http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jun/08062706.html Sorry guys, but no matter what your faith is, ID has no place being taught in our public schools. The goal of a school is to prepare the students for the real world / college, and evolution is an undeniable fact. ID/Creationism has no scientific evidence to support it, period. There are no accepted "alternative views" in the scientific community. This is not from lack of consideration or study. This is because all biological evidence supports evolution / natural selection. I mean, we'd think it was foolish to teach alternate versions of World War 2 in History class, or alternate versions of English (ebonics) in Grammar class; why in the hell is it a good idea to allow ID/Creationism to be taught in a science class, especially in a state with such a poor overall academic standing like Louisiana? This is why Bobby Jindal is a fool. Last time I checked, the people responsible for this bill were politicians, not scientists. Ignorant, dogmatic men trying to cast doubt on what is an accepted, observable science because it conflicts with a holy book. These are many of the same men who believe that the physical body of Jesus exists in a cracker. I'm sorry to sound so harsh, but this is where religion crosses the line. When religion steps in the way of science and knowledge, it becomes dangerous. That is all that ID is about: trying to reconcile the observed world to an ancient book, by using fancy terms that mean nothing. There is NO evidence to support ID. If anyone here could offer some proof in ID that I may have missed, I'll promise to take a good openminded look at it. So far I'm not impressed. Edit: I just noticed that Jindal has a Biology degree. That's even worse. Evolution is the absolute basis for all modern Biological Science. He should know better than anyone that evolution is fact.
“There is no publication in the scientific literature—in prestigious journals, specialty journals, or books—that describes how molecular evolution of any real, complex, biochemical system either did occur or even might have occurred. There are assertions that such evolution occurred, but absolutely none are supported by pertinent experiments or calculations.”-Behe, Michael J. (1996) Darwin’s Black Box, Touchstone, New York, p. 185 Where Did Life Come From? http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/p_tree.shtml
I agree with what you said about ID/Creationism. I disagree with your description of Jindal as a fool. He has done some foolish things, and his signing the education bill which may open the door to ID and Creationism being taught in science class is not one of his better moments. But he is no fool.
It does have a place and it is already being taught there . . . in social studies classes where it belongs. Nobody has forbidden religious topics from being discussed in schools in their proper place. That place is NEVER in a science class. As long as students take a well-rounded curriculum, they are exposed to a broad range of thoughts and ideas. He's not a fool, but he is a kiss-ass typical politician. The average Louisiana voter is ignorant of science and believes in mythology, so he's going with the flow. Entirely predictable. No change at all from any earlier politician.
A preposterous statement by an ID advocate that is absolute hogwash scientifically. The evidence for Evolution is overwhelming in all the biological sciences. Yes, Michael Behe is a scientist, but is "Intelligent Design" science? If so, it will be the first science established without a single technical paper published for peer-review, including zero by Behe himself. For obvious reasons he has decided to completely bypass professional review and go directly to a Darwin-doubting public. He offers no general laws, models, or explanations for how design happens, no testable predictions, and no possible way to falsify his hybrid evolution/ID hypothesis. He is simply claiming that design is a fact that is easily detectable in biochemical systems. "Never say, and never take seriously anyone who says, 'I cannot believe that so-and-so could have evolved by gradual selection.' I have dubbed this kind of fallacy 'the Argument from Personal Incredulity.' Time and again, it has proven the prelude to an intellectual banana-skin experience." Richard Dawkins - River out of Eden "He is intelligent, but not experienced. His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking..." Spock - The Wrath of Khan Behe has been scientifically rebutted many times by many experts and it ain't hard to find them. A Rebuttal of Behe A Biochemist's Response to "The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution
Maybe...but you, in all of your ramblings, failed to point out how this... ...is not true. Hence, evolution is nothing more than a guess..a theory, some God hating lunatic's "bright" idea, that has made a fool of the masses. I'm sure, in time, evolution will be scientifically proven impossible and some other weird idea will be taught besides creation. And, don't come back with that..."you people cannot scientifically prove creation"...crap. We know this. We accept this. I don't lose sleep just because something I believe in can not be scientifically proven to be factual. This is really a pointless debate..creation vs. evolution. The argument here is should I.D. (which I'm not a big fan of because it stays from Christian beliefs also) be taught along side evolution. I say yes..it should. If your going to teach one stupid, made up theory, then you might as well talk about another theory that refutes it. It should be taught in the same class to show it's relevancy.
You didn't read a single link, did you? The guy is a laughing stock among biologists, Salty. He didn't make this statement in a technical paper, subject to review and critique by his peers. It ... simply ... aint ... true. It would have never been survived the first editor or fact-check, much less a peer review. He just wrote a popular book aimed at gullible readers who buy it hook line and sinker because it seems to validate their beliefs. The best minds in the business have completely shredded his arguments anyway, I can offer about 50 more authoritative scientific sources, not that it would matter to you. Are you serious or drunk? if you want to argue evolution, then roll up your sleeves because I can offer tons of scientific evidence and you got nuthin'. That's what people say when they know they cannot win it. I say teach evolution in science class, creationism in social studies class, and religion in church and then everybody is happy. You know, I think I'll just take the evidence of 150 years of scientific research as a bit more than "a stupid, made-up theory". There is no scientific theory that refutes it, only religion. What relevance? Yes, let's just put english and history and geology and religion and mythology all in the same class and set education back 600 years. As a science teacher, you are a damn fine machine gunner, amigo. :wink:
If you seriously believe that there is no evidence of evolution, then you know absolutely nothing about biology. We have observed evolution with our very eyes in a lab and real life environment. That is fact. There is no debate in the scientific community whatsoever. Do you think it is because of some massive conspiracy against the bible? The only debate is with some ignorant Christians who will not accept any truth that contradicts the bible. Many other Christians see evolution as a process started by God, and that is fine. Evolution doesn't pretend to explain where life began, only how it came to the point where it is today. ID is not a science. It is a farce, and a clever lie. The only goal of ID is to make the bible seem credible as a source of scientific information. If you believe the bible is any sort of science book, then you are as ignorant as the people who believed that the earth was the center of the universe.
And there you go. You have shown in one sentence that you have no clue what evolution is or how it works. You have also shown that you have no idea what a scientific theory is. Must be nice to stand so adamantly against an idea that you do not have any basic understanding of. I'm sure you can find a 6th grade biology textbook somewhere if you need a starting point. Evolution has already been proven 100% as fact. We have shown over and over the "how" of evolution, in and out of the lab. The only reason it is still "Theory" and not "Law" is because we don't know "why". Being content with intellectual ignorance is fine with me. But why try to present your side of a debate when you admit to not having any basis for your opinions? Meaningful discussion of science require a baseline knowledge of the topic. If you have no concept of what biology and scientific theory is, then you have no platform for your opinions, and nobody is going to take you seriously. While we can agree that ID is a stupid, it can only be scientifically categorized as a HYPOTHESIS. It cannot be classified as THEORY. Google "scientific theory", learn what it actually means, and then maybe we can start an elementary discussion on scientific principles. Otherwise you are wasting our time. You might as well be trying to reason that witches weigh as much as ducks.
So where does science say life began? Science tries to explain to us how life got to a certain point without knowing how it started. How it started is the most important variable. Why can't the 100's of years of science tell us how? It will always be argued that science is unearthing how God created life because science will never tell us how life began or how the substances that started life came to be and so on. If science has no answer to how it all began then what is so wrong with presenting ID as a possible explanation?
