| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jason Spaceman" |
| Date: |
09 Jan 2004 04:19:10 PM |
| Object: |
In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time in a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
Some Missouri lawmakers want the state to force public schools to
teach intelligent design as an alternative theory to evolution.
Even if it never becomes law, House Bill 911 figures to toss Missouri
into the same furor over origin-of-life science that embroiled the
Kansas State Board of Education in recent years.
Many science educators in Missouri are distressed, said Rebecca
Litherland, a past president of the Science Teachers of Missouri and
the science coordinator for Columbia Public Schools.
“I thought, ‘Oh, my gosh, we're going to become Kansas.' ”
The bill, which Republican Rep. Wayne Cooper of Camdenton said was
brought to him by individuals in the St. Louis area, also would
require school science curriculums to define evolution as a theory
resting on a historical hypothesis that has not, and cannot, be
proved.
He figures it has a 50-50 chance of getting out of committee and onto
the House floor.
“Our objective is to improve science instruction and make textbooks
more accurate,” said Cooper, whose bill was co-sponsored by six other
Republican representatives. “We want to create academic freedom to
allow this discussion.”
The seven-page bill defines scientific terms and how they should be
applied to the teaching of evolution and intelligent design. It would
require equal treatment of both theories, in the amount of textbook
space and the time spent in classroom instruction.
If the measure becomes law, teachers who do not follow its
requirements could lose their jobs.
Every science classroom would have to post a copy of the law on the
wall.
“That's unimaginable,” said Louis Odom, an associate professor in
science education at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. “It's a
violation of academic freedom. I would fight it to the end.”
Evolution supporters say proponents of intelligent design are trying
to force their way into the science classroom with a theory that is
not scientific.
Critics of evolution theory say they are taking aggressive measures
because the mainstream science community has shut the door on
competing theories and ostracized those who disagree.
“Evolution never earned a monopoly on academic thought,” said Tom
Willis of the Creation Science Association for Mid-America. “They
bullied their way in. They just yelled louder.”
Willis, of Cleveland, Mo., helped write proposed changes in the Kansas
science curriculum playing down evolution, which the state Board of
Education adopted in 1999. In a storm of public debate, moderates took
control of the Kansas board in the 2000 elections and restored
evolution's status, if only tenuously.
Some people thought the debate cast Kansas in a poor light.
Litherland said she fears the same attention coming Missouri's
direction just when the state is trying to establish itself as a
leader in life science research.
“This will bring national attention to Missouri,” she said, “and it
won't be positive.”
Evolution proponents haven't yelled louder, said Eugenie Scott of the
California-based National Center for Science Education; they simply
have science on their side.
Intelligent design theory, which she called a cloak for creationism,
hasn't made it into high school classrooms because it hasn't
established merit with the scientific community, she said.
“They (proponents of intelligent design) are trying to cut to the head
of the line with things like House Bill 911, rather than do the heavy
lifting of trying to prove themselves in the rough and tumble of the
academic community,” Scott said.
The theory of evolution holds that the diversity of living things grew
over millions of years from simple organisms through the natural
selection of randomly occurring mutations.
The theory of intelligent design holds that there is an “irreducible
complexity” in living organisms that could not have occurred by
chance.
Intelligent design theory stops short of speculating on what kind of
intelligence is behind the design. The distinction, Cooper said,
allows teachers to discuss the theory without advocating any religion.
Not all advocates of intelligent design research approve of Cooper's
bill.
The Seattle-based Discovery Institute holds that seeking state
mandates is the wrong approach, said John West, the associate director
of the institute's Center for Science and Culture.
West thinks schools would do better to take a more thorough — and
critical — approach when teaching evolution.
State Rep. Susan Phillips of Kansas City said she signed on as a
co-sponsor because she thought alternative theories had been blocked
from the classroom.
“We need to understand other theories,” she said. “It's a hot-button
issue with people.”
Cooper expects the bill to be modified. For instance, he said, the
requirement that the law be posted in classrooms “is probably
unnecessary.”
State Education Commissioner Kent King, who would oversee
implementation of the law, has not studied the bill and did not want
to comment, spokesman Jim Morris said.
Even if the bill becomes law, Willis predicted, it will be challenged
in court.
And courts have not been friendly to anti-evolution measures.
“We are going to have to accomplish our goal without aid of the law,”
he said.
------------------------------------------------
From http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/7665979.htm
(but you will need to set up an account first)
J. Spaceman
.
|
|
| User: "Mike Dworetsky" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
10 Jan 2004 03:22:59 AM |
|
|
"Jason Spaceman" <I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com> wrote in message
news:d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com...
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time in a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
Allow me to volunteer a contribution to your defence fund, should it be
necessary. We can plead that your need for religious expression (you are a
believer in rationality) overrides copyright law...
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
Some Missouri lawmakers want the state to force public schools to
teach intelligent design as an alternative theory to evolution.
Even if it never becomes law, House Bill 911 figures to toss Missouri
into the same furor over origin-of-life science that embroiled the
Kansas State Board of Education in recent years.
Many science educators in Missouri are distressed, said Rebecca
Litherland, a past president of the Science Teachers of Missouri and
the science coordinator for Columbia Public Schools.
“I thought, ‘Oh, my gosh, we're going to become Kansas.' ”
The bill, which Republican Rep. Wayne Cooper of Camdenton said was
brought to him by individuals in the St. Louis area, also would
require school science curriculums to define evolution as a theory
resting on a historical hypothesis that has not, and cannot, be
proved.
He figures it has a 50-50 chance of getting out of committee and onto
the House floor.
“Our objective is to improve science instruction and make textbooks
more accurate,” said Cooper, whose bill was co-sponsored by six other
Republican representatives. “We want to create academic freedom to
allow this discussion.”
Hmm, a politicial lying for electoral gain. Why does this not surprise
me...? Note that they are all Republicans, why is that? Are all Democrats
merely Godless, or just rational? Or more intelligent?
The seven-page bill defines scientific terms and how they should be
applied to the teaching of evolution and intelligent design. It would
require equal treatment of both theories, in the amount of textbook
space and the time spent in classroom instruction.
Most of the terms have clear definitions in scinece outside the confines of
the bill. It's suspect that the authors see fit to need to redefine them.
If the measure becomes law, teachers who do not follow its
requirements could lose their jobs.
Every science classroom would have to post a copy of the law on the
wall.
“That's unimaginable,” said Louis Odom, an associate professor in
science education at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. “It's a
violation of academic freedom. I would fight it to the end.”
Hey! A good guy. Let's give him our support.
Evolution supporters say proponents of intelligent design are trying
to force their way into the science classroom with a theory that is
not scientific.
Critics of evolution theory say they are taking aggressive measures
because the mainstream science community has shut the door on
competing theories and ostracized those who disagree.
“Evolution never earned a monopoly on academic thought,” said Tom
Willis of the Creation Science Association for Mid-America. “They
bullied their way in. They just yelled louder.”
Doesn't this bozo realise that ID theorists agree with everything evolution
says, except about the designer having to make the flagellum or something?
What gain does he expect for Creationism from this bill?
By the way, let me beat Lenny Flank to the punchline, "What is the theory of
Creation Science? How can we test it?"
Willis, of Cleveland, Mo., helped write proposed changes in the Kansas
science curriculum playing down evolution, which the state Board of
Education adopted in 1999. In a storm of public debate, moderates took
control of the Kansas board in the 2000 elections and restored
evolution's status, if only tenuously.
Some people thought the debate cast Kansas in a poor light.
Litherland said she fears the same attention coming Missouri's
direction just when the state is trying to establish itself as a
leader in life science research.
“This will bring national attention to Missouri,” she said, “and it
won't be positive.”
Evolution proponents haven't yelled louder, said Eugenie Scott of the
California-based National Center for Science Education; they simply
have science on their side.
Intelligent design theory, which she called a cloak for creationism,
hasn't made it into high school classrooms because it hasn't
established merit with the scientific community, she said.
“They (proponents of intelligent design) are trying to cut to the head
of the line with things like House Bill 911, rather than do the heavy
lifting of trying to prove themselves in the rough and tumble of the
academic community,” Scott said.
The theory of evolution holds that the diversity of living things grew
over millions of years from simple organisms through the natural
selection of randomly occurring mutations.
The theory of intelligent design holds that there is an “irreducible
complexity” in living organisms that could not have occurred by
chance.
Intelligent design theory stops short of speculating on what kind of
intelligence is behind the design. The distinction, Cooper said,
allows teachers to discuss the theory without advocating any religion.
Not all advocates of intelligent design research approve of Cooper's
bill.
The Seattle-based Discovery Institute holds that seeking state
mandates is the wrong approach, said John West, the associate director
of the institute's Center for Science and Culture.
West thinks schools would do better to take a more thorough — and
critical — approach when teaching evolution.
State Rep. Susan Phillips of Kansas City said she signed on as a
co-sponsor because she thought alternative theories had been blocked
from the classroom.
“We need to understand other theories,” she said. “It's a hot-button
issue with people.”
Why do they get so excited about it when it has to do with "origins" but not
with physics, I wonder?
Cooper expects the bill to be modified. For instance, he said, the
requirement that the law be posted in classrooms “is probably
unnecessary.”
State Education Commissioner Kent King, who would oversee
implementation of the law, has not studied the bill and did not want
to comment, spokesman Jim Morris said.
Even if the bill becomes law, Willis predicted, it will be challenged
in court.
And courts have not been friendly to anti-evolution measures.
“We are going to have to accomplish our goal without aid of the law,”
he said.
And what the heck does that imply, I wonder?
------------------------------------------------
From http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/7665979.htm
(but you will need to set up an account first)
--
Mike Dworetsky
(Remove "pants" spamblock to send e-mail)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Regarding ID "theory" in public schools |
12 Jan 2004 08:23:40 AM |
|
|
Does anyone know of a state that prohibits the teaching of "intelligent
design" in public schools? Would it be realistic to even propose a bill
that would allow only the teaching of theories based in established
scientific fact?
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"If you make yourself a sheep, the wolves will eat you."
-- Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
| User: "mvillanu" |
|
| Title: Re: Regarding ID "theory" in public schools |
12 Jan 2004 09:12:47 PM |
|
|
Gregory Gadow <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message news:<4002AEC0.43AD2125@serv.net>...
Does anyone know of a state that prohibits the teaching of "intelligent
design" in public schools?
Al states prohibit the teaching of "intelligent design" in public
school science classes.
Would it be realistic to even propose a bill
that would allow only the teaching of theories based in established
scientific fact?
Very realistic. As of now, public school science classes only teach
well accepted scientific theories with solid supporting evidence
(ie..."based in established scientific fact")
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dr. Desertphile" |
|
| Title: Re: Regarding ID "theory" in public schools |
12 Jan 2004 05:14:40 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:23:40 +0000 (UTC), Gregory Gadow
<techbear@serv.net> wrote:
Does anyone know of a state that prohibits the teaching of "intelligent
design" in public schools? Would it be realistic to even propose a bill
that would allow only the teaching of theories based in established
scientific fact?
The United States Government prohibits the teaching of "Intelligent
Design" in *ALL* states of the Union.
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"If you make yourself a sheep, the wolves will eat you."
-- Benjamin Franklin
--
"To the bat tank!" --- Tank Girl
"You're the thickest piece of dung ever to masquerade as an intellectual."
--- Uncle Davey, talk.origins newsgroup, 10Jan2004
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dana Tweedy" |
|
| Title: Re: Regarding ID "theory" in public schools |
12 Jan 2004 06:31:07 PM |
|
|
"Dr. Desertphile" <desertphile@cchr.ws> wrote in message
news:btv9vl$bl1o8$9@ID-197010.news.uni-berlin.de...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:23:40 +0000 (UTC), Gregory Gadow
<techbear@serv.net> wrote:
Does anyone know of a state that prohibits the teaching of "intelligent
design" in public schools? Would it be realistic to even propose a bill
that would allow only the teaching of theories based in established
scientific fact?
The United States Government prohibits the teaching of "Intelligent
Design" in *ALL* states of the Union.
No, that's not quite true. If there were a *scientific* theory of
Intelligent Design, it would be legal to present it in school classrooms.
The problem is that there is no scientific theory of Intelligent Design, and
what The Discovery Institute and others are pushing is not science.
DJT
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Delaney" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
12 Jan 2004 04:01:31 AM |
|
|
Jason Spaceman <I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com> wrote in message news:<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com>...
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
Some Missouri lawmakers want the state to force public schools to
teach intelligent design as an alternative theory to evolution.
'Course what no one wants to recognize, is that the issue exists
only because gubmit is in the education business in the first
place. Consequently, every subject taught becomes a political football.
If the entire gov't school system were abolished, the evolution
vs. creationism problem (along with most others) would be moot.
Rich
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dave Oldridge" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
12 Jan 2004 10:51:26 AM |
|
|
(Rich Delaney) wrote in
news:2eda37b1.0401120204.afd52bb@posting.google.com:
Jason Spaceman <I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com> wrote in message
news:<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com>...
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
Some Missouri lawmakers want the state to force public schools to
teach intelligent design as an alternative theory to evolution.
'Course what no one wants to recognize, is that the issue exists
only because gubmit is in the education business in the first
place. Consequently, every subject taught becomes a political
football.
If the entire gov't school system were abolished, the evolution
vs. creationism problem (along with most others) would be moot.
Yes, but we've had public schools of one type or another in the western
world for over 2000 years. I suspect there are good reasons for that and
we would be remiss to jeopardize our entire civilization just because
some people don't like being governed.
--
Dave Oldridge
ICQ 1800667
Paradoxically, most real events are highly improbable.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dr. Desertphile" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
12 Jan 2004 05:14:39 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:01:31 +0000 (UTC),
(Rich Delaney) wrote:
Jason Spaceman <I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com> wrote in message news:<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com>...
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
Some Missouri lawmakers want the state to force public schools to
teach intelligent design as an alternative theory to evolution.
'Course what no one wants to recognize, is that the issue exists
only because gubmit is in the education business in the first
place. Consequently, every subject taught becomes a political
football.
What is 4+4, and how can the answer be politicized to my advantage?
If the entire gov't school system were abolished, the evolution
vs. creationism problem (along with most others) would be moot.
That is very true. And that is exactly why the future health of the
USA resides upon the government STAYING "the the business" of
education. Morons who wish to "abolish" the public school system would
rather the citizenry revert to savage, brutal ignorance.
Rich
--
"To the bat tank!" --- Tank Girl
"You're the thickest piece of dung ever to masquerade as an intellectual."
--- Uncle Davey, talk.origins newsgroup, 10Jan2004
.
|
|
|
| User: "eyelessgame" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
15 Jan 2004 03:38:00 PM |
|
|
(Dr. Desertphile) wrote in message news:<btv9vh$bl1o8$8@ID-197010.news.uni-berlin.de>...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:01:31 +0000 (UTC),
(Rich Delaney) wrote:
Jason Spaceman <I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com> wrote in message news:<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com>...
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
Some Missouri lawmakers want the state to force public schools to
teach intelligent design as an alternative theory to evolution.
'Course what no one wants to recognize, is that the issue exists
only because gubmit is in the education business in the first
place. Consequently, every subject taught becomes a political
football.
What is 4+4, and how can the answer be politicized to my advantage?
If the entire gov't school system were abolished, the evolution
vs. creationism problem (along with most others) would be moot.
That is very true. And that is exactly why the future health of the
USA resides upon the government STAYING "the the business" of
education. Morons who wish to "abolish" the public school system would
rather the citizenry revert to savage, brutal ignorance.
Rich
I really think we need to just give the libertarians their own place
-- fence it off, let them ignore everything that makes a society work
and just shoot at each other until they're all dead or the survivors
grow up. Trouble is, in the meantime we'll still have to breathe the
air they'll be polluting.
eyelessgame
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pithecanthropus Erectus" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
17 Jan 2004 08:31:30 PM |
|
|
eyelessgame wrote:
desertphile@cchr.ws (Dr. Desertphile) wrote in message news:<btv9vh$bl1o8$8@ID-197010.news.uni-berlin.de>...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:01:31 +0000 (UTC),
(Rich Delaney) wrote:
Jason Spaceman <I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com> wrote in message news:<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com>...
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
Some Missouri lawmakers want the state to force public schools to
teach intelligent design as an alternative theory to evolution.
'Course what no one wants to recognize, is that the issue exists
only because gubmit is in the education business in the first
place. Consequently, every subject taught becomes a political
football.
What is 4+4, and how can the answer be politicized to my advantage?
If the entire gov't school system were abolished, the evolution
vs. creationism problem (along with most others) would be moot.
That is very true. And that is exactly why the future health of the
USA resides upon the government STAYING "the the business" of
education. Morons who wish to "abolish" the public school system would
rather the citizenry revert to savage, brutal ignorance.
Rich
I really think we need to just give the libertarians their own place
-- fence it off, let them ignore everything that makes a society work
and just shoot at each other until they're all dead or the survivors
grow up. Trouble is, in the meantime we'll still have to breathe the
air they'll be polluting.
eyelessgame
Haven't you ever read "Atlas Shrugged?" When the libertarians run
everything, then society will be perfect, but certainly not free. I
know who John Galt is.
Not that I would like him.
.
|
|
|
| User: "eyelessgame" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
20 Jan 2004 07:13:43 PM |
|
|
Pithecanthropus Erectus <tuibguy1@spam.earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<OhmOb.15071$zj7.4200@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
eyelessgame wrote:
desertphile@cchr.ws (Dr. Desertphile) wrote in message news:<btv9vh$bl1o8$8@ID-197010.news.uni-berlin.de>...
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:01:31 +0000 (UTC),
(Rich Delaney) wrote:
Jason Spaceman <I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com> wrote in message news:<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com>...
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
Some Missouri lawmakers want the state to force public schools to
teach intelligent design as an alternative theory to evolution.
'Course what no one wants to recognize, is that the issue exists
only because gubmit is in the education business in the first
place. Consequently, every subject taught becomes a political
football.
What is 4+4, and how can the answer be politicized to my advantage?
If the entire gov't school system were abolished, the evolution
vs. creationism problem (along with most others) would be moot.
That is very true. And that is exactly why the future health of the
USA resides upon the government STAYING "the the business" of
education. Morons who wish to "abolish" the public school system would
rather the citizenry revert to savage, brutal ignorance.
Rich
I really think we need to just give the libertarians their own place
-- fence it off, let them ignore everything that makes a society work
and just shoot at each other until they're all dead or the survivors
grow up. Trouble is, in the meantime we'll still have to breathe the
air they'll be polluting.
eyelessgame
Haven't you ever read "Atlas Shrugged?" When the libertarians run
everything, then society will be perfect, but certainly not free. I
know who John Galt is.
Not that I would like him.
Atlas Shrugged and the Communist Manifesto both. Neither presents a
society I would want to live in, both claim the inevitable weight of
history, both replace religion with a fanaticism that draws from the
same irrational center, both make the same basic and cavalier mistakes
in misunderstanding human nature, both regarded as gospel by their
fans, both spawned political movements.
One of them caused its fanatical adherents to bite off a third of the
planet and masticate it for a century before vomiting back the
detritus. The other aspires to the same greatness.
eyelessgame
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
10 Jan 2004 09:47:07 PM |
|
|
Jason Spaceman <I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com> wrote in message news:<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com>...
[...]
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
Some Missouri lawmakers want the state to force public schools to
teach intelligent design as an alternative theory to evolution.
[...]
I have not seen this item hit the news yet in St. Louis but when it
does it should appear here;
http://www.stltoday.com/education
http://www.stltoday.com/missouri
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richard McBane" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
10 Jan 2004 02:05:58 PM |
|
|
Jason Spaceman wrote:
<snip>
The seven-page bill defines scientific terms and how they should be
applied to the teaching of evolution and intelligent design. It would
require equal treatment of both theories, in the amount of textbook
space and the time spent in classroom instruction.
Will they require that space and time spent on evolution be cut if no
one can come up with more than a few paragraphs of ID materials?
--
Richard McBane
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rv Cloim" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
09 Jan 2004 08:44:52 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 22:19:10 +0000, Jason Spaceman wrote:
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time in a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
Thanks.
For those interested in reading the bill:
http://www.house.state.mo.us/bills041/bills/HB911.HTM
For any Missouri residents wanting to contact their legislators to let
them know how you feel about this:
http://www.senate.state.mo.us/zipcode/leg_lookup.htm
He figures it has a 50-50 chance of getting out of committee and onto
the House floor.
I doubt that it has much of a chance of passing. It has 0% chance of
making it past the governors desk without a veto override. And very slim
chances for an override.
But I could be mistaken. In any case, I'm going to read the bill then
let them have my opinion on it.
<snip>
Litherland said she fears the same attention coming Missouri's
direction just when the state is trying to establish itself as a
leader in life science research.
No sh*t. I thought we were moving in the opposite direction from this c$&^.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dr. Desertphile" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
10 Jan 2004 05:40:09 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:44:52 +0000 (UTC), Rv Cloim
<cloim@propylaea.tor.org> wrote:
I doubt that it has much of a chance of passing. It has 0% chance of
making it past the governors desk without a veto override. And very slim
chances for an override.
But I could be mistaken. In any case, I'm going to read the bill then
let them have my opinion on it.
I think HB911 isn't meant to be passed into law: it is meant to
attract votes. Politicians who are seen to be in favor of the bill
will be considered "pro-god, pro-family, pro-fairness, pro-good,"
while politicians who are against the bill will be considered
"anti-god, anti-family, anti-fairness, evil." This was the motivation
behind the Arkansas bill a few years ago. Since the proposed bill
would be against the law if passed, the bill's backers would probably
be astounded if the bill were taken seriously by their peers.
--
"To the bat tank!" --- Tank Girl
"I wish they had voted in 'Equal Dating Opportunities For School
Nerds' when I was a kid." -- Me
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
12 Jan 2004 12:30:25 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:44:52 +0000 (UTC), Rv Cloim
<cloim@propylaea.tor.org>, Message ID:
<pan.2004.01.10.02.50.16.816064@propylaea.tor.org> wrote in alt.atheism;
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 22:19:10 +0000, Jason Spaceman wrote:
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time in a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
Thanks.
For those interested in reading the bill:
http://www.house.state.mo.us/bills041/bills/HB911.HTM
For any Missouri residents wanting to contact their legislators to let
them know how you feel about this:
http://www.senate.state.mo.us/zipcode/leg_lookup.htm
He figures it has a 50-50 chance of getting out of committee and onto
the House floor.
I doubt that it has much of a chance of passing. It has 0% chance of
making it past the governors desk without a veto override. And very slim
chances for an override.
But I could be mistaken. In any case, I'm going to read the bill then
let them have my opinion on it.
<snip>
Litherland said she fears the same attention coming Missouri's
direction just when the state is trying to establish itself as a
leader in life science research.
No sh*t. I thought we were moving in the opposite direction from this c$&^.
Won't happen as long as theists can't be bothered to keep their
superstition where it belongs. Not to mention the sad state of public
education in the U.S..
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bobby D. Bryant" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
09 Jan 2004 10:05:56 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 02:44:52 +0000, Rv Cloim wrote:
I doubt that it has much of a chance of passing. It has 0% chance of
making it past the governors desk without a veto override. And very slim
chances for an override.
I suspect some cynical politicians offer these bills knowing darn well
that they won't pass, or wouldn't stand up in court if they did, as an
easy way of harvesting votes from a certain demographic.
--
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Harlequin" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
09 Jan 2004 10:16:17 PM |
|
|
Rv Cloim <cloim@propylaea.tor.org> wrote in
news:pan.2004.01.10.02.50.16.816064@propylaea.tor.org:
[snip]
He figures it has a 50-50 chance of getting out of committee and onto
the House floor.
I doubt that it has much of a chance of passing. It has 0% chance of
making it past the governors desk without a veto override. And very
slim chances for an override.
[snip]
Even if it does not pass it contributes the atmosphere of hostility
to the proper teaching of evolution in biology, etc. Also if it
almost passes it makes it easier to campaign against someone saying
it x's vote kept God out of biology. The faster the bill gets the ax
the better.
--
Anti-spam: replace "usenet" with "harlequin2"
Creationist arguments are like orcs. They are wimpy and
easy to slay. But there just so many of them....
.
|
|
|
| User: "catshark" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
09 Jan 2004 10:57:30 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 04:16:17 +0000 (UTC), Harlequin <usenet@cox.net> wrote:
Rv Cloim <cloim@propylaea.tor.org> wrote in
news:pan.2004.01.10.02.50.16.816064@propylaea.tor.org:
[snip]
He figures it has a 50-50 chance of getting out of committee and onto
the House floor.
I doubt that it has much of a chance of passing. It has 0% chance of
making it past the governors desk without a veto override. And very
slim chances for an override.
[snip]
Even if it does not pass it contributes the atmosphere of hostility
to the proper teaching of evolution in biology, etc.
I am beginning to suspect that *is* the ID strategy now. This bill will,
no doubt, lead to a few months of back-and-forth where IDolaters can
inundate the letters to the editors columns and slick(ish) spokespersons
can make the nightly news with the message that there is a *controversy*.
ID is nothing but a rear-guard action, intended create a justification for
ignoring science when it inconveniently contradicts what people want to
believe. It doesn't matter if it is in the classroom, as long as it is in
the public perception and handy to the parents and youth ministers who want
their charges to have a reason, any reason, to shut their minds to other
influences.
[...]
---------------
J. Pieret
---------------
We have done amazingly well in creating a cultural movement,
but we must not exaggerate ID's successes on the scientific front.
- William A. Dembski -
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Louann Miller" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
10 Jan 2004 01:58:45 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Jason Spaceman
<I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com> wrote:
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
(snip down to my favorite line, a closing quote re the chances of it
being overturned as unconstitutional, like all the others have been,
if it did pass.)
[Tom Willis of the Creation Science Association for Mid-America]
Even if the bill becomes law, Willis predicted, it will be challenged
in court.
And courts have not been friendly to anti-evolution measures.
'We are going to have to accomplish our goal without aid of the law,'
he said.
I'm queasily unsure whether "the law" in the above sentence means this
specific proposed law -- in which case, why propose it? -- or law as a
whole. The latter reading as more of a "we aren't going to let laws
get in the way of doing what we want" sort of thing.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
12 Jan 2004 11:45:13 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Jason Spaceman
<I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com>, Message ID:
<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time in a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
I wrote the representative.
Susan.Phillips@house.mo.gov
Dear Mrs. Phillips;
I was saddened to read this article. I must say it illustrates how
education is in free-fall.
Evolution isn't the rubbish the Discovery Institute or the Institute for
Creationist Research says it is, or what the general public thinks it
is. In the case of the DI, ICR, these folks blatantly, casually,
unrepentantly, and repeatedly bear deliberate false witness.
Please excuse me for being a bit crude, but it is necessary to
illustrate a point. Creationism and ID are to education what x-rated
films would be in a church service.
Evolution has nothing to do with origin of life. Evolution deals with
things after life has appeared.
(Abiogenesis is general name for the theories regarding origin of life.
I do not pretend to know anything about the subject)
Even the Pope has no problem with evolution. He's indicated it's the
method God utilized in His plan.
Evolution, like gravity, is both fact and theory. Strangely, gravity
isn't daemonized like evolution is by the uneducated and bearers of
false witness. More on this in a minute.
Evolution is the change of alle frequencies in a given population
through time. Evolution is observed via the birth of every baby. It is
also observed through the appearance of new diseases, strains of
diseases, and the decreasing effectiveness of antibiotics. That is the
fact part.
The theory part of evolution is the attempt to explain the observations.
As time goes on more and more is learned.
Creationism and Intelligent Design are both nothing more than bearing
deliberate false witness.
They have nothing to do with theory and everything to do with forwarding
religious dogma with the power of the state behind it. This is a
blatant and unrepentant violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Theory does not mean 'guess.' It is working to explain
observations-facts.
One problem with Creationism, ID, is there is no objective supporting
evidence the universe was manufactured (created).
A second problem is the broken logic involved with the Creator concept.
That is if the universe had to be created (manufactured) then so does
the Creator. This leads to an ever regressive chain of 'creators' which
means creator 'x' isn't it. If one indicates their particular deity
didn't need a creator, that also leaves the 'door' open for the universe
to 'step through' as well. In other words, you can't have it both ways.
Other than via Comparative Religion classes, religion belongs in the
home and in houses of worship. Jesus said the same when He said
"Schools are for education not venues for religious indoctrination. The
Founding Fathers were well aware of what happens when religion becomes
involved with government. You get lots of bloodshed and atrocities.
Think back to your history classes and what was going on in England-the
purges, the imprisonment, the torture and executions. The Founding
Fathers endeavored to keep that misery from our shores.
Consider also when the Church ran things. It was a thousand years of
misery, and horror. It's called "The Dark Ages" for a reason.
I was pointed to this link in response to a question I asked. It
compares the Ten Commandments of Moses to the Ten Commandments by Solon
the Athenean centuries before.
I found it of great interest. I think you will, too.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/features/2000/carrier2.html
I urge you to remove your co-sponsorship, and urge others to do the
same, of House Bill 911. The bill has nothing to do with education
other than to further dismantle the system.
I indicated I'd come back to gravity. An individual wrote about gravity
utilizing the same misinformation tactics the ICR and DI used on
evolution to make a point.
/quote
The INTELLIGENT GRAPPLING FAQ.
1. What is Intelligent Grappling (IG?)
Intelligent Grappling is the SCIENTIFIC Theory that Intelligent and
Conscious
Agents "push" things together. It is the only coherent theory that
explains
why things fall.
2. Doesn't gravity explain why things fall?
NO. Gravity only attempts to describe what objects do. It does not
explain
WHY they do them. It is that challenge that Intelligent Grappling is
intended
to meet.
3. Aren't there theories that explain why things fall?
NO. There are theories by atheists and secular humanists that TRY, but
they all
lead to crazy conclusions no human being has ever seen, like black holes
and
the so-called "Big Bang". Intelligent Grappling ONLY deals with the
visible
world.
4. Is Intelligent Grappling a scientific theory?
YES. Intelligent Grappling is the ONLY VIABLE THEORY for why things
fall.
Physicists have tried for a hundred years to explain why things fall and
THEY
HAVE FAILED. It is time for a new theory, one backed up by all the
evidence,
to finally solve the question. IG isthat theory.
5. Isn't "Intelligent Grappling" just another way of saying, "Angels
push
things around?"
NO. Intelligent Grappling says nothing at all about the nature or
origins of
the conscious agents that perform the actual act of pushing and
grappling. All
IG says is that conscious agents are thecause of all apparent "gravitic"
phenomenon.
6. In order to accept Intelligent Design, must I accept Intelligent
Grappling
as well?
YES. Intelligent Design says that there is a non-naturalistic,
conscious
designer at work at the biological level. Intelligent Grappling says
that
there is a non-naturalistic, conscious grappler at the physicial level.
Accepting a naturalistic explanation for one phenomenon but a
non-naturalistic
explanation for another is a philosophically corrupt position and we do
not
advocate it.
Elf Sternberg
/quote
Thank you for your time.
Kind Regards,
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
| User: "Terence J Rigby" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
12 Jan 2004 12:36:58 PM |
|
|
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:e9n5001l6amkkc7p0pmujglhpe7bb8vkps@4ax.com...
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Jason Spaceman
<I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com>, Message ID:
<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time in a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
<snip>
Consider also when the Church ran things. It was a thousand years of
misery, and horror. It's called "The Dark Ages" for a reason.
When I was in school in the1960's 'The Dark Ages" were taught as the few
centuries after 410AD when the Roman Legions withdrew from Britain until
about the time of Alfred The Great. When did it expand to cover the Middle
Ages?
Terry Rigby
<snip>
Stoney
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
14 Jan 2004 09:03:45 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 18:36:58 +0000 (UTC), "Terence J Rigby"
<trigby@multiweb.co.uk>, Message ID:
<btupn3$brm2d$1@ID-220239.news.uni-berlin.de> wrote in alt.atheism;
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:e9n5001l6amkkc7p0pmujglhpe7bb8vkps@4ax.com...
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Jason Spaceman
<I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com>, Message ID:
<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time in a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
<snip>
Consider also when the Church ran things. It was a thousand years of
misery, and horror. It's called "The Dark Ages" for a reason.
When I was in school in the1960's 'The Dark Ages" were taught as the few
centuries after 410AD when the Roman Legions withdrew from Britain until
about the time of Alfred The Great. When did it expand to cover the Middle
Ages?
When I was in school in the 70's.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lizz Holmans" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
15 Jan 2004 04:17:43 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 03:03:45 +0000 (UTC), stoney <stoney@the.net>
wrote:
When I was in school in the1960's 'The Dark Ages" were taught as the few
centuries after 410AD when the Roman Legions withdrew from Britain until
about the time of Alfred The Great. When did it expand to cover the Middle
Ages?
When I was in school in the 70's.
You must have had an exceptionally ignorant teacher.
Lizz 'half-past the middle ages' Holmans
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
16 Jan 2004 01:21:23 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 10:17:43 +0000 (UTC), Lizz Holmans
<dillo@jackalope.demon.co.uk>, Message ID:
<fdqc00lio2tvqbc4o0j6qn6hcobq4b7ncp@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 03:03:45 +0000 (UTC), stoney <stoney@the.net>
wrote:
When I was in school in the1960's 'The Dark Ages" were taught as the few
centuries after 410AD when the Roman Legions withdrew from Britain until
about the time of Alfred The Great. When did it expand to cover the Middle
Ages?
When I was in school in the 70's.
You must have had an exceptionally ignorant teacher.
It could also be I was misremembering, too. My memory is certified
"Swiss Cheese." :\
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Wilkins" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
12 Jan 2004 04:38:33 PM |
|
|
Terence J Rigby <trigby@multiweb.co.uk> wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:e9n5001l6amkkc7p0pmujglhpe7bb8vkps@4ax.com...
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Jason Spaceman
<I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com>, Message ID:
<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time in a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
<snip>
Consider also when the Church ran things. It was a thousand years of
misery, and horror. It's called "The Dark Ages" for a reason.
When I was in school in the1960's 'The Dark Ages" were taught as the few
centuries after 410AD when the Roman Legions withdrew from Britain until
about the time of Alfred The Great. When did it expand to cover the Middle
Ages?
Terry Rigby
<snip>
Stoney
With the publication of _1066 And All That_, IIRC. There were lots of
Good Kings and Bad Kings until the printing press.
--
John Wilkins
"And this is a damnable doctrine" - Charles Darwin, Autobiography
.
|
|
|
| User: "Terence J Rigby" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
13 Jan 2004 02:42:54 AM |
|
|
"John Wilkins" <john.wilkins@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:1g7huca.1pfgf3f15bodb3N%john.wilkins@bigpond.com...
Terence J Rigby <trigby@multiweb.co.uk> wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:e9n5001l6amkkc7p0pmujglhpe7bb8vkps@4ax.com...
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Jason Spaceman
<I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com>, Message ID:
<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time in
a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
<snip>
Consider also when the Church ran things. It was a thousand years of
misery, and horror. It's called "The Dark Ages" for a reason.
When I was in school in the1960's 'The Dark Ages" were taught as the few
centuries after 410AD when the Roman Legions withdrew from Britain until
about the time of Alfred The Great. When did it expand to cover the
Middle
Ages?
Terry Rigby
<snip>
Stoney
With the publication of _1066 And All That_, IIRC. There were lots of
Good Kings and Bad Kings until the printing press.
--
John Wilkins
"And this is a damnable doctrine" - Charles Darwin, Autobiography
I have read 1066 And All That and am trying to get my copy returned from
the person who borrowed it. However, though it is a fun read, I would not
have thought that serious historians would allow the renaming of centuries
of
history at the whim of Sellars and Yeatman.
Terry Rigby
"WIHIH
Uncle Roger"
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Wilkins" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
14 Jan 2004 04:59:31 AM |
|
|
Terence J Rigby <trigby@multiweb.co.uk> wrote:
"John Wilkins" <john.wilkins@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:1g7huca.1pfgf3f15bodb3N%john.wilkins@bigpond.com...
Terence J Rigby <trigby@multiweb.co.uk> wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:e9n5001l6amkkc7p0pmujglhpe7bb8vkps@4ax.com...
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Jason Spaceman
<I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com>, Message ID:
<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time in
a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
<snip>
Consider also when the Church ran things. It was a thousand years of
misery, and horror. It's called "The Dark Ages" for a reason.
When I was in school in the1960's 'The Dark Ages" were taught as the few
centuries after 410AD when the Roman Legions withdrew from Britain until
about the time of Alfred The Great. When did it expand to cover the
Middle
Ages?
Terry Rigby
<snip>
Stoney
With the publication of _1066 And All That_, IIRC. There were lots of
Good Kings and Bad Kings until the printing press.
--
John Wilkins
"And this is a damnable doctrine" - Charles Darwin, Autobiography
I have read 1066 And All That and am trying to get my copy returned from
the person who borrowed it. However, though it is a fun read, I would not
have thought that serious historians would allow the renaming of centuries
of
history at the whim of Sellars and Yeatman.
Terry Rigby
"WIHIH
Uncle Roger"
Ummm, no. I think that was my point ;-)
--
John Wilkins
"And this is a damnable doctrine" - Charles Darwin, Autobiography
.
|
|
|
| User: "Terence J Rigby" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
14 Jan 2004 02:11:49 PM |
|
|
"John Wilkins" <john.wilkins@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:1g7iuep.owl01k1nm41gpN%john.wilkins@bigpond.com...
Terence J Rigby <trigby@multiweb.co.uk> wrote:
"John Wilkins" <john.wilkins@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:1g7huca.1pfgf3f15bodb3N%john.wilkins@bigpond.com...
Terence J Rigby <trigby@multiweb.co.uk> wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:e9n5001l6amkkc7p0pmujglhpe7bb8vkps@4ax.com...
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Jason Spaceman
<I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com>, Message ID:
<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm
going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time
in
a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
<snip>
Consider also when the Church ran things. It was a thousand years
of
misery, and horror. It's called "The Dark Ages" for a reason.
When I was in school in the1960's 'The Dark Ages" were taught as the
few
centuries after 410AD when the Roman Legions withdrew from Britain
until
about the time of Alfred The Great. When did it expand to cover the
Middle
Ages?
Terry Rigby
<snip>
Stoney
With the publication of _1066 And All That_, IIRC. There were lots of
Good Kings and Bad Kings until the printing press.
--
John Wilkins
"And this is a damnable doctrine" - Charles Darwin, Autobiography
I have read 1066 And All That and am trying to get my copy returned from
the person who borrowed it. However, though it is a fun read, I would
not
have thought that serious historians would allow the renaming of
centuries
of
history at the whim of Sellars and Yeatman.
Terry Rigby
"WIHIH
Uncle Roger"
Ummm, no. I think that was my point ;-)
WTHDTM?
Terry Rigby
--
John Wilkins
"And this is a damnable doctrine" - Charles Darwin, Autobiography
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Wilkins" |
|
| Title: Re: In the News: Evolution battle looms in Missouri |
14 Jan 2004 08:21:21 PM |
|
|
Terence J Rigby <trigby@multiweb.co.uk> wrote:
"John Wilkins" <john.wilkins@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:1g7iuep.owl01k1nm41gpN%john.wilkins@bigpond.com...
Terence J Rigby <trigby@multiweb.co.uk> wrote:
"John Wilkins" <john.wilkins@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:1g7huca.1pfgf3f15bodb3N%john.wilkins@bigpond.com...
Terence J Rigby <trigby@multiweb.co.uk> wrote:
"stoney" <stoney@the.net> wrote in message
news:e9n5001l6amkkc7p0pmujglhpe7bb8vkps@4ax.com...
On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Jason Spaceman
<I@Eat.Spammers.For.Breakfast.com>, Message ID:
<d5auvvsjog03gkktb6oot3mclphoci51fc@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
Since the article requires an account in order to read it, I'm
going
to do something that is highly illegal and could get me hard time
in
a
federal penitentiary; I'm going to post the entire thing. :-)
------------------------------------------------
Posted on Fri, Jan. 09, 2004
Evolution battle looms in Missouri
Lawmakers push alternative theory
By JOE ROBERTSON The Kansas City Star
<snip>
Consider also when the Church ran things. It was a thousand
years of misery, and horror. It's called "The Dark Ages" for a
reason.
When I was in school in the 1960's 'The Dark Ages" were taught as
the few centuries after 410AD when the Roman Legions withdrew from
Britain until about the time of Alfred The Great. When did it
expand to cover the Middle Ages?
<snip>
Stoney
With the publication of _1066 And All That_, IIRC. There were lots of
Good Kings and Bad Kings until the printing press.
I have read 1066 And All That and am trying to get my copy returned
from the person who borrowed it. However, though it is a fun read, I
would not have thought that serious historians would allow the
renaming of centuries of history at the whim of Sellars and Yeatman.
Terry Rigby
"WIHIH
Uncle Roger"
Ummm, no. I think that was my point ;-)
WTHDTM?
It means that I really *don't* think anyone who studies medieval history
thinks that the Dark Ages extends to 1500, and the only plausible source
for such a silly claim is 1066 And All That, which was a Very Silly
Book. Which is a Good Thing.
--
John Wilkins
"And this is a damnable doctrine" - Charles Darwin, Autobiography
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
