Religions > Atheism > TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"JaBrIoL" |
| Date: |
23 Sep 2003 11:03:59 AM |
| Object: |
TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless, chance
evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist fundamentalists . . .
control the science departments in many universities," says Phillip E.
Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
Johnson points out: "In some cases biology professors have been
forbidden to tell students that there is any reason to doubt the claim
that mindless material processes could and did create the wonders of
biology."
Scientist and engineer Murphy O'Dean observes: "Rather than discard a
theory that does not stand up to fact, the direction of 'evolutionary
science' has become a statement of faith that 'evolution must be
true.'" Conflicting evidence and the lack of evidence are either
ignored or explained away.
Why? Michael Behe, molecular biologist, says in Darwin's Black Box:
"Many people, including many important and well-respected scientists,
just don't want there to be anything beyond nature. They don't want a
supernatural being to affect nature." But true science does not ignore
contrary evidence in order to advance preferred ideas. Nor do all
scientists believe evolution.
The Brazilian magazine Veja asked Carlo Rubbia, winner of the Nobel
Prize for Physics, "Do you believe in God?" While not acknowledging a
personal God, he did admit: "The more you observe nature, the more you
perceive that there is tremendous organization in all things. It is an
intelligence so great that just by observing natural phenomena I come
to the conclusion that a Creator exists."
.
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
24 Sep 2003 04:58:36 AM |
|
|
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:b002nv42v5adg2r3lho2i5jkh9pflmk1hn@4ax.com...
In alt.talk.creationism, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net> wrote in
<tI5cb.1741978$Bf5.252158@news.easynews.com>:
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:nlk1nvcms6ts3f45ah8kng9il1spgq1jgb@4ax.com...
...
If you don't think we should take theology directions from programmers,
why should we take claims about biology from a lawyer?
his comments has nothing to do with biology, it has to do with
educational policy
about the method used by educational authorities in teaching evolution
in
the classroom.
Really? Doesn't he actually have to know something about biology before
he critiques how it is taught?
how many lawyer actually take the time to study any case, they just do a
basic research, and come to conclusions, I am sure this is what this law
professor did.
beside he was reffering to biology professors, therfore he should be well
verse in methods of teaching, what is allowed and what is not.
...
take it up with him. in any case are you saying that biologist are
allowed
to teach alternatives? and I am not reffering to creationism. Have you
ever
look up the guidelines for teaching evolution... ?
they even have the proper defintion wrong.
Please provide references to support your claims.
do a google search on "Kronk"". we had a conversation on educational
material used in high schools. I gave him the name of the publication
used
in my school district, and he posted guideline used by science teacher in
the united states. He had some comments and concerns...
or ask any biology teacher.
So you don't have an appropriate reference that actually supports what
you claim. Okay.
so you are lazy and don't waht to do the research yourself to verify if what
I say is true or not..
okay...
...
You have shown that you do not understand or intentionally misrepresent
the scientific evidence and the theories.
not at all, one way or the other.. I simply pointed out, what is already
writen by scientists, not from creationist websites...
You apparently do not understand what they have written.
Why? Michael Behe, molecular biologist, says in Darwin's Black Box:
"Many people, including many important and well-respected
scientists,
just don't want there to be anything beyond nature. They don't want
a
supernatural being to affect nature." But true science does not
ignore
contrary evidence in order to advance preferred ideas. Nor do all
scientists believe evolution.
Behe accepts evolution and common descent.
his comments are related to the subject at hand.. forcing biology
teachers
to teach one version of evolution.
A claim you have made but not supported.
the comment was made by him, not me.. from his book..what more do you
want,
a phone call from him?
A valid reference, not a fuzzy claim.
The Brazilian magazine Veja asked Carlo Rubbia, winner of the Nobel
Prize for Physics, "Do you believe in God?" While not acknowledging
a
personal God, he did admit: "The more you observe nature, the more
you
perceive that there is tremendous organization in all things. It is
an
intelligence so great that just by observing natural phenomena I
come
to the conclusion that a Creator exists."
So what's your point?
that not all scientist are on the evolution bandwagon. real scientist,
not
the so called creation scientists
Please document your claim.
just did.... you must know by now I not going to post out of the blue
what
comes to mind.. since I am not a creationist, nor do I use creationist
material, you will notice that barely any creationist participate in
"jabriol" threads
You documented nothing in this thread.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
24 Sep 2003 07:07:56 AM |
|
|
In alt.talk.creationism, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net> wrote in
<gVdcb.4902438$mA4.691316@news.easynews.com>:
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:b002nv42v5adg2r3lho2i5jkh9pflmk1hn@4ax.com...
In alt.talk.creationism, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net> wrote in
<tI5cb.1741978$Bf5.252158@news.easynews.com>:
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:nlk1nvcms6ts3f45ah8kng9il1spgq1jgb@4ax.com...
...
If you don't think we should take theology directions from programmers,
why should we take claims about biology from a lawyer?
his comments has nothing to do with biology, it has to do with
educational policy
about the method used by educational authorities in teaching evolution
in
the classroom.
Really? Doesn't he actually have to know something about biology before
he critiques how it is taught?
how many lawyer actually take the time to study any case, they just do a
basic research, and come to conclusions, I am sure this is what this law
professor did.
What an interesting defense.
beside he was reffering to biology professors, therfore he should be well
verse in methods of teaching, what is allowed and what is not.
Why? Do law professors teach a lot of biology?
....
So you don't have an appropriate reference that actually supports what
you claim. Okay.
so you are lazy and don't waht to do the research yourself to verify if what
I say is true or not..
I've read enough of your fact challenged prose to realize that it is a
fool's errand to trust anything you say without support. The laziness is
all yours.
okay...
...
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
24 Sep 2003 04:10:46 PM |
|
|
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:4423nvce5aun6n79h461iedcsa2nlrksp6@4ax.com...
In alt.talk.creationism, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net> wrote in
<gVdcb.4902438$mA4.691316@news.easynews.com>:
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:b002nv42v5adg2r3lho2i5jkh9pflmk1hn@4ax.com...
In alt.talk.creationism, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net> wrote in
<tI5cb.1741978$Bf5.252158@news.easynews.com>:
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:nlk1nvcms6ts3f45ah8kng9il1spgq1jgb@4ax.com...
...
If you don't think we should take theology directions from
programmers,
why should we take claims about biology from a lawyer?
his comments has nothing to do with biology, it has to do with
educational policy
about the method used by educational authorities in teaching
evolution
in
the classroom.
Really? Doesn't he actually have to know something about biology before
he critiques how it is taught?
how many lawyer actually take the time to study any case, they just do a
basic research, and come to conclusions, I am sure this is what this law
professor did.
What an interesting defense.
beside he was reffering to biology professors, therfore he should be well
verse in methods of teaching, what is allowed and what is not.
Why? Do law professors teach a lot of biology?
who knows, I had a prossesor who taught Engineering and Humanities.. again
ask him...
...
So you don't have an appropriate reference that actually supports what
you claim. Okay.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "JaBrIoL" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
24 Sep 2003 05:56:53 AM |
|
|
David Jensen <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message news:<b002nv42v5adg2r3lho2i5jkh9pflmk1hn@4ax.com>...
In alt.talk.creationism, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net> wrote in
<tI5cb.1741978$Bf5.252158@news.easynews.com>:
look up the guidelines for teaching evolution... ?
they even have the proper defintion wrong.
Please provide references to support your claims.
do a google search on "Kronk"". we had a conversation on educational
material used in high schools. I gave him the name of the publication used
in my school district, and he posted guideline used by science teacher in
the united states. He had some comments and concerns...
or ask any biology teacher.
So you don't have an appropriate reference that actually supports what
you claim. Okay.
___________________________________________________________________________
some people are just plain lazy, here you go...
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:43:17 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net>
wrote:
"Kronk" <void@isp.com> wrote in message
news:3f68a1b7.6456594@news.gvtc.com...
On 17 Sep 2003 04:10:45 -0700, (JaBrIoL) wrote:
Kronk,
name of the biology publication by Prentince-hall:
Biology by Miller/levine 2002 edition Pag3 366-467
even the defintion of evolution is not correct.
this is used in camden county vocational tech.
I don't have a copy of this book, but I'll see if the local library
has one.
I see the authors have a website for feedback at:
http://biocrs.biomed.brown.edu/Elephant%20stuff/Mailroom.html
If I can find a copy of the book and if it looks like their definition
is not in compliance with the guidelines set by the National Academy
of Sciences, I'll write them to see what can be done to remedy that.
Kronk
where can I find these guidelines?
Whole guidelines:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/5787.html
Pertaining to evolution:
http://books.nap.edu/html/evolution98/evol4.html
General working definition given in the guidelines:
"Evolution is a series of changes, some gradual and some sporadic,
that accounts for the present form and function of objects, organisms,
and natural and designed systems."
Personally, I would not have limited it to accounting to present
forms.
"The general idea of evolution is that the present arises from
materials and forms of the past."
I'm guessing they are using a very broad interpretation of
"materials".
"Although evolution is most commonly associated with the biological
theory explaining the process of descent with modification of
organisms from common ancestors, evolution also describes changes in
the universe."
Okay, frankly I have no idea where they are going with that "changes
in the universe" bit. I suspect that they have had to make the
concept of evolution rather vague and general in order to render it
acceptable to the general public.
Kronk
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
24 Sep 2003 07:22:18 AM |
|
|
In alt.talk.creationism, (JaBrIoL) wrote in
<d222de3e.0309240256.54d0fe94@posting.google.com>:
David Jensen <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message news:<b002nv42v5adg2r3lho2i5jkh9pflmk1hn@4ax.com>...
In alt.talk.creationism, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net> wrote in
<tI5cb.1741978$Bf5.252158@news.easynews.com>:
look up the guidelines for teaching evolution... ?
they even have the proper defintion wrong.
Please provide references to support your claims.
do a google search on "Kronk"". we had a conversation on educational
material used in high schools. I gave him the name of the publication used
in my school district, and he posted guideline used by science teacher in
the united states. He had some comments and concerns...
or ask any biology teacher.
So you don't have an appropriate reference that actually supports what
you claim. Okay.
....
some people are just plain lazy, here you go...
So, how do you figure that they got the 'proper' definition wrong?
....
where can I find these guidelines?
Whole guidelines:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/5787.html
Pertaining to evolution:
http://books.nap.edu/html/evolution98/evol4.html
....
.
|
|
|
| User: "JaBrIoL" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
24 Sep 2003 12:33:54 PM |
|
|
David Jensen <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message news:<0c23nv4hcms85dqoev6c17be4thmcpm0ur@4ax.com>...
In alt.talk.creationism, (JaBrIoL) wrote in
<d222de3e.0309240256.54d0fe94@posting.google.com>:
David Jensen <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message news:<b002nv42v5adg2r3lho2i5jkh9pflmk1hn@4ax.com>...
In alt.talk.creationism, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net> wrote in
<tI5cb.1741978$Bf5.252158@news.easynews.com>:
look up the guidelines for teaching evolution... ?
they even have the proper defintion wrong.
Please provide references to support your claims.
do a google search on "Kronk"". we had a conversation on educational
material used in high schools. I gave him the name of the publication used
in my school district, and he posted guideline used by science teacher in
the united states. He had some comments and concerns...
or ask any biology teacher.
So you don't have an appropriate reference that actually supports what
you claim. Okay.
...
some people are just plain lazy, here you go...
So, how do you figure that they got the 'proper' definition wrong?
...
where can I find these guidelines?
Whole guidelines:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog/5787.html
Pertaining to evolution:
http://books.nap.edu/html/evolution98/evol4.html
...
what is the defintion of evolution?
is not in thier guidelines...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
23 Sep 2003 12:07:21 PM |
|
|
JaBrIoL wrote:
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless, chance
evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist fundamentalists . . .
control the science departments in many universities," says Phillip E.
Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
Because evolution is the best theory that we have today.
Johnson points out: "In some cases biology professors have been
forbidden to tell students that there is any reason to doubt the claim
that mindless material processes could and did create the wonders of
biology."
And a law professor should know more than biology professors?
Scientist and engineer Murphy O'Dean observes: "Rather than discard a
theory that does not stand up to fact, the direction of 'evolutionary
science' has become a statement of faith that 'evolution must be
true.'" Conflicting evidence and the lack of evidence are either
ignored or explained away.
"Evolutionary science"?
Why? Michael Behe, molecular biologist, says in Darwin's Black Box:
"Many people, including many important and well-respected scientists,
just don't want there to be anything beyond nature. They don't want a
supernatural being to affect nature." But true science does not ignore
contrary evidence in order to advance preferred ideas. Nor do all
scientists believe evolution.
Whether scientists want there to be a creator or not, doesn't matter!
What matters is the observations and experimental results etc that we
have.
The Brazilian magazine Veja asked Carlo Rubbia, winner of the Nobel
Prize for Physics, "Do you believe in God?" While not acknowledging a
personal God, he did admit: "The more you observe nature, the more you
perceive that there is tremendous organization in all things. It is an
intelligence so great that just by observing natural phenomena I come
to the conclusion that a Creator exists."
That is not a scientific statement, and you really shouldn't interpret
it as such. And btw, you don't trust science, do you? So why do you
think that something a scientist says carry more weight because he is a
scientist, especially when he's talking about something that has
nothing to do with science?
After all, you know very well that there is no evidence of an
intelligent special creator. You may believe there is one, but it's
completely superfluous in any models that describe our current
observations! Come back when you have observational data that might
support an intelligent creator of the universe.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
23 Sep 2003 05:29:48 PM |
|
|
"Maverick" <sh100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5%bb.2297$d1.1108@nntpserver.swip.net...
JaBrIoL wrote:
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless, chance
evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist fundamentalists . . .
control the science departments in many universities," says Phillip E.
Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
Because evolution is the best theory that we have today.
ahhhhh so .... it must be taught as the only method that man arrived on the
planet, beside contradictions, lack of transitionals, and or incomplete
fossil records... I see.
Johnson points out: "In some cases biology professors have been
forbidden to tell students that there is any reason to doubt the claim
that mindless material processes could and did create the wonders of
biology."
And a law professor should know more than biology professors?
A law proffesor, who is among biology professors, would know the "why" or
reasond behind forceful teaching of a an unfounded subject.
Scientist and engineer Murphy O'Dean observes: "Rather than discard a
theory that does not stand up to fact, the direction of 'evolutionary
science' has become a statement of faith that 'evolution must be
true.'" Conflicting evidence and the lack of evidence are either
ignored or explained away.
"Evolutionary science"?
that is what the article says eh?
Why? Michael Behe, molecular biologist, says in Darwin's Black Box:
"Many people, including many important and well-respected scientists,
just don't want there to be anything beyond nature. They don't want a
supernatural being to affect nature." But true science does not ignore
contrary evidence in order to advance preferred ideas. Nor do all
scientists believe evolution.
Whether scientists want there to be a creator or not, doesn't matter!
What matters is the observations and experimental results etc that we
have.
did you know that evolution does not pass the scientific method?
observing one lifeform converting into another has not been observed, nor
can it be duplicated in a lab, much less falsified... and speciation of one
lifeform does not change the genetic core of said lifeform.. you can
speciate a dog, but he still remains a dog..
The Brazilian magazine Veja asked Carlo Rubbia, winner of the Nobel
Prize for Physics, "Do you believe in God?" While not acknowledging a
personal God, he did admit: "The more you observe nature, the more you
perceive that there is tremendous organization in all things. It is an
intelligence so great that just by observing natural phenomena I come
to the conclusion that a Creator exists."
That is not a scientific statement, and you really shouldn't interpret
it as such.
why not? the guy is a noble laurate...
And btw, you don't trust science, do you?
you refer to science as if it a sort of diety, please define "trust in
science".
So why do you
think that something a scientist says carry more weight because he is a
scientist, especially when he's talking about something that has
nothing to do with science?
how do you define "natural phenomena"? a spirtual experiance?
After all, you know very well that there is no evidence of an
intelligent special creator.
Evidence is in the eye of the beholder.
here is a simple question on evidence... you run upon a house in a
extemely isolated part of the dessert, you see noone there. Tou enter the
house, it has a refigerator full of food, fire burning in the wood stove,
full running water, an aquerium with live fish, a few plants around the
furniture...
how many millions of years did it take for that house, to develop and
evolved on its own, with everything inside?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
30 Oct 2003 09:14:31 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:29:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net>
wrote:
"Maverick" <sh100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5%bb.2297$d1.1108@nntpserver.swip.net...
JaBrIoL wrote:
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless, chance
evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist fundamentalists . . .
control the science departments in many universities," says Phillip E.
Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
Because evolution is the best theory that we have today.
ahhhhh so .... it must be taught as the only method that man arrived on the
planet, beside contradictions, lack of transitionals, and or incomplete
fossil records... I see.
Straw man.
No evidence is ever complete. The only way it could be is if you
yourself were there to observe what happened.
If complete evidence was required to prove anything, nothing could be
proved - no one would ever be judged guilty and science would not
exist.
To push this crap is essentially revealing you have a motive and are
trying to lie to people.
Hope you aren't religious. You just sinned big time.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
30 Oct 2003 04:50:17 PM |
|
|
"Kate " <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote in message
news:3fa12971.170983621@news-west.newscene.com...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:29:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net>
wrote:
"Maverick" <sh100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5%bb.2297$d1.1108@nntpserver.swip.net...
JaBrIoL wrote:
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless, chance
evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist fundamentalists . .
..
control the science departments in many universities," says Phillip
E.
Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
Because evolution is the best theory that we have today.
ahhhhh so .... it must be taught as the only method that man arrived on
the
planet, beside contradictions, lack of transitionals, and or incomplete
fossil records... I see.
Straw man.
No evidence is ever complete. The only way it could be is if you
yourself were there to observe what happened.
Exactly, yet biology teachers does not teach this. they teach that the truth
are in the bones.
If complete evidence was required to prove anything, nothing could be
proved - no one would ever be judged guilty and science would not
exist.
not true. and how many people based on faulty evidence, goes to death row
for years, then released???
To push this crap is essentially revealing you have a motive and are
trying to lie to people.
no lie here..
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mylon" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
30 Oct 2003 07:18:52 PM |
|
|
"jabriol" <jabriol@bluegender.org> wrote in message
news:JAgob.417805$oO4.4248814@news.easynews.com...
"Kate " <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote in message
news:3fa12971.170983621@news-west.newscene.com...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:29:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net>
wrote:
"Maverick" <sh100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5%bb.2297$d1.1108@nntpserver.swip.net...
JaBrIoL wrote:
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless, chance
evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist fundamentalists .
..
.
control the science departments in many universities," says Phillip
E.
Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
Because evolution is the best theory that we have today.
ahhhhh so .... it must be taught as the only method that man arrived on
the
planet, beside contradictions, lack of transitionals, and or incomplete
fossil records... I see.
Straw man.
No evidence is ever complete. The only way it could be is if you
yourself were there to observe what happened.
Exactly, yet biology teachers does not teach this. they teach that the
truth
are in the bones.
That species change over time is FACT. We have witnessed this in
laboratories and in the real world. The common cold is an evolving virus
that changes itself enough that your immune system does not recognize it the
second time around. That is evolution at work. How evolution occoured
between the start of life and now is what is still classified under the
realm of theory, yet given the fact of evolution, it isn't very hard at all
to support this theory.
The "gaps" in the fossil record are merely an excuse used by creationists.
For a truly "complete" fossil record, we would have to have a fossil of
every ancestor of every living thing on the planet. If, say, ants were to
be looked at by themselves, we'd need a phenomonal amount of fossils just
for the last million years, much less the past 3 billion years for all of
life on Earth. A complete fossil record is not only an impossibility, it's
also an absurdity.
If complete evidence was required to prove anything, nothing could be
proved - no one would ever be judged guilty and science would not
exist.
not true. and how many people based on faulty evidence, goes to death row
for years, then released???
Evolution has been on "death row" for a good long time now. If there any
counter evidence, it would have been "released" and no longer regarded as a
valid theory.
To push this crap is essentially revealing you have a motive and are
trying to lie to people.
no lie here..
There goes another one.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
31 Oct 2003 04:43:25 PM |
|
|
"Mylon" <someone@somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:0Miob.57951$RP2.29775@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
"jabriol" <jabriol@bluegender.org> wrote in message
news:JAgob.417805$oO4.4248814@news.easynews.com...
"Kate " <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote in message
news:3fa12971.170983621@news-west.newscene.com...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:29:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net>
wrote:
"Maverick" <sh100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5%bb.2297$d1.1108@nntpserver.swip.net...
JaBrIoL wrote:
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless,
chance
evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist fundamentalists
..
.
.
control the science departments in many universities," says
Phillip
E.
Johnson, law professor at the University of California at
Berkeley.
Because evolution is the best theory that we have today.
ahhhhh so .... it must be taught as the only method that man arrived
on
the
planet, beside contradictions, lack of transitionals, and or
incomplete
fossil records... I see.
Straw man.
No evidence is ever complete. The only way it could be is if you
yourself were there to observe what happened.
Exactly, yet biology teachers does not teach this. they teach that the
truth
are in the bones.
That species change over time is FACT.
which of the 5 different defintion of species are you refering to?
We have witnessed this in
laboratories and in the real world. The common cold is an evolving virus
that changes itself enough that your immune system does not recognize it
the
second time around.
it is still a virus.
That is evolution at work. How evolution occoured
between the start of life and now is what is still classified under the
realm of theory, yet given the fact of evolution, it isn't very hard at
all
to support this theory.
The "gaps" in the fossil record are merely an excuse used by creationists.
I am not a creationist, and real scientists admit to "gaps"
For a truly "complete" fossil record, we would have to have a fossil of
every ancestor of every living thing on the planet.
yup
If, say, ants were to
be looked at by themselves, we'd need a phenomonal amount of fossils just
for the last million years, much less the past 3 billion years for all of
life on Earth. A complete fossil record is not only an impossibility,
it's
also an absurdity.
then education allows an absurdity to be taught?
If complete evidence was required to prove anything, nothing could be
proved - no one would ever be judged guilty and science would not
exist.
not true. and how many people based on faulty evidence, goes to death
row
for years, then released???
Evolution has been on "death row" for a good long time now. If there any
counter evidence, it would have been "released" and no longer regarded as
a
valid theory.
you are right TOE is on death row.
To push this crap is essentially revealing you have a motive and are
trying to lie to people.
no lie here..
There goes another one.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
30 Oct 2003 07:51:35 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 22:50:17 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@bluegender.org>
wrote:
"Kate " <cobalt@newscene.com> wrote in message
news:3fa12971.170983621@news-west.newscene.com...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:29:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net>
wrote:
"Maverick" <sh100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5%bb.2297$d1.1108@nntpserver.swip.net...
JaBrIoL wrote:
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless, chance
evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist fundamentalists . .
.
control the science departments in many universities," says Phillip
E.
Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
Because evolution is the best theory that we have today.
ahhhhh so .... it must be taught as the only method that man arrived on
the
planet, beside contradictions, lack of transitionals, and or incomplete
fossil records... I see.
Straw man.
No evidence is ever complete. The only way it could be is if you
yourself were there to observe what happened.
Exactly, yet biology teachers does not teach this. they teach that the truth
are in the bones.
Honey - they teach science which is about theory and proof. About how
much data makes usable proof. Which is not all data because there is
no physical way to get all proof.
Maybe you weren't listening?
Maybe you still aren't listening?
Maybe it's too much fun to be a liar?
Does your god forgive people for enjoying sinning?
Does he forgive people for not making it right?
If complete evidence was required to prove anything, nothing could be
proved - no one would ever be judged guilty and science would not
exist.
not true. and how many people based on faulty evidence, goes to death row
for years, then released???
It's not true that people are judged guilty? Ever?
You know better.
liar.
To push this crap is essentially revealing you have a motive and are
trying to lie to people.
no lie here..
Lies lies lies lies.
Sinner.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JaBrIoL" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
31 Oct 2003 06:43:41 AM |
|
|
(Kate ) wrote in message news:<3fa1bda7.36921623@news-west.newscene.com>...
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 22:50:17 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@bluegender.org>
wrote:
"Kate " < > wrote in message
news:3fa12971.170983621@news-west.newscene.com...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:29:48 GMT, "jabriol" <jabriol@Neogenesis.net>
wrote:
"Maverick" <sh100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5%bb.2297$d1.1108@nntpserver.swip.net...
JaBrIoL wrote:
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless, chance
evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist fundamentalists . .
.
control the science departments in many universities," says Phillip
E.
Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
Because evolution is the best theory that we have today.
ahhhhh so .... it must be taught as the only method that man arrived on
the
planet, beside contradictions, lack of transitionals, and or incomplete
fossil records... I see.
Straw man.
No evidence is ever complete. The only way it could be is if you
yourself were there to observe what happened.
Exactly, yet biology teachers does not teach this. they teach that the truth
are in the bones.
Honey - they teach science which is about theory and proof. About how
much data makes usable proof. Which is not all data because there is
no physical way to get all proof.
Maybe you weren't listening?
Maybe you still aren't listening?
Maybe it's too much fun to be a liar?
or maybe you never read a teacher guide on how to teach evolution.
and it is easy to call somebody a liar than to look up the facts..
I hope you are not a teacher... it would be a waste of taxpayer dollars..
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
23 Sep 2003 06:34:15 PM |
|
|
jabriol wrote:
"Maverick" <sh100@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d5%bb.2297$d1.1108@nntpserver.swip.net...
JaBrIoL wrote:
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless,
chance evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist
fundamentalists . . . control the science departments in many
universities," says Phillip E. Johnson, law professor at the
University of California at Berkeley.
Because evolution is the best theory that we have today.
ahhhhh so .... it must be taught as the only method that man arrived
on the planet, beside contradictions, lack of transitionals, and or
incomplete fossil records... I see.
What contradictions?
As for transitional fossils, they do exist. I will admit that I don't
know much about transitional fossils either, but there are resources on
the web: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
That the fossil records are incomplete should be no surprise.
And btw, wouldn't the fossil record they did find contradict
creationism?
Johnson points out: "In some cases biology professors have been
forbidden to tell students that there is any reason to doubt the
claim that mindless material processes could and did create the
wonders of biology."
And a law professor should know more than biology professors?
A law proffesor, who is among biology professors, would know the
"why" or reasond behind forceful teaching of a an unfounded subject.
What unfounded subject would that be? Creationism, perhaps? But that
would be strange.
Scientist and engineer Murphy O'Dean observes: "Rather than
discard a theory that does not stand up to fact, the direction of
'evolutionary science' has become a statement of faith that
'evolution must be true.'" Conflicting evidence and the lack of
evidence are either ignored or explained away.
"Evolutionary science"?
that is what the article says eh?
Why? Michael Behe, molecular biologist, says in Darwin's Black
Box: "Many people, including many important and well-respected
scientists, just don't want there to be anything beyond nature.
They don't want a supernatural being to affect nature." But true
science does not ignore contrary evidence in order to advance
preferred ideas. Nor do all scientists believe evolution.
Whether scientists want there to be a creator or not, doesn't
matter! What matters is the observations and experimental results
etc that we have.
did you know that evolution does not pass the scientific method?
observing one lifeform converting into another has not been observed,
nor can it be duplicated in a lab, much less falsified... and
speciation of one lifeform does not change the genetic core of said
lifeform.. you can speciate a dog, but he still remains a dog..
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html
The Brazilian magazine Veja asked Carlo Rubbia, winner of the
Nobel Prize for Physics, "Do you believe in God?" While not
acknowledging a personal God, he did admit: "The more you observe
nature, the more you perceive that there is tremendous
organization in all things. It is an intelligence so great that
just by observing natural phenomena I come to the conclusion that
a Creator exists."
That is not a scientific statement, and you really shouldn't
interpret it as such.
why not? the guy is a noble laurate...
And so everything he says are scientific statements?
And btw, you don't trust science, do you?
you refer to science as if it a sort of diety, please define "trust in
science".
No, I'm not. However, you seem to reject science unless you can find a
scientist that says what you want to hear and then quote him/her, in
order to make it look like your "theories" are more scientific, isn't
that so?
So why do you
think that something a scientist says carry more weight because he
is a scientist, especially when he's talking about something that
has nothing to do with science?
how do you define "natural phenomena"? a spirtual experiance?
After all, you know very well that there is no evidence of an
intelligent special creator.
Evidence is in the eye of the beholder.
here is a simple question on evidence... you run upon a house in a
extemely isolated part of the dessert, you see noone there. Tou enter
the house, it has a refigerator full of food, fire burning in the
wood stove, full running water, an aquerium with live fish, a few
plants around the furniture...
how many millions of years did it take for that house, to develop and
evolved on its own, with everything inside?
Will this confirm that you have no idea what you're talking about, or
do you want another chance?
..
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
25 Sep 2003 10:45:41 PM |
|
|
On 23 Sep 2003 09:03:59 -0700, (JaBrIoL) posted in
alt.atheism:
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless, chance
evolution as fact?
No one teaches about your god Chance.
--
"Damn. Looks like all of usenet agrees that you don't have the logical
faculties to prove the statement 'dogshit is not peanut butter' if we
gave you a jar of each and a box of crackers" - John Hattan to Tichy
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
23 Sep 2003 04:16:29 PM |
|
|
On 23 Sep 2003, (JaBrIoL) screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:d222de3e.0309230803.4dc0a314@posting.google.com:
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless, chance
evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist fundamentalists . . .
control the science departments in many universities," says Phillip E.
Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
*chokes*
Darwinist fundamentalists?! That's a new one!
Johnson points out: "In some cases biology professors have been
forbidden to tell students that there is any reason to doubt the claim
that mindless material processes could and did create the wonders of
biology."
I doubt this. Evidence?
Scientist and engineer Murphy O'Dean observes: "Rather than discard a
theory that does not stand up to fact,
Evolutionary theory actually *does* stand up to fact.
the direction of 'evolutionary
science' has become a statement of faith that 'evolution must be
true.'"
As far as we know, it *is* true.
Conflicting evidence and the lack of evidence are either
ignored or explained away.
Dude, my irony meter is bleeding all over my keyboard. What did you do
to it?!
Why? Michael Behe, molecular biologist, says in Darwin's Black Box:
"Many people, including many important and well-respected scientists,
just don't want there to be anything beyond nature. They don't want a
supernatural being to affect nature." But true science does not ignore
contrary evidence in order to advance preferred ideas. Nor do all
scientists believe evolution.
When you show objective evidence for supernatural beings, I guarantee
you all rational scientists will study it. That's when you show
*objective* evidence, not faith-based, anecdotal, and/or feel-good
speculation.
The Brazilian magazine Veja asked Carlo Rubbia, winner of the Nobel
Prize for Physics, "Do you believe in God?" While not acknowledging a
personal God, he did admit: "The more you observe nature, the more you
perceive that there is tremendous organization in all things. It is an
intelligence so great that just by observing natural phenomena I come
to the conclusion that a Creator exists."
So? Just because some idiot believes in God doesn't mean he/she/it
exists.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"When did I realize I was God? Well, I was praying and I suddenly
realized I was talking to myself!"
--Peter O'Toole.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lance S. Ferm" |
|
| Title: Re: Public Schools Science Education: What Biology teachers are forced to teach |
23 Sep 2003 07:39:06 PM |
|
|
http://www.icr.org
"JaBrIoL" <Jabriol@excite.com> wrote in message
news:d222de3e.0309230803.4dc0a314@posting.google.com...
Why do so many science teachers in America promote mindless, chance
evolution as fact? One reason is that "Darwinist fundamentalists . . .
control the science departments in many universities," says Phillip E.
Johnson, law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.
Johnson points out: "In some cases biology professors have been
forbidden to tell students that there is any reason to doubt the claim
that mindless material processes could and did create the wonders of
biology."
Scientist and engineer Murphy O'Dean observes: "Rather than discard a
theory that does not stand up to fact, the direction of 'evolutionary
science' has become a statement of faith that 'evolution must be
true.'" Conflicting evidence and the lack of evidence are either
ignored or explained away.
Why? Michael Behe, molecular biologist, says in Darwin's Black Box:
"Many people, including many important and well-respected scientists,
just don't want there to be anything beyond nature. They don't want a
supernatural being to affect nature." But true science does not ignore
contrary evidence in order to advance preferred ideas. Nor do all
scientists believe evolution.
The Brazilian magazine Veja asked Carlo Rubbia, winner of the Nobel
Prize for Physics, "Do you believe in God?" While not acknowledging a
personal God, he did admit: "The more you observe nature, the more you
perceive that there is tremendous organization in all things. It is an
intelligence so great that just by observing natural phenomena I come
to the conclusion that a Creator exists."
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
