environmental stimuli by a process of Natural Selection. Everything else is theory.

The difference is, the 'evolution' theory of the origin of species is not based in the disputed holy book of one of several major world religions. I repeat, because you must have missed it before, that if Intelligent Design advocates could get peer-reviewed articles and studies published, that didn't rely upon the Bible as a cornerstone of their argument, I'd be willing to consider their point significantly more valid. Instead, they just whine and cry that they're 'underground science'. 'Underground' is for films, for music scenes, for slam or beat poetry. It's not for science. Science should be able to stand the light of day, and I have not yet seen a peer-reviewed ID article from a neutral information source that could stand without relying on the reader's wholesale acceptance of the Bible as Unquestionable Truth.

And, bankboy? The thing is, you may be a brilliant speaker or intelligent individual in meatspace. But when the only face you present here is one of poor language usage, sloppy grammar, and bad spelling, how exactly are we to form a perception of you based on anything else? If you express yourself in public as marginally literate, and then run about extolling the virtues of your education, you're opening yourself up to mockery. A few mistakes here and there are nothing, but you consistently write like a high school sophomore taking remedial English for the second time.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

At the risk of sounding interested in smoking pot and having anonymous sex, I love you badger.

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

You said: "No. ID has not been tested. Designists (is that the word?) refuse to test it. Anything based on the supernatural is not science."

It is obvious that you don't have any idea what you are rambling about. Where did you read that? What aspect have we "refused" to test?

And that definition...SAYS THAT CRISTIAN SCIENCE IS ALSO SCIENCE!

You have made no valid points AT ALL! And if you are going to slam someone, spell it right. Yokel is how you spell it if you are wanting to use it as a slam, and not just a screen name.

I feel sorry for anyone else who wasted one minute of their time reading your cut n' paste of websters, thinking that you were making a point. And yes, the pot and sex comment was a cheap stab establishing the average moral stance of a liberal.<-- Your only point.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

hahahah You are the best el Dub!

If there are peer reviewed tests of ID, please forward them to me. Make sure that they are actualy reviewed and not just re-printed in www.jesusrodeadinointojeruselem.com

Read it again, note that Christian Science is a specific defined term. It refers particular sect of Christianity.

Um, as far as the slam comment. You are blithering now. Take it down a notch

The average moral stance of a liberal? I'd rather smoke a little grass than cut medicare to pay for an invasion based on lies.

But hey, its all good isn't it?

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

You say the following to be true AND proven: "changes in species' genotype pools occur over time in response to changes in environmental stimuli by a process of Natural Selection".

Where is the PROOF. Have you ever seen a person evolve from a rock? Because that is what evolution says we come from. I am just translating that from scientific terms, because when scientists say that EXACT thing, they say it in a million words and make it sound really intelligent.

Have you ever seen an ape give birth to a human? If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes? The "god" for evolution is TIME. Everytime something is explained, the evolutionist says "Well, over billions and billions of years......." So really, you have never seen proof of what you claim to be the "unassailable truth". Just like my religion, it takes faith to believe in the evolution theory.

I do, however, believe in what is defined as "micro-evolution". Microevolution is: "comparatively minor evolutionary change involving the accumulation of variations in populations usually below the species level." This is the only type of evolution that HAS been proven. This, however unfortunate for your theory, has nothing to do with the origin of life, or the evolution of life from a "big bang".

I am sure that you will have some uneducated response for me, and I will do my best to correct you so that the other people reading this won't get any dumber by your comments.

fossilhunter 9 years, 9 months ago

LYokal -- For the 100th time....evolution is not one genus "morphing" into another! Sheeeez. No one who studies evolution ever, ever said that a chimp gave birth to a human. For crying out loud.....

bangaranggerg 9 years, 9 months ago

I went to public school in Kansas and I feel I got a great education. Friends of mine from Chicago will never know about how Adam and Eve would ride dinosaurs to church.

fossilhunter 9 years, 9 months ago

"Yokal" is spelled "Yokel". Look it up. This correction encapsulates everything that has occurred in the debate on this blog today. ---

As well as in Topeka

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

I know that, but badger stated that it had been proven. So I was just asking if he had ever seen an ape give birth to a human.<--- I KNOW HE HASN'T IT WAS SARCASM! So, if he hasn't seen this, then what is the proof that we evolved from apes? Where is the missing link?

And please, don't use the Time article "How Man Evolved" to disprove YOUR theory once again.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

Great example: what does a rock have to do with an ape having babies?

You are in such a hurry to understand that you make assumptions based on your faith. Science never claims to be an absolute. It is constantly changing, being reviewed, being refined. Billions of years takes a long time to review. Man has the uncanny ability to channel its curiosity in the world into study. You can decide to not participate, but the scientist cannot.

I think that your arrogance has something to do with your disdain of science. You can not imagine having an ancestor that was less than human. I can understand that, but wishing it wasn't so does not make ID good science.

Once Again, if ID-ists (made up term, just relax) can provide peer reviewed, follow the scientific method of expirimentation - based tests that I will be happy to read their work. But so far , these "Christian Scientists have been unable to provide this documentation. Even in the Pennsylvania Lawsuit regarding removing ID from the curriculum, the defendant's chief witnesses can provide no evidencence of testable conclusions.

Science will not reject information that can be tested. Evolution has been tested and retested and reviewed and refined within the confines of the scientific method, Do we have all the answers? no. Will we ever? probably not.

You can not believe in it, think that it is some sort of intellectual assault on your faith. I actually understand that, but it is intellectually dishonest to think of them as rival theories that need to sussed out scientifically. Their nature makes that impossibile. Reason v. Feeling.

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

I know how to spell yokel, did you not read what I wrote? Or are you too high? I wrote: "And if you are going to slam someone, spell it right. Yokel is how you spell it if you are wanting to use it as a slam, and not just a screen name." So I did spell it right, genius.

Anyone else?

usaschools 9 years, 9 months ago

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/050530fa_fact

Here is an excellent article that sums up many of the major points made by ID proponents and summarizes the flaws in these arguments.

It is also worth noting that the publishers of THE textbook on ID testified in court that the book (Of People and Pandas) was originally submitted with the word CREATIONISM in 100% of the places that Intelligent Design now appears, and that the change was made after the Supreme Court ruled it illegal to teach Creationism as SCIENCE, which it is not. This means that the authors of the one and only major ID text feel that creationism and intelligent design are SYNOMYMS, laying to rest any argument that they are not. We all know that they are, but the fact that those who like to argue otherwise will not admit the obvious shows their deep lack of credibility.

badger 9 years, 9 months ago

LY-

I fail to see how my commentary could make you dumber.

What I was speaking of is what you so casually dismissed as 'microevolution.' That is, I said, the only proven and unassailable fact, and I have observed it. If you take something with a short generation time, like a fruit fly, and you divide one hatching (essentially considered to be gene pools) into two groups, and you subject the groups to different environmental pressures, like darkness and high temperature vs. light and low temperature, after fifty or so generations (less than a year), you find that selection for traits that provided different advantages has caused significant change in the originally identical gene pools of those two groups.

I said nothing of that being any sort of proof of the big bang (in fact, the origin of species is completely unrelated to the theory of the big bang) or even of large-scale speciation-level evolution.

It istheorized that should consistent microevolution occur in extreme enough conditions (like, I don't know, an Ice Age or a period of high volcanic activity) over hundreds or thousands of generations, gradual changes in populations would eventually result in new species. That part I acknowledge as unproven, but a reasonable explanation that stands up to scientific challenge, unlike ID which does not stand up to scientific challenge unless you consider the Bible to be an acceptable scientific publication, which I do not.

Your 'have you ever seen a human evolve from a rock?' nonsense is such a blatant and unappealing straw man that I will simply not even address the ridiculous hyperbole you've set forth, other than to point out that it is a straw man and therefore unworthy of refutation.

BunE - in the immortal words of Katherine Hepburn, "Golly."

bangaranggerg 9 years, 9 months ago

it seems to make sense, i mean local isn't spelled lokel, so ya, waste of time with that insult guys.

usaschools 9 years, 9 months ago

bankboy119 you are full of baloney and misinformation. The evolutionists are asked to explain very minor and insignificant questions often based on misunderstandings by the uninformed. However, when ID proponents are asked to explain glaring, huge differences of opinion among ID proponents, they are unable to do so.

When was the last ID experiment conducted in a laboratory. That would be NEVER. Why? It is NOT SCIENCE.

I have no problem with the theory in a religion class. It is not science, nor is is a critique on science. It is just a faith-based initiative. It is creationism in sheep's clothing.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

Sorry it was a bad 'joke, a play on Nixon's comment after seeing the great wall of China:

"It truly is, a great wall."

I just was referencing El Dub's name and trying to make a funny. Actually, it might be the missing link between straight prose and a real joke. Evolution is everywhere.

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

BUNNY, WHAT PROOF CAN YOU DIRECT ME TO, TO PROVE EVOLUTION?!? Everytime scientists "prove" it, someone else disproves it, so they continue again on the perpetual journey to find the origin of life...even when it has been right in front of them their whole life. If the theory is proven wrong, wouldn't they lose their grant money to reasearch it? Don't you think that MIGHT have something to do with the fact that they haven't said "OK, we were wrong." Think, if someone was giving you millions of dollars to research something that can never be proven, what an awesome job that would be.

Your problem, is that you believe everything that scientists say. I guess you could say that my problem is that I believe everything that Jesus says, but I would rather have faith in Jesus, than faith in nobel scientists.

They are both unproven theories, and you are right, probably always will be. There is evidence published for both sides. Once again www.drdino.com has scientific evidence for Creationism. And I am sure that you could direct me to an evolutionist website for evidence. The fact is that the two of us will never agree on who has the most evidence, or who is right, or anything else. We will state our opinions based on what we believe to be true.

Shouldn't our children be taught both, so that they can come to their own conclusions as well? I wasn't raised with any religion in my life, and was taught evolution in high school, and had to research the ID theory myself. I came to my own conclusions, but really wish that I would have been taught ID in school, because many people won't just go out and research something on their own. I am not as radical as most Christians, because I want my children to be taught both ID AND evolution, and decide on their own. Why would that scare evolutionists so much?

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

That prove/disprove cycle is the whole point of science. Open a Biology book (don't worry, you won't turn into a pillar of salt, I talked to god, he said it would be cool.) and note how science builds on each new experiment.

MMMMMMMMMethodology

I especially like that the DRdino has a "merch" tab. I want a T-shirt that says:

"My old man weren't no Ape"

Yelling really doesn't make you right, I know that is how most people rank experts here in Idiot America, but not me.

Your philosophies are neat, they are fun to talk about but they are the wrong arguments here.

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

Badger, you wont address the "man came from a rock" comment, because that is exactly what evolution teaches, and it sounds so ridiculous that you don't want to touch it.

Talk to you all later, have to go home. It has been nice talking with you all, and no hard feelings. Just people with two different opinions. We will see how the BOE votes.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

What scares evolutionists is that ID wants to join the party without doing the legwork.

ID is welcome once it puts in the time. Your gut feeling that there is something more out there is not science.

I think that the ID-ists are afraid to play by the rules because they know it can't hold up to scientific scrutiny.

I know that to believe in ID is to believe in god (lets not fool ourselves) and most people who believe that god see him as loving and morally above reproach. ID if taken to its logical conclusion assaults the infallibility of god. I think I said this yesterday but if god created dinosaurs and loved what he saw, why did he kill them all off? were they bad? Did he make a mistake? Did he love the dinosaurs less? Did Man use them up? Scary questions.

staff04 9 years, 9 months ago

I think this discussion should be over with. No matter what all the voices of moderation want, we have clearly lost this battle to the unsophisticated, yokel, rustic, bumpkins.

AlexFenton 9 years, 9 months ago

Dearest Danny,

You know more about the Jerry Springer Show than you do western Kansas. Rant all you like about being away at college, the Kansas BOE evolution issue has been covered nationally. Heck, even I knew it was up for vote.

The point is that there is movement in western Kansas to unseat some of those board members. That movement should be supported. A Lawrence-centered smugness will do nothing to further that cause.

Hugs and kisses!

Learn a little about life outside of Lawrence.

bankboy119 9 years, 9 months ago

Okay sorry I've been at meetings so I haven't had time to read through the rest of this. Badger would you explain how I'm writing in high school English? un4choonatelee enuf 4 u mi grammur mussabe nut intellegeble enuf 4 u en all ur smmartsssss 2 undurrstend

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

I love western Kansas. Some people even think that anyone west of Douglas County is western Kansas, I guess I am one of ya!

I hunt there, love the sky and the people. I camp, fish have even worked on a custom cutting crew etc. Any help to unseat the Connie Morris' of the world can count on my help and support.

craigers 9 years, 9 months ago

Be careful about using the pearls before swine remark. Right before that Jesus is talking about people being hypocrites and not judging themselves and pulling the plank out of their own eye in order to see clearly. The moral of that story can be applied to both sides equally in this debate. I see validity of the study of evolution. However, my problem was that when I was in school evolution was brought up as to being the way we all came into existence. There was more emphasis on that rather than the small variations that we have all agreed does occur and can be proven. I won't try to push ID into a science classroom. However, put it into a religion class that is required, not optional. When we are required to take science we are required to make our kids hear about how evolution explains our existence with no alternatives. I don't care if it is in the science room or not, but letting our kids hear about both theories I think is a reasonable request, don't you? As of right now most philosophy courses are optional. Mandatory exposure to both ideas of the origin of life would be my suggestion.

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

Wendt, maybe if there is an english debate, we could use your insight, but until then, shut up man. I am not writing an essay.

As far as what I wrote, it IS "Just people with two different opinions." Because there are more than two people in this debate dumb a$$. For some reason, your comment makes me more mad, because of your lack of insight on the issue at hand, you have to criticize people for imperfect grammer. NOBODY CARE WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY!

Does anyone from the evolution side agree with that?

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

One way or another, you want that god talk in the schools don't ya?

tell you what, you let me teach a science course at your church.

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

craigers, Man, I see your point, and agree with almost everything you said. Good job man.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

Sorry, I could not resist. Mucho apologies El Dub

LocalYocal 9 years, 9 months ago

BunE,

Totally different man. Church is optional. People who believe in what they believe, choose and attend a church accordingly. EVERYONE is REQUIRED to go through school. What is so threatening about "God talk"? If YOUR theory is taught as well, what is wrong with giving the kids options? It suprises me how much it scares evolutionists that "God talk" will be in schools again. Did you know that since they took the word of God out of public schools, teenage pregnancy, drug use, violent crimes, and just about all other criminal act has skyrocketed. "God talk" must be sooooo bad, huh.

fossilhunter 9 years, 9 months ago

Craigers - "Mandatory exposure to both ideas of the origin of life would be my suggestion."

But scientists don't put any validity in one idea. That's the same as saying, "Hey, there's a group of people that really, really believe that the sun rotates around the earth, so we need to teach that as an alternative to the earth rotating around the sun just to be fair."

fossilhunter 9 years, 9 months ago

LocalY -- are you OK with "Muhammed Talk" and "Buddha Talk" in school too?

Linda Aikins 9 years, 9 months ago

Does anyone feel better? Do you think you convinced a single person? I personally think you are passing gas into a breeze if you think you did. Do you think anyone is looking at your screen name and saying, "Wow - that person is brilliant!" ???

ick

Bad blog. Bad blog.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

You don't have to go to public schools. You got private schools, home schools etc...but whatever.

Listen man, I believe that aliens seeded the earth, but I can't test it. Do you want me to teach that?

What version of god talk? Christian? Islam? Hindu? Do you really want public schools teaching "god talk"?

Did you know that since the gap between the rich and poor has widened so much the crime rate has skyrocketed?

pz5g1 9 years, 9 months ago

Awesome! Class warfare is back and better than ever! Let me run out and get a copy of "Communist Manifesto."

fossilhunter 9 years, 9 months ago

Class warfare broke out when the Kansas Taliban took over the BOE

yourworstnightmare 9 years, 9 months ago

The intemperate ignorance displayed in these blogs by the fundamentalist/creationist/IDers of the Kansas Taliban continues to amaze. Bunch a freakin' spoiled little Dorothys: "Ooo the big old world is complicated and conflicts with my little dogma. Make it go away! Make it stop!" Click your heels, Dorothys.

Even if these "standards" are reversed, the damage is done, the stuff is out of the horse. Kansas biology teachers already feel intimidated about teaching real science regardless of official standards, and the US and world as a whole is further impressed with the idea that Kansas is filled with fundamentalist wackos out of touch with reality, willing to slit their own throats to avoid dealing with the real world. Sadly for Kansas and Kansans, the market will correct this and Kansas will sink further into the intellectual and economic backwaters.

BunE 9 years, 9 months ago

Oh, I get it, people won't change their minds so shut up? C'mon Goatsie.

If that is how you feel stay of the message board. At least John and El Dub and BB are willing to talk.

Calliope877 9 years, 9 months ago

Wow, what a heated debate!
I like it.

LocalYocal,

You stated that evolution teaches that mankind came from a rock...but creationism teaches that mankind came from the dust. Maybe it's just me, but I see some similarities there.

I think alot of people have a problem with Creationism or ID being taught in public schools because it kind of breaches that "Seperation of Church and State" thing in our consitution. I'd have to disagree that the theory of evolution is a faith within itself. No one I know of who believes in evolution worships the Big Bang and prays to Darwin at night.

I understand the need for children to make up their own minds as to what viewpoint they want to take, but if parents want to persuade their children to ponder creationism then it should be done by taking their children to church every week. There's no need to wrap creationism up in a scientific-sounding title like Intelligent Design. The two concepts are pretty much one and the same in my opnion.

I just thought I'd add my $.02 to this heated debate.

Calliope877 9 years, 9 months ago

Sorry, I spelled "constitution" wrong...my bad.

Calliope877 9 years, 9 months ago

Wendt,

Thanks.:) I like a good argument. Arguing is healthy if done in a civilized manner, but I don't agree with a lot of the insults that have been tossed from BOTH sides.

I especially think it hurts the credibility of the individuals trying to make a point when they resort to words like dumb@$$. Or when they tell people on a public forum to "shut up". But maybe that's just me.:)

Calliope877 9 years, 9 months ago

I think I spelled "separation" wrong too...man, my grammar sucks tonight...sorry.:(

Calliope877 9 years, 9 months ago

pz5g1,

"Awesome! Class warfare is back and better than ever! Let me run out and get a copy of "Communist Manifesto."

I actually have to study the "Communist Manifesto" for my Western Civ. II class tomorrow night....fun, fun, fun....sarcastic.

Calliope877 9 years, 9 months ago

wendt,

Thank you! You're very kind.:)

My parents are wonderful people. They're very conservative, especially my dad. He's a generous human being. But despite his viewpoint that the world was created in seven days by a very intelligent designer, I think that if I was still in elementary, junior high, or highschool he'd have some misgivings about having this viewpoint being taught in public schools without his supervision. He would want to be a part of these teachings by taking me to Wednesday and Sunday services. Kids don't always like what their parents want to teach them. Kids don't always like what schools teach them either. I don't care if it's a public, private, or religious school...kids are going to think what they want to think because, unfortunately for their parents, they have minds of their own!

I don't think this "god-talk" in schools, especially public schools, will make much of a difference because it's up to the INDIVIDUAL to make a choice as to what belief they want to side with! And there must be something wrong with the family unit if the "god-talk" isn't at home. Why do you want to rely on public schools for this endeavor? If you bring up your child with strong morals at home and through attendance at your church, and keep an open communication with your child you shouldn't have to rely on the teachings of whatever school your child is attending to eliminate teen-age pregnancy or crime!

Force-feeding perceptions on creationism or intelligent design in our public schools isn't going to make the pregnancy or crime rate go down because these young adults are exactly that: they're young ADULTS! The parents play a huge role on their child in the seclusion of what's called "home." How their children are going to turn out as far as strength of character and morality goes depends on the character and morality of their parents, and I don't think teaching creationism or ID in public schools will eliminate problems like pre-marital sex, teenage pregnancy, or crime. Why do you want the state to teach your children driven by a religious and moral perspective when it's your, as a parent's, responsibility to bring your child up right?

I think it's irresponsible that parents are willing to give this endeavor up to the Board of Education. This is just another example of how the family social structure is breaking down through the lack of parental responsibility. Let's blame the music, let's blame the movies, let's blame the books -- the books we don't want them to read! No, it can't be the parents, it can't be the parents at all! We just gave birth to them and that's it....

Again, this is just my $.02.

Daniel Speicher 9 years, 9 months ago

Very well, Alex... I do not doubt that there is intelligence west of the Douglas County line... I just worry about the consistent sea of red, that's all. That shows to me that there is a "come hell or highwater we'll vote Republican" mentality. However, I suppose it is just the same in Lawrence, just blue instead of red.

You have my apologies for my "smugness". You were absolutely correct. Accept my apologies... And, when the vote does come around... Vote intelligently... Vote in a non-biased manner... And, vote to benefit the children (and their, hopefully, college careers). Once again, sorry for the rude remarks.

--Danny Speicher

craigers 9 years, 9 months ago

I see what you are saying fossilhunter, but I am not just suggesting requiring a religion class that includes Christianity along with other religions in terms of this debate. I myself don't feel informed enough about all other religions in this world and think a class would give students a headstart by making them more aware of the world around them. The goal of education is to make critical thinkers of these students and in order to think critically you have to know both sides. Science aside I think that everybody does a little soul searching in their life, but sometimes they don't know where to start. A required class like this would at least gives these students a grasp of what is out there. We are a triune being spirit, soul, and body. We must take care of all parts and just teaching natural knowledge doesn't do that.

The separation of church and state that everybody speaks about is so that the state doesn't force a certain religious beliefs and institute a state/mandated church for all to participate in. It is not an infringement on rights if we are merely exposing the students to multiple religious studies.

fossilhunter 9 years, 9 months ago

Craigers - but why bring religion of any kind into the science classroom? Do we do it in math too? Take the barrels of wine divided by the number of people attending = the number of glasses each....unless there is a miracle, then the math as we know it can't be applied. In fact, we have to teach miracle math. If the numbers just don't work out, then the intelligent designer made it that way. It's OK. Move on to the next problem.

craigers 9 years, 9 months ago

I don't think it should be in the science classroom. I am sorry I didn't make that clear with my comment. I think you could use statistics to support a conclusion of the creator, but does that mean that stats class should be where ID or Creationism is taught? No. I merely think we should expose all the kids to religion in a required class. I don't think merely requiring science is enough. You would make better citizens and people out of these children if they had some exposure to world religions. Require this type of philosophy class in the curriculum. You know what I mean? Not require a Christianity class because that would completely be against the clause of government establishing a mandated religion. I think in a way we agree fossilhunter.

fossilhunter 9 years, 9 months ago

Holy cow! We're on the same page!!! Yes, I think that kids should get exposed to all kinds of religion. It teaches them to be more tolerant. My wife and I have taken our children to several different churches so they can see what's the same and what's different. I really enjoyed my humanities classes at KU. It would be nice if all kids got the chance to experience that.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.