BOE member: "I want God to be part of this"

The other shoe has dropped. State Board of Education member Donna Callaway says she’ll be voting against the proposed new state science standards because evolution “should not be taught to the exclusion of other theories of origin of life” and says she hopes “there will be times of prayer throughout Christian homes and churches directed toward this issue.”

"As a SBOE member, I want those prayers," Callaway said, according to a Nov. 30 column in the Florida Baptist Witness, a weekly newspaper based in Jacksonville that is an official organ of the Florida Baptist Convention. "I want God to be part of this. Isn’t that ironic?"

Callaway, a former middle school principal and Jeb appointee, is one of seven board members who’ll be voting on the science standards early next year. But more importantly for the moment, she is the highest-profile official to date who has come out against the draft standards since the Department of Education released them for public comment in October. Educators and scientists have generally given them a good review (see St. Petersburg Times story here.) In fact, another key scientist gave them a plug yesterday (see press release here.)

Evolution "is like no other subject we teach. Therefore, it is of supreme importance," Callaway continued, according to the Florida Baptist Witness. "This has the possibility of confirming or denying for a child who he/she really is. This strikes to the meaning, the value, and the core of life itself. I firmly believe that a child can deal with the proof of science along with a personal belief in God as the Creator of the universe at the same time. The classroom should allow him, openly, that opportunity. Teachers should be allowed the leeway to acknowledge that there are other theories."

Callaway told the newspaper she does not believe intelligent design should be taught, but said it should be "acknowledged as a theory which many people accept along with others. Students need to have any proof, scientific evidence that is there. But the fact that there are other theories about certain parts, at least needs to be pointed out, footnoted. I believe this is true education."

- Ron Matus, state education reporter

See also: Future speaker, intelligent design believer, the Gradebook, 12/05/2007; Divisions open over science standards, St. Petersburg Times, 12/06/2007

Comments

[kdr]

Excuse me Monkeyboy. I should have said believer instead of Christians when refering to our founding fathers. But the principal is still the same, they believed in something not based off of science as you would say. They were still intelligent men.

The questions I have left is when did it begin? If we evolved, then we evolved from something, right? And when did that something become life? What triggered it? And the real question is why do we not see proof of this transformation? When did the molecule leap from being something like water to life?

[Joe Diffie]

Teaching creationism and ID in schools? What's next, teaching Scientology in schools? Its just as good of a theory as Intelligent Design isn't it? Are you kidding me?

Its funny how these people can trust science enough to drive our cars or fly in our airplanes, but they can't trust science enough with where we came from and how we got here. I know, let's just pick and choose the sciences that match our personal beliefs and ignore the ones that we don't like - just like we pick the stories out of the bible that we like and ignore those we don't like!

[MonkeyBoy]

kdr says "There are several Christians who are intelligent individuals. Our founding fathers are a prime example."

Not this again, yes several of the founding fathers were Christians. Many of the more important ones were Deists - they accepted a notion of God the watchmaker who created the universe and then walked away not to interfere with it. They explicitly rejected the notion of Jesus being divine.

Anybody who pushes the notion that George Washington was a devout Christian needs to be ridiculed as a liar or a stupid dupe.

[MonkeyBoy]

Haydee wrote "here is a link as well with awesome points on why evolution not solid...

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/154/story_15485_1.html

Gee, just look at its subhead "Random, undirected evolution is incompatible with Christianity, says a well-known evangelical author."

This shows an evangelical author who knows nothing about evolution.

Genetic mutation is random. Natural selection causes a specie's gene pool to be optimized in its "fitness" for a particular environment. Evolution is NOT RANDOM and UNDIRECTED.

Technically the author's statement above is true given his mischaracterizaion of evolution.

[kdr]

Why is it that we must resort to name calling? If you don't believe in God then fine, but you shouldn't call believers names. There are several Christians who are intelligent individuals. Our founding fathers are a prime example.

[Sigh]

Many religious folk have stressed that we athiests had better hope we're right or else!!!

I had almost forgotten that particularly obsene little notion 'HELL'

God is good, God loves you, God forgives you......

Love him back or else he'll torture for ETERNITY. What a psycotic, needy, vengeful and petty creature God is.

If you 'believers' out there can't see through this transaparent gibberish then nothing anyone can say will sway you.

Crazy ole PC world we live in, you can't call someone who believes that God condemned all of humanity because some bloke ate one of his precious fruit stupid. Ever stop to wonder why the VAST majority of the smartest, most educated people in the world are atheists?

[Snitter]

Sorry Irene, you beat me to it.

[Cliff]

There should be a separate class for people who think religion belongs in a science class room. The powers that be (the school board) should let the students choose which they'd rather be in...one that teaches science and one labeled "other", because the "other" one isn't science. There's also the whole 'separation of church and state' thing. Send your kids to private schools if you want them praying and spreading the word during school time.

PS: To Sarah "if you don't believe in Christ, then you have no business taking part in His birthday celebration." Uh, you know perfectly well that Jesus wasn't thought to be born on Dec. 25 right? You know that Xmas used to be on a floating date to correspond with the solstice right? You know that Christians appropriated somebody else's holiday right? You know that it's not your place to decide who can celebrate right?
Sorry for veering off topic folks.

[Snitter]

Okay, seriously. Has anyone read the report that just came out ranking various countries in science education? That's why creationism shouldn't be allowed to waste time in a science class. There are already enough irrational arguments coming at kids from the adult world without blowing out real facts or functional theories for pixie-dust wish fulfillment.
As an interesting side-note. The great thing about ID is that it's obvious it's religion disguised as science and every Christian knows it. Fundamentalists however are so eager to share Christ's light of truth and honesty with kids that they're quite willing to lie and say they don't believe ID is a religious theory.

[Irene]

Sara said: My point about the CHRISTmas tree vs. the evolution tree is that if you don't believe in Christ, then you have no business taking part in His birthday celebration. If you do take part without believing, that would make you a hypocrite, now wouldn't it?

1. Don't use the term "hypocrite" when discussing Christianity. It really doesn't help your argument. Just trust me on that one. I can support that Biblically--don't worry about the mote in your neighbor's eye when you have the big, huge, honking rock/log/staff in your own.

2. I don't know what others do, but I have an evergreen tree up to celebrate the Solstice, following a new-aged version of the ancient custom of using an evergreen as an example of something that never dies--even when all else around does. The tree wasn't ALWAYS a CHRISTmas tree, you realize? It far, far predates Christ or his followers. It--like the date, the Yule log, the feasting and gift giving, the mistletoe, the holly, the wassail, yadda yadda yadda--just got appropriated to make converting the Pagans easier.

IN FACT, if you actually read your history, you'd find that the religious group that eventually settled this country actually banned the celebration of Christmas in England for several years--recognizing it was a Pagan celebration.

[Snitter]

Furthermore, it's clear that no evolutionists have ever tried spaghetti squash. I mean, God knew I loved spaghetti and he knew I loved squash and there are both in one vegetable. All you have to do is cook it for half an hour with a little oil on it and look at it. It's obvious proof of God's design.

[Mr. Sheldon]

Thank you Snitter for proving my point.

[Snitter]

Your all wrong about evolution. I can't see it so it doesn't exist. You've also all been fooled into thinking that the T-Rex existed. If it was there once, where has it gone? Huh? I could make anything out of those bones.
HomoErectus was an abomination as was Neanderthal, so God wiped both of them out, end of conversation. Show me the Neaderthal walking around. Have you seen one? Ha!! So much for evolution!

[Mr. Sheldon]

Hey, where did all the faithful go? It looks like the academics are once again talking to themselves.

No wonder the discussion never advances, the Creationist/ID proponents fall back on "That's not true because I know god (lower case intended) is all knowing and he told me how the world works in a book."

I'm glad that clears it up, I guess I really don't have to use logic anymore because all the answers rest with "him."

[Brandon]

I welcome you to visit the Florida Citizens for Science website http://www.flascience.org and consider joining our organization if sound science education in Florida matters to you.

We had broken the Callaway story a few days ago: http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=331
Keep an eye on our blog for similar updates!

[frey]

With all this talk from the ID and Creationists side, all you have to do is come up with a practical application from your "theory". If you can do that it would help your side tremendously. Think about it a practical scientific application that we can use in everyday life that has it's basis in ID or Creationism. Forget about disproving evolution, if want a competing theory put muscle to plow. You see the great thing about science is in the applications that can be used to understand complex systems like biology, gravity, the cosmos. We can use these theories to make predictions about how to send a rocket to the moon, to study how viruses behave and evolve within certain systems like the human body, and so on. See here's the thing truth persists weather you choose to believe it or not. If we still used the church to guide science we would still be telling ourselves that the world is flat, and that the Sun revolves around the Earth, remember these ideas were in conflict with religious views during their time.

"What prevents teachers from teaching whatever they want?"

EPIC FAIL!

[Sabbie]

Dover Trial anyone?

[Dennis]

KDR:

The problem is that if teachers say there are other theories on life, then they are lying and mis-educating our students with false information. There are NO other theories. Certainly no other scientific theories (we ARE talking about SCIENCE class). ID is not a theory. It's a wild speculation based on a DESIRE to believe something, not on the evidence available. You might as well let a child dream up some random scenario, and teach that, as it has as much validity. Evolution is a FACT in that it is known to occur. In turn, there is a THEORY which describes the fact and tells how, when, etc. To say that ID is an alternative is equivalent to saying that there is alternative theory to how gravity works...that in fact it may not be attraction between masses, but that it's the result of invisible angels lifting and pushing things.

[Mencken Jr]

kdr, you need to keep in mind who you're dealing with. Creationists aren't interested in fairness and "equal time" any more than a land developer is interested in "equal time" for residents who don't want a giant borrow pit next to their house. But they'll keep saying that as long as they think they have to in order to sneak religion into the public schools.

Any teacher that has so little control of their classroom that he/she lets kids ridicule each other needs to relearn classroom management, btw. And any teacher that ridicules a child in class for stating their beliefs should be suspended or fired on the spot.

But it's telling that someone would drag out those old chestnuts to try and get people to stop thinking and just start reacting emotionally. No actual arguments, no real data in support of their "theory", so now out come the scare stories and mini-apocrypha.

[Tom]

Uhh, KDR, this is what she said...

... evolution “should not be taught to the exclusion of other theories of origin of life”

This has nothing to do with a student saying they are a believer in Creation without ridicule... it says that Florida Science Teachers will be required to teach Christian (apparently the only flavor she's advocating) creation in schools.

Makes me think that someone who is a stern believer in Astrology would be allowed to teach planetary astronomy and ignore the photos of Mars from the rovers, After all, in their belief system, Mars is the god of war and he rules over passions...

What prevents teachers from teaching whatever they want?

[kdr]

I think many of the bloggers have forgotten what the orignal blog was about. Donna Callaway was only asking that the teachers have the freedom to say there are other theories of how the earth was created. If you have a child who does learn that God was the creater in Sunday School and then goes to class and says that the theory of evolution is not something they believe in, then they should have the freedom to say that without ridicule or scorn from the teacher or their classmates.

Not mine, but I like this song. Note at the bottom is from the page where I got the lyrics.

http://www.echoschildren.org/CDlyrics/WORDGOD.HTML

The Word of God
Lyrics and melody © 1994 by Catherine Faber

From desert cliff and mountaintop we trace the wide design,
Strike-slip fault and overthrust and syn and anticline. . .
We gaze upon creation where erosion makes it known,
And count the countless aeons in the banding of the stone.
Odd, long-vanished creatures and their tracks & shells are found;
Where truth has left its sketches on the slate below the ground.
The patient stone can speak, if we but listen when it talks.
Humans wrote the Bible; God wrote the rocks.

There are those who name the stars, who watch the sky by night,
Seeking out the darkest place, to better see the light.
Long ago, when torture broke the remnant of his will,
Galileo recanted, but the Earth is moving still.
High above the mountaintops, where only distance bars,
The truth has left its footprints in the dust between the stars.
We may watch and study or may shudder and deny,
Humans wrote the Bible; God wrote the sky.

By stem and root and branch we trace, by feather, fang and fur,
How the living things that are descend from things that were.
The moss, the kelp, the zebrafish, the very mice and flies,
These tiny, humble, wordless things---how shall they tell us lies?
We are kin to beasts; no other answer can we bring.
The truth has left its fingerprints on every living thing.
Remember, should you have to choose between them in the strife,
Humans wrote the Bible; God wrote life.

And we who listen to the stars, or walk the dusty grade,
Or break the very atoms down to see how they are made,
Or study cells, or living things, seek truth with open hand.
The profoundest act of worship is to try to understand.
Deep in flower and in flesh, in star and soil and seed,
The truth has left its living word for anyone to read.
So turn and look where best you think the story is unfurled.
Humans wrote the Bible; God wrote the world.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This song was inspired when a friend of mine complained to me about a run-in with some Creationists, and asked "what can you say to such people?" The first words that popped out of my mouth were "humans wrote the bible. God wrote the rocks."

[Phil]

Its only ID and creation supporting christians who say that theres holes in evolution.Darwins theories are constantly being analysed,scrutinized and updated as science increases its knowledge.It evolves like everything else in the universe.It evolves at its own pace.Which happens over millions of years.
What I find amusing in all of this is that so many christians who follow and love to quote the old testament,and yet are so anti semitic.Double standard there

[Willow]

Move to Kansas- you're on the same biblical page.....

[craig.p]

For years I wanted to work and live in America - being in the tech industry it was a natural, but American Fundamentalists killed my desire. The religious right (they don't deserve capitals) have dumbed the country down so much you couldn't pay me enough to move there and damage my children that way.

I won't even mention how the once bastion of human rights and social equality now has a class of permanent working poor and is slipping further and further back in the pack when it comes to education and human rights... mostly due again to the christian right...

I'm sorry to say this is just another story of too many that have made me feel this way...

[craig.p]

For years I wanted to work and live in America - being in the tech industry it was a natural, but American Fundamentalists killed my desire. The religious right (they don't deserve capitals) have dumbed the country down so much you couldn't pay me enough to move there and damage my children that way.

I won't even mention how the once bastion of human rights and social equality now has a class of permanent working poor and is slipping further and further back in the pack when it comes to education and human rights... mostly due again to the christian right...

I'm sorry to say this is just another story of too many that have made me feel this way...

[Ed]

This is the same kind of "my way only" pushy stuff that got Christians in so much hot water in the first place.
Maybe the Romans were right all along by throwing these clowns to the lions.

[Dawkins]

Gwen, Evolution is a FACT to nearly the same degree that gravity is a fact. A scientific theory is basically a FACT. It is not the same as "Joe's theory of nice BBQ sauces for winter months."

Science is as real as life gets. And religion is not. In fact religious people lie so much about science that it has to be breaking some rule in the Bible. Like this will actually change anyone's mind... If you're religious out there, please don't vote. I know that you don't realize yet that everything you believe is a myth, but please try to be kind to those of us who actually have evidence on our side. Blah blah, I know you will say that you really are smart, but seriously define whatever rules you want, and you will never win. There is no higher power. Nice try. Grow up.

[Wayne]

Why is this stupidity even being discussed anymore?
As a theory, Darwin's evolution has been relentlessly attacked and has stood the test of time flawlessly. Few other commonly accepted ones (such as the nature of gravity) have withstood the rigors of consistent testing as well as evolution. The problem seems to stem from the fact that goes against some beliefs.
Well, here's a simple solution.... if any religion has a set of beliefs that it wants taught in conjunction with Darwins Theory, then it should be called a theory also and subject to the same principles. Test them, take measurements, and scrutinize them.
Adam and Eve, show at least some evidence besides fables from a primitive culture. Same for Noah's Ark, the Garden of Eden, etc. Give a reason for equal standing. Because if you can't, then every nut that feels that UFOs populated earth, Xenu is the source of modern man, Bigfoot guarded the Garden of Eden or whatnot will be given equal ground.
Lets face it, if you don't like the position of science in public schools being taught to coincide with your particular dogma, prove your dogma or shut the heck up already! That's why we have religious schools and home-schooling available for all, or you could do your job as a parent and teach your dogmas at home if its so important to you.
Once again, put up or shut up! And considering how long this debate has been happening, no religion has put up anything worth competing with Darwins theory.
There's no room anymore for intellectual discussion with these nuts anymore, because they don't bring anything intelligent to the table and never have.

[Mencken Jr]

Sara says:

"Mutations are genetic copying mistakes. They are mistakes that work on something that is already designed, already created. Opponents of evolution are not conviced that mistakes can create complex information and irreducibly complex systems."

More unpacking? Sure, why not.

1) Whoever wrote this paragraph has already taken it as an article of faith that genes are designed and created. This, by itself, makes just about anything else they say on the subject useless from a scientific perspective.

2) Whoever wrote this paragraph is also trying their best to make it look like opposition to evolution is grounded in careful analysis rather than strong belief (and in the process has, ironically enough, made a transcription error in going fron "convinced" to "conviced").

3) There's also a reference to "complex information" (cribbed from one of Dembski's incoherent papers, with no discussion of pro's and con's. Dembski, btw, is a lousy choice of theorist to crib from. He's a molecular biologist dabbling in information theory, and he doesn't seem to understand its limitations at all.)

[Jerry]

Ally- my mistake you are correct Ministers do pay taxes, I am very heated by all this Christian right BS!!! That I was thinking faster than I could type...it is Reverends that don't pay taxes. YOU KNOW WHAT EVERYONE....Bottom line is these Bible Beaters forget 1 most important thing in our constitution...the 1st ammendment gives them the right to practice any religion they want and say what ever they want, in the same way it allows all of us too. Although, I have to admit that the 1st ammendment has been over used a bit..but the fundamental principle of the 1st ammendment, gives us freedoms that we should be proud of, instead of making a mockery of. Have you noticed the Born againers, seems like little by little are trying to take away these freedoms? It's ashame though that their God doesn't get investigated for tax fraud. And why does it seem like mostly the relgious right seems to be in favor of the the 2nd ammendment (the right to bear arms)? I believe in AMERICA, I believe in our Constitution, and I feel that everyone has the right to exercise his or her own beliefs within the rules/guidelines of our Consitution. But I also believe that Science or Scientific ideas/facts/studys/theories should not be taught because it goes against Religious feelings or beliefs of certain individuals. Really all they are doing is filling the children's head with historical fiction and taking away historical fact.
Bottom line let the children learn all they can to become smarter and more of an uderstanding of themselves and life, while they go to church and have their religion.

Hey is it just me or do the Christians seem like a very strong, very rich religious Cult, and only reason why it is accepted is because (just like Jonestown & Mr. Korish) it grabs the minds of the simple minded and or people who are down on life at the time. But since it has been here from the start of our lives it is more accepted. Instead of Cyanide we drink wine, which is the cup of his blood, the cup of teh new and everylasting covenant, to where sins may be forgiven, so do this in memory of him....hhhmmmm.

School is to learn all types of Mathematics, History, SCIENCE, Language Arts, Literature, English & let's not forget recess, then there is Gym class, and music class, art class, etc.
You learn all of these from k-12.
You study religion in church...and once upon a time there was this thing called Sunday school, while your parents were in church you went to a class for an hour to an hour and 1/2 to learn about the Bible, and Jesus, and other things there within. So keep your faith there and away from the school. Thank you and good night...

[DD]

I love reading responses to this topic. I must say that I am shocked at the ignorance of the masses. History has shown us that religion has caused more violence, murder, and war than anything else. Religion breeds bigotry. Education breeds tolerance. Have you ever heard of scientists trying to get evolution taught at sunday schools? No, of course not. The scientist are intelligent enough to realize that sunday school is for religion not science. And the opposite is also true. Religion has no business being taught in a science class room. The two are diametrically oppossed. Anyone who attempts to combine the two is kidding themselves. Religious teachings (Creationism and intelligent design) should not be in public schools. Only people who want to convert others to their religion support religion in school. If you want your child learning about what you perceive to be the "correct" and "true" version of God, then send them to a private school that teaches your preferred dogma. When you don't separate Church and State you get IRAN, SUDAN, SAUDI ARABIA, etc... or the christian versions, The Crusades, Salem witch trials, Spanish Inquisition, etc...

"Which is it, is God one of man's blunders, or is man one of God's?"
- Friedrich Nietche

"Religion is a pious illusion, a fairy tale in conflict with reason."
-Sigmund Freud

"If god does exist, I believe he's definitely an under achiever."
-Woody Allen

"Faith is believing in something you know isn't so."
-Mark Twain

[Jason]

yeah...here is a link as well with awesome points on why evolution not solid...
"
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/154/story_15485_1.html

goodnight chimps...

Posted by: Haydee | December 04, 2007 at 08:57 PM "

Lee Strobel? Are you serious. Why are you interjecting the writings of an Christian apologist in a discussion about science?
His assessment of Miller-Urey experiments misinforms his reader and borders on lying. Stanly Miller and company only showed that organic compounds could be made from inorganic precursers when energy is applied. Strobel says that scientists hit a "brick wall" when they learned that the early atmosphere was different from Miller's assumptions. This is a lie. The crux of Miller-Urey experiment has been validated over and over again, that in what we suspect to be the early atmosphere of the earth, organics can be created from inorganics with a little energy. That is all.

Why is it that anyone gives credance to Lee Strobel on the subject of bacterial flagellum when the entire community of microbiologists and bio-chemists (save Behe) disagree with his idiotic stance.

The scientific community marches forward, saving lives, improving our well being, while Strobel fights to put us back into the bronze age.

Strobel knows jack about science and yet you bring him into this conversation.

ID and creationism loses the battle everyday in the scientific community because it gives us nothing to work with, tells us nothing about the world around us, and in fact ends the discussion with "goddidit" Science screeches to a halt if you have your way.

All ID does is tell us that science is hard and when we don't understand something we say "and then a miracle occurs".

And when ID fails to convince the scientists of its merits, it goes after school children who aren't educated enough to tell it to bugger off. It goes after their parents who blew off biology and their science classes in high school and wouldn't know a transitional fossil if it bit them in the vestigial tail we know as the coccyx.

There are no competing theories to teach. 99.9% of scientists who work in the relevant fields are convinced of the validity of evolution. Just because a slew of dentists, lawyers, engineers, pastors and a few parents who couldn't tell the difference between a mitochondria and miter saw, disagree, doesn't make for a controversy.

Forget what your pastor told you about how the world works; forget what the internet preachers tell you about how evolution screwed up their imagined American paradise that never was; forget what these charlatans tell you with certainty about things they could not possibly know.

Take a science class and learn about the way the world is.

[Julie]

It is religious morons like Donna Calloway achieving positions in government where they can inflict their delusions on the non-believing citizenry that has transformed me from an eye-rolling agnostic to a letter writing atheist! Please keep your ignorance to yourself, Donna!

[Gwen]

A large point that a lot of people [on both sides] seem to miss is that evolution is a theory. It is -not- fact [yet]. That means, as scientist come up with more evidence for of against something related to evolution, the theory is changed.

The business with ID and Creationism, is that they aren't theories. They -can't- be refuted, and as such, are not scientific theories and thus should not be taught in classrooms.

[Dawkins]

Evolution is a fact. 2+2=4. There is no "alternative" to 4. I'm sorry that reality didn't live up to your wishful thinking. The only reason you can disbelieve evolution is if you don't understand it and the evidence for it OR if it shakes the foundation of your world view.

Find one peer-reviewed scientific paper written on intelligent design, and then we'll talk. Otherwise, shut up and stop whining that God isn't "real" enough for you.

[Logan]

Right. Let's teach kids that humans just "happened" and now here we are. And dinosaur bones are the devil's plot to confuse us...and fish couldn't have grown legs on their own to walk on land as some may suggest. We'll keep it nice and simple and allow a sort of teaching that gives the possibility of a "creator", along with evolutionary theory. Then we'll watch the test scores plummet.

[Haydee]

yeah...here is a link as well with awesome points on why evolution not solid...

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/154/story_15485_1.html

goodnight chimps...

[Jenan]

Marley, that's a wild and radical idea, but yanno...it just might work.

Or Florida's schools could go with Donna Callaway's way of doing things, and continue to be ranked in the bottom 3 in the nation. I mean-- hey, why upset the status quo? After all, we're still higher than Mississippi and Louisiana.

[Marley]

Like millions of people, I believe that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created all things. With His Noodly Appendage, he placed life on earth and created "proof" of evolution.

Creationism should not be taught to the exclusion of other theories of origin of life, and Pastafarianism must be taught to our children in order to let them see all sides and choose the proper path. I want FSM to be part of this. Isn’t that ironic?

Or we could let the science teachers teach science, and let the parents and religious schools teach religion.

[darwinian dilemma]

My problem with allowing Intelligent Design is that it has no scientific merit. If you want to talk about alternate theory's in a science class at least have some kind of science/empirical data to back it up. Otherwise you're opening the door for anybody with just a "theory" to argue that their point of view should also be included in the curriculum.

_______________________________________
If we're all Gods Children why was Jesus so special?

[Sam]

All I know is I'm getting the hell out of Florida before my kids are subjected to the educational system. Pathetic.

[science]

a facts and theories are not opposites. a theory gives an explanation for facts; it ties facts together.

As for evolution, it does not attempt to explain how life was created. Intelligent design does (attempt). Evolution says that all life was derived from a common ancestor. It may be a tough theory to understand, but if those that love ID would study 150 years of scientific inquiry as much as they study that book (whatever your fable book may be) then maybe you would have a small grasp.

Science will never answer a question before rigorous testing. Nothing is proven only by reading a book and talking about it. That is more than i can say for IDers

[Tom]

Oh, another one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District

[Tom]

So, I wonder if this State Board member ever reads Supreme Court Rulings?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLean_v._Arkansas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwards_v._Aguillard

Thank you, Supreme Court, for preventing fundamentalists from running the show...

[Dave]

Ian, I'd like to see any creationist attempt to take apart your post and tell you why you're wrong.

Anyone? Surely there's at least one creationist that hasn't been run off with their tail between their legs still?

C'mon. Show your chops. Explain what Ian has gotten wrong. You've got God on your side! It should be easy!

Or maybe you could be grown, mature adults and admit you're ignorant and wrong about this topic, and let future generations have the science education that you so clearly missed out on.

[Ian]

Okay, look.

"Evolution is only a theory."

Technically true, but in scientific terms a theory actually holds more weight than a fact. A theory is an explanation of a collection of facts, supported by evidence. While a fact is either true or false, a theory can grow and change as new facts are introduced.

"There are no transitional fossils."

Not true. We have thousands of transitional fossils. Tiktaalik is a great example; it's the common ancestor we have for fish and amphibians.

Evolution predicts that amphibians and fish have a common ancestor, and its fossils should be at a certain point in the rock strata, given how old it should have been... and that's where we found it.

"There are no missing links."

Also not true, but as per the definition of "missing link" Sara gave above, very misleading. There are no "half-amoeba, half-duck" creatures just like there is no "missing link" that looks half like Sara and half like her second cousin. However, Sara and her second cousin still have a common ancestor.

As to there not being a valid half-reptile, half-bird, you may have forgotten the archaeopteryx. A late-period dinosaur - a reptile - with many bird-like features, including feathers and wings.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx

"Behe's irreducible complexity."

Behe's concept of irreducible complexity is that a biological object is so complex it couldn't have come about naturally, it had to have been designed. His primary examples of this were the bacterial flagellum and the blood clot cascade.

The bacterial flagellum cannot function as a flagellum if any of its parts are missing, it's true. But they function perfectly well as other biological devices. If you take away 40 of the flagellum's 50 parts, you'll end up with the type III secretory system, a sort of cellular syringe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQQ7ubVIqo4

Same deal with the blood clot cascade... if any of the steps in the are removed, then blood won't clot. Which is true, in humans. Different animals are "missing" different proteins, and their blood clots just fine.

"I've never seen evolution."

Well, speak for yourself, but scientists see it all the time. The yearly flu vaccine; a flower that, due to spreading to two different environments, speciates to a degree that the two can no longer interbreed; a mosquito population that moved to the London Underground which has speciated to that environment (in some cases, specific to a certain train line!)...

All of this is a short-term example of the big picture. There is no difference between "micro-evolution" and "macro-evolution," as some people like to call it. It's just a matter of scale. You'll never find a frog giving birth to a cow or anything ludicrous - that would prove evolution (as it's currently understood) to be wrong.

What you will find, if you go back far enough, is that any two animals had some sort of common ancestor, which won't necessarily have looked anything like the resultant species. The changes are gradual and happen over millions of years.

"I didn't come from a monkey."

No, you didn't. Just like you didn't come from your second cousin. But the two of you share a common ancestor.

Humans and monkeys are both offshoots of a form of ape.

Here's an interesting article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil

You don't even need to read any of it. Just check out the charts to the right. We're learning more and more about our species' history, and finding more and more transitional fossils that help fill out the line of evolution, and point us further and further back to the ape ancestor we share.

I don't even know where to begin with the idea that a given creature can't possibly evolve into something else because no new "information" is added to the DNA. What's that supposed to mean? How do you define "information?"

---
The Dover trial demonstrated that intelligent design is inextricably interwoven with its creationist origins. ID is inherently a religious proposition. And that's fine. ID, or creationism, might even be *true*. That's not the point. The point is that they're not *science*.

ID does not put forth any testable hypotheses, does not perform any research, does not publish in peer-reviewed journals, and really doesn't do anything scientific at all.

Science is a method of explaining the world around us using natural laws. Once you include the supernatural, like bringing in God, it is no longer science. If you expand the definition of science to include God, then you let in astrology, tarot cards, magic, crystal-waving, and everything else. You also introduce a "show-stopper" to science. Science is about asking questions. If you ask "where does lightning come from," and your answer is "Zeus did it," you learn nothing, and human knowledge does not advance.

Intelligent design should *not* be taught in a science class, because it is not science. Evolution is science. You can teach ID, you can teach creationism, you can teach any creation story you want from any of Earth's hundreds of religious beliefs. But teach them in philosophy, or something. You can't teach them in a science class. I'm not going to teach you how to paint in a math class, so don't teach non-science in a science class.

[Sean]

Your belief in a religion and god is due to your irrational fear of death! We (human beings) think we are just too important to just cease to exist after our physical bodies die off.

Religion was formed as a way for society to be controlled by promising them something they really want: eternal life.

You are only spouting off on the ignorance you were force-fed because you are too self-righteous!

Do you still believe Heaven is an actual city in the clouds and that Hell is really under ground? You do know those weren't metaphors, right?

Right?