Evolution Basics: Epperson v. Arkansas (1968)
Monday June 22, 2009
It is true that state governments do and should have the authority to decide what sorts of things taught in public schools; nevertheless, just how far should such authority extend? Many state governments have in the past outlawed the teaching of evolution - but is that a valid use of state power? Are there any secular reasons for banning the teaching of evolution, or are there only religious reasons?
Read Article: Epperson v. Arkansas (1968)
Of course there are reasons for not wanting evolution taught in schools. I’m a agnostic theist who is Catholic. And I think Creation Science and Intelligent Design should be taught there as valid belief systems concerning the history of the world, its life forms and the rest of the universe. Naturalistic and theistic Evolution are generally not rejected. We should just teach both as valid belief systems. The children should be able to make their minds up over which theory of design they choose to believe. Anyways, there seems to be an increasing trend among some Christian high schools and colleges to abandon creation science in favor of theistic evolution. I’m not saying this is a good thing…because I still believe in Intelligent Design..but people can believe what they want to believe and that’s just fine by me.
Atheists SUCK!
For example?
Prove it.
If you’re Catholic, then you’re not agnostic. Catholic doctrine includes the assertion that one knows that God exists.
And by the way, the Catholic Church accepts evolution as real. So that’s another point on which you are rejecting what the Catholic hierarchy is telling is real.
They can be taught as belief systems in classes where kids are taught about belief systems — like history and social studies classes.
Evolutionary theory is a scientific theory, not a “belief system.” Evolutionary theory has the same status in science as plate tectonics, Quantum Mechanics, and the Germ Theory of Disease. They, too, are not belief systems.
Should they be able to choose between believing whether or not the Holocaust happened?
That, too, would be inappropriate in science classes because there is no scientific theory called “Theistic Evolution.”
This is an admission that your position isn’t scientific because scientists don’t “believe in” a theory or idea, they accept it or not based on the accumulated evidence.
So, you don’t think that people should proportion their belief according to evidence?
As I pointed out in the last place you left comments: pretending to post as two different people isn’t very wise. Or ethical.
You might remember me from:
Link 1–
http://atheism.about.com/b/2009/03/12/daily-poll-should-socially-active-atheists-identify-themselves-as-atheists.htm#comments
Link 2–
http://forums.prospero.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ab-atheism&tid=42353
The reasons for not wanting evolution taught in schools in simple…it’s not real anyways. Nobody has called evolution fact…that’s why it’s called the “theory” of evolution. If it were a fact it’d be called the fact of evolution. Anyways, Americans do not believe that humans evolved, and the vast majority says that even if they evolved, God guided the process. Just 13 percent say that God was not involved. A 2005 poll by the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Social and Religious Research found that 60% of American medical doctors reject Darwinism, stating that they do not believe humans evolved through natural processes alone. The study also reported that 1/3 of all medical doctors favor the theory of intelligent design over evolution.In addition, there is evidence to suggest that the evolutionary position is gradually losing public support in the United States.The prestigious science journal Science reported the following in 2006 concerning the United States also reported: The percentage of people in the country who accept the idea of evolution has declined from 45 in 1985 to 40 in 2005. Meanwhile the fraction of Americans unsure about evolution has soared from 7 per cent in 1985 to 21 per cent last year. Also creation scientists disagree with the theory such as, Swedish geneticist Dr. Heribert Nilsson, Professor of Botany at the University of Lund in Sweden.
Atheists SUCK big time!
Don’t feed the trolls.
mobathome says: Don’t feed the trolls.
/me opts to take the ferry across the river instead.
The reasons for not wanting evolution taught in schools in simple…it’s not real anyways. Nobody has called evolution fact…that’s why it’s called the “theory” of evolution.
You right that evolution (really evolution via natural selection) is not a fact, it is a theory. Theories are much better then facts. Theories explain facts.
A 2005 poll by the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Social and Religious Research found that 60% of American medical doctors reject Darwinism
You want to play the game of numbers? No problem:
There are 6 billion people on this planet. 5 billion of them do NOT believe in Catholicism. About 4.5 billion of them do NOT believe in Christianity.
For most of human history, people did not believe there was only one god — they were polytheists.
The experts of Evolution are the biologists. They are the ones working in this field. Find me 1 survey (just one) that says that most biologists do NOT “believe” in Evolution.
If Evolution is not your field of expertise, then your opinion is worthless. If you don’t get that, then ask yourself this: why is it that only people who have done extensive studies in a medical field are allowed to work as doctors? Why is it that unless you have a Law degree, you are not allowed to work as a lawyer? Why is it that no one will hire you as an engineer unless you have a degree in engineering?
You think about that the next time you’re sick and you run to a hospital instead of running to a law firm.
Oh, and btw, if you really believe that children can make their own choices, then I have a challenge for you: next time one of your children is sick, let him choose his own medication! Let’s just hope that your kid does not choose to swallow cyanide pills in order to poison his little flu viruses…
A 2005 poll by the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Social and Religious Research found that 60% of American medical doctors reject Darwinism
You should really learn to interpret poll data correctly. The poll says that 63% of physicians agree with evolution over ID, and 78% would rather accept evolution than reject it.
If you are misrepresenting those statistics, I refuse to accept any other data you provide until you first give your sources.
I often wonder how some people are able to turn off an alarm clock, get out of bed, shower, dress and leave the house, all without the help of Smithers or someone like him.
Why, in in June 2009 are we discussing this? The people who are on here making a case of “ID”, with all due respect, sort of, are morons, which quite honestly, if I were a moron I would be upset at being compared to them.
They come on here, and everywhere else with the same nonsensical diatribes that make no sense, it’s a theory, blah, equal time, blah, I have stats, blah.
Nobody takes them seriously, they’re laughed at world wide, we make fun of them, you can spend days on YouTube laughing your ass off at their expense (which I suggest you do, starting with Tenderf00t).
The only schools they affect are the ones they make up and they will never go from them into any mainstream science venue without being laughed off the face of the intelligently designed earth. The only thing they due is provide entertainment value, and I do give them credit for that.
They’ve been made fools of in court, schools and by 99% of every legitimate scientist on the planet.
As proof of the “ID” movement I offer you, with great pleasure and incredible pleasure (and they say comedy is dead in theater) none other than:
Ben Stein. If you can handle it and would like to join the other 29 people who watched the movie, do so, it is worth it. He does more to set back the “movement” than the actual movement itself.
At least they have Ted Haggard to help. Oh, sorry, wrong guy, he’s off humping leather pants, I was thinking of Ken Hovinand, oops again, he’s in prison. I guess they’ll have to stick with Ben Stein and what’s his face from that kids show, that sucked, I forget, he walks around with the picture of the duck and goat or something?
Don’t forget, your banana fit in your hand, so there must be a “Designer”. Something else fits in my hand but I thought I thought my “Designer” said I wasn’t suppose to do that, unless I’m a Catholic Priest and I’m doing it to someone else.
Hey, it evolved to fit into my hand. Maybe that’s the problem, theirs hasn’t evolved that much yet that why they’re still yanking banana’s.
Peace out freaks.
Laura Pope: “Nobody has called evolution fact.”
Actually, many scientists call it a fact.
http://talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
I don’t care what they teach, as long as their is room for open debate and doubt. Schooling is basically indoctrination and propaganda. Talking, reading, writing, and thinking are all that really matters.
I care a great deal what they teach in a public school. I have two kids in public schools and I damn sure don’t want them being taught theology in science.
I want them being taught tested, practical and accepted science in science class. That’s it, not ideology, someone’s “idea” of science, or “equal” time.
I don’t want that taught in their math class either. When they get older and get in schools that have electives and can take philosophy and religious history or theology or anything else they CHOOSE, then they may take whatever they want, but not in science.
In science class in a my kids 3rd and 5th grade science classes I damn well expect them to be taught science, not that freakish creationism sh*t.
I’m glad I live in NJ and don’t have to deal with it, and believe me, the good folks of Dover, PA are damn glad they don’t have to deal with me. Panda’s and People my ass.
Peace out freaks.
As usual with the fundamentalists and others who are intellectually lazy, there are many like Laura Pope above who do not understand what the word theory means in the context of science. A theory in scientific context is a “factual description of the world that covers a relatively large number of phenomena and has met many observational and experimental tests.” from The Sciences, An Integrated Approach by Trefil and Hazen.
And science is not something that depends on capricious whim of polls and popular opinion as to whether someting is factual and accurate.
The concepts of gravity and electricity are also called theories, but we don’t see the religious or popular opinion trying to refute these obvious realities. Evolution and natural selection is based on the reality and observation of biological processes, not supernatural dogma or wishful thinking.
Laura, just because something real that millions of dedicated scientists and curious individuals have developed and verified over the centuries offends your religious sensibilities does not mean it is false.
Laura, also evolutionary biology is a international science, so what do you suggest that our biological scientists, paleontologists, geologists and universities etc. do if the US by decree of “popular opnion” (via theocratic thugs and other assorted scum) no longer teach or accept evolution in this country?
Do they just stop their work and no longer communicate with scientists in other countries? Do they just give up their advanced degrees,years of accomplishments, quit and just go on “evil” welfare?
Of course critical thinking skills is not attribute of religious fundies are they?… otherwise you would not be an apologist for disgustingly willful ignorance would you?
Laura Pope (1). Intelligent Design, in my opinion, is the stupidist/most ignorant concept that I can imagine that any, even semi-intelligent, person could have devised, based on easily observed evidence to the contrary. An ape could probably design animals superior to those contributed to your god. If anyone ever mentions Intelligent Design in my presence, I am afraid I will “lose my cool” (vernacular that at least some Creationists probably have the mental capacity to marginally comprehend; I am being generous in my assessment. Most seem, after myrids of explanations, unable to understand the meaning of either atheist or theory). Let us look at the eye, “darling of the ID’s”. Over the past eight (8) years, I have developed eye problems, all of which are the result of incredibly incompetent design (or the result of evolution). In addidition to several types of eye drops used frequently on a daily basis, I have Ahmed vitreous drain valves (to relieve glaucoma generated pressure, which is destroying the optic nerve) in both eyes; I have had vitrectomy surgery in both eyes; cataract surgery, with artificial lens implanted in both eyes; have an Avastin injection on a 2-month basis for macular edema in my right eye; an intramuscular injection (buttock!!) on a 1-month basis, which slowly releases Sandostatin for the macular edema; 2-hour Remicade infusion into my blood on a 2-month basis, to control glaucoma and iritis/uveitis; and on July 27, I am going to have 3-way surgery at Cambridge, MA on my right eye: 1. vitrectomy 2. re-position the Ahmed valve so it won’t interfere with 3. the cornea transplant, which is the reason for the surgery.
The right eye is totally blind, but the probabality of the transplant restoring at least a modicum of vision is about 30%.
The standard reply to anyone promoting religious/ID concepts in education should be, “Fine as soon as you and your ilk renounce all modern conveniences and medical advancements.” Including but not limited to clean water, waste treatment, transportation, communications..ect.
By the way, what in the hell is an agnostic theist catholic?
That’s like someone who’s never had a drink in thier life, being drunk, at an AA meeting.