| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jason Spaceman" |
| Date: |
20 Feb 2005 01:49:07 AM |
| Object: |
19 Kansas State biologists agree: ID isn't science |
From the article:
------------------------------------
'Intelligent design' at odds with a biotech image
By members of the division of biology at Kansas State University
We view the proposed changes in Kansas Science Standards (the minority
report which is likely to be adopted by the State Board of Education) with
dismay and disbelief.
The proposal introduces non-scientific ideas into the curriculum to
promote the concept of "intelligent design" as a "scientific" alternative
to the existing curriculum. Intelligent design is based on the belief that
an intelligent being created and directs the universe.
Proposed revisions to the biology curriculum have a thinly veiled goal of
institutionalizing unverifiable interpretations of the natural world in
our schools. It is inappropriate to introduce this non-scientific view in
science classrooms.
------------------------------------
Read the rest at http://cjonline.com/stories/022005/opi_ksucolumn.shtml
(may require a login & password --> www.bugmenot.com )
J. Spaceman
.
|
|
| User: "josephus" |
|
| Title: Re: 19 Kansas State biologists agree: ID isn't science |
20 Feb 2005 02:48:00 AM |
|
|
Jason Spaceman wrote:
From the article:
------------------------------------
'Intelligent design' at odds with a biotech image
By members of the division of biology at Kansas State University
We view the proposed changes in Kansas Science Standards (the minority
report which is likely to be adopted by the State Board of Education) with
dismay and disbelief.
The proposal introduces non-scientific ideas into the curriculum to
promote the concept of "intelligent design" as a "scientific" alternative
to the existing curriculum. Intelligent design is based on the belief that
an intelligent being created and directs the universe.
Proposed revisions to the biology curriculum have a thinly veiled goal of
institutionalizing unverifiable interpretations of the natural world in
our schools. It is inappropriate to introduce this non-scientific view in
science classrooms.
------------------------------------
Read the rest at http://cjonline.com/stories/022005/opi_ksucolumn.shtml
(may require a login & password --> www.bugmenot.com )
J. Spaceman
I think we need to mobilize a response that would insure a resolution
not mandated by a majority but by scientific principals.
josephus
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: 19 Kansas State biologists agree: ID isn't science |
23 Feb 2005 12:10:41 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 02:49:07 -0500, Jason Spaceman
<notreally@jspaceman.homelinux.org> said in alt.atheism:
We view the proposed changes in Kansas Science Standards (the minority
report which is likely to be adopted by the State Board of Education) with
dismay and disbelief.
If the Kansas Bd. of Ed. can't read between the lines - "we aren't
going to accept students who have been taught that ID is an acceptable
"theory" into the Biology Department - they need to take a remedial
reading class.
Or maybe that's what they want - for all high school graduates to
attend "bible college".
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise
as false, and by the rulers as useful."
- Seneca the Younger
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: 19 Kansas State biologists agree: ID isn't science |
20 Feb 2005 04:25:35 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 02:49:07 -0500, Jason Spaceman
<notreally@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote:
From the article:
------------------------------------
'Intelligent design' at odds with a biotech image
By members of the division of biology at Kansas State University
We view the proposed changes in Kansas Science Standards (the minority
report which is likely to be adopted by the State Board of Education) with
dismay and disbelief.
The proposal introduces non-scientific ideas into the curriculum to
promote the concept of "intelligent design" as a "scientific" alternative
to the existing curriculum. Intelligent design is based on the belief that
an intelligent being created and directs the universe.
Proposed revisions to the biology curriculum have a thinly veiled goal of
institutionalizing unverifiable interpretations of the natural world in
our schools. It is inappropriate to introduce this non-scientific view in
science classrooms.
This is what happens. This militant evangelisation of the god concept
is of the 'you are with us or you are against us' type . By their
unremmiting advocacy of Creationism they are literally forcing
scientists to abandon any beliefs in a god that they might have in
order to defend science against the moral corruption of the
creationists. Either that or give up science. Maybe this is part of
the agenda to isolate science as an 'ungodly' practise (which to them
is synonomous with 'devilty' thus undermining the practise of science
itself. I can see a time
in the future of the USA when the likes of Galileo and Roger Bacon
are imprisoned, silenced and maybe even executed for creating
'novel' ideas. Christian militants are a dangerous people as history
has proved. We djould not stand by as the Germans did when Hitlert
built his Third Catholic Reich. Yes it is as dangerous as that. Given
the chance, the militant Biblist who post here would not hesitate
to shut us up in the name of their religion. They have no regard for
notions such as free speech or democracy when it becomes between
them and their notions of what they decide their god want.
Jews had every reason to fear and flee Germany. We atheists as
well as Homosexual had better look out for our safety too and do
something about it before it is too late. These militants are on the
march and it is an ugly nasty sight. . We are top of their list for
'treatment' after science, don't doubt it. Thank goodness I do not
live in the USA where freedom of thought is not under attack.
Do I exaggerate the threat we face from these people? Is the
picture I paint above a bit extreme or fantasy on my part?
Maybe they are only a tiny minority and safe to ignore but
just loud. Maybe the great general public will get heartily sick
of them or see them for the self-important self-righteous would
be controllers of other peoples lives using their concept of
a god for an excuse and treat them with the contempt they
deserve. Maybe this is just a bad phase the USA is going
through and the shadow will pass over.
Nevertheless do you really think these militant godists would
really put freedom of speech and thought above their desire
to control us using their concepts of a god, and would they really
allow freedom of worship? The Puritans did not when they established
their Republic here in England. You got fined if you did not
attend their churches on a Sunday.
--
Les Hellawell
greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
