| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 05/18/2005 : 2:06:56 PM
In my accounting class, I was poking around at some news, and came across this one article that, to say the least, pissed me the fuck off.
http://www.local10.com/education/4490802/detail.html
----
Conservatives Seek Redefinition Of Science In Kansas Schools
POSTED: 2:42 pm EDT May 15, 2005
UPDATED: 3:46 pm EDT May 15, 2005
TOPEKA, Kan. -- The Kansas school board's hearings on evolution weren't limited to how the theory should be taught in public schools. The board is considering redefining science itself.
Advocates of "intelligent design" are pushing the board to reject a definition limiting science to natural explanations for what's observed in the world.
Instead, they want to define it as "a systematic method of continuing investigation," without specifying what kind of answer is being sought. The definition would appear in the introduction to the state's science standards.
The proposed definition has outraged many scientists, who are frustrated that students could be discussing supernatural explanations for natural phenomena in their science classes.
"It's a completely unscientific way of looking at the world," said Keith Miller, a Kansas State University geologist.
The conservative state Board of Education plans to consider the proposed changes by August. It is expected to approve at least part of a proposal from advocates of intelligent design, which holds that the natural world is so complex and well-ordered that an intelligent cause is the best way to explain it.
State and national science groups boycotted last week's public hearings, claiming they were rigged against evolution.
Stephen Meyer, a senior fellow at the Seattle-based Discovery Institute, which supports intelligent design, said changing the schools' definition of science would avoid freezing out questions about how life arose and developed on Earth.
The current definition is "not innocuous," Meyer said. "It's not neutral. It's actually taking sides."
Last year, the board asked a committee of educators to draft recommendations for updating the standards, then accepted two rival proposals.
One, backed by a majority of those educators, continues an evolution-friendly tone from the current standards. Those standards would define science as "a human activity of systematically seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us." That's close to the current definition.
The other proposal is backed by intelligent design advocates and is similar to language in Ohio's standards. It defines science as "a systematic method of continuing investigation" using observation, experiment, measurement, theory building, testing of ideas and logical argument to lead to better explanations of natural phenomena.
The Kansas board deleted most references to evolution from the science standards in 1999, but elections the next year resulted in a less conservative board, which led to the current, evolution-friendly standards. Conservatives recaptured the board's majority in 2004.
Jonathan Wells, a Discovery Institute senior fellow, said the dispute won't be settled in public hearings like the ones in Kansas.
"I think it will be resolved in the scientific community," he said. "I think (intelligent design), in 10 years, will be a very respectable science program."
Evolution defenders scoff at the notion.
"In order to live in this science-dominated world, you have to be able to discriminate between science and non-science," said Alan Leshner of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. "They want to rewrite the rules of science."
----
As if this education system weren't fucked up enough. This has to be the tallest, fattest, heaviest, smelliest sack of diplomatic bullshit i have ever seen. Nothing pisses me off more than a bunch of close-minded, super-Christian soccer-moms from some small town bitching about how teacher's tell their children that the reality observed by others differs from their own preference in beliefs. FUCK THEM! The education system isn't supposed to give watered down, over-worded shit to our children, its supposed to teach and let the KIDS decide their beliefs. Whether or not they learn what other bleiefs are has nothing to do with if they believe them. The world is full of other ideas, and if you can't cope with the fact that you've got to LEARN, HEAR, and EXPLORE new ideas, then go dig a hole for yourself and die. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| pcbTIM |
Posted - 05/26/2005 : 10:25:04 PM
Scientists don't need to be excellent communicators because their work speaks for them. It's just stupid people who get drawn in by a silk tongue. I can't believe that there is going to be a "museum" about the earth based on the bible. I guess scientific data and experimentation have no importance anymore. All you need a lot of money and any idea you can think of. |
| therippa |
Posted - 05/26/2005 : 5:08:42 PM
quote:
Originally posted by guitarisPIMP
"The Lord gave me a fire in my bones," Ham says. "The Lord has put this burden in my heart: 'You've got to get this information out.'"
See people, this is why you shouldn't listen to those voices in your head.
A really good discussion about Intelligent Design is at kuro5hin - http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/4/27/03541/2520
Evolution might just be a theory, but so is gravity. To say the earth is only 6,000 years old is just plain retarded.
|
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 05/26/2005 : 1:06:57 PM
The museum pretty much makes sense as yet another step back into the dark ages. This country seems to be heading that way. |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 05/26/2005 : 07:47:27 AM
zachmo, i find alot of those ideas interesting, and many of them coinciding with my own. However incoherent they may seem to you, it's always good to try and get your ideas out. Guys like these fundamentalists don't seem to have a problem with it. |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 05/26/2005 : 07:42:49 AM
http://kevxml2a.infospace.com/info.ncbuy/apnws/story.htm?kcfg=apart&sin=D8A8BA880&qcat=science&ran=32313&passqi=0&feed=ap&more=1
another pile of bullshit
___
05/22/2005 11:36:33 EST Creation Museum Sparks Evolution Debate
Ken Ham has spent 11 years working on a museum that poses the big question - when and how did life begin? Ham hopes to soon offer an answer to that question in his still-unfinished Creation Museum in northern Kentucky.
The $25 million monument to creationism offers Ham's view that God created the world in six, 24-hour days on a planet just 6,000 years old. The largest museum of its kind in the world, it hopes to draw 600,000 people from the Midwest and beyond in its first year.
Ham, 53, isn't bothered that his literal interpretation of the Bible runs counter to accepted scientific theory, which says Earth and its life forms evolved over billions of years.
Ham said the museum is a way of reaching more people along with the Answers in Genesis Web site, which claims to get 10 million page views per month and his "Answers ... with Ken Ham" radio show, carried by more than 725 stations worldwide.
"People will get saved here," Ham said of the museum. "It's going to fire people up. If nothing else, it's going to get them to question their own position of what they believe."
Ham is ready for a fight over his beliefs - based on a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis, the first book of the Old Testament.
"It's a foundational battle," said Ham, a native of Australia who still speaks with an accent. "You've got to get people believing the right history - and believing that you can trust the Bible."
Among Ham's beliefs are that the Earth is about 6,000 years old, a figure arrived at by tracing the biblical genealogies, and not 4.5 billion years, as mainstream scientists say; the Grand Canyon was formed not by erosion over millions of years, but by floodwaters in a matter of days or weeks and that dinosaurs and man once coexisted, and dozens of the creatures - including Tyrannosaurus Rex - were passengers on the ark built by Noah, who was a real man, not a myth.
Although the Creation Museum's full opening is still two years away, already a buzz is building.
"When that museum is finished, it's going to be Cincinnati's No. 1 tourist attraction," says the Rev. Jerry Falwell, nationally known Baptist evangelist and chancellor of Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va. "It's going to be a mini-Disney World."
Respected groups such as the National Science Board, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the National Science Teachers Association strongly support the theory of evolution. John Marburger, the Bush administration's science adviser, has said, "Evolution is a cornerstone of modern biology."
Many mainstream scientists worry that creationist theology masquerading as science will have an adverse effect on the public's science literacy.
"It's a giant step backward in science education," says Carolyn Chambers, chair of the biology department at Xavier University, which is operated by the Jesuit order of the Catholic church.
Glenn Storrs, curator of vertebrate paleontology for the Cincinnati Museum Center, leads dinosaur excavations in Montana each summer. He said the theory of dinosaurs and man coexisting is a "non-issue."
"And so, I believe, is the age of the Earth," Storrs said. "It's very clear the Earth is much older than 6,000 years."
The Rev. Mendle Adams, pastor of St. Peter's United Church of Christ in Pleasant Ridge, takes issue with Ham's views - and the man himself.
"He takes extraordinary liberties with Scripture and theology to prove his point," Adams said. "The bottom line is, he is anti-gay, and he uses that card all the time."
Ham says homosexual behavior is a sin. But he adds that he's careful to condemn the behavior, not the person.
Even detractors concede that Ham has appeal.
Ian Plimer, chair of geology at the University of Melbourne, became aware of Ham in the late 1980s, when Ham's creationist ministry in Australia was just a few years old.
"He is promoting the religion and science of 350 years ago," says Plimer. "He's a far better communicator than most mainstream scientists."
Despite his communication skills, Ham admits he doesn't always make a good first impression. But, that doesn't stop him from trying to spread his beliefs.
"He'd be speaking 20 hours a day if his body would let him," said Mike Zovath, vice president of museum operations.
Ham's wife of 32 years agrees. "He finds it difficult talking about things apart from the ministry," Mally Ham says. "He doesn't shut off."
Ham said he has no choice but to speak out about what he believes.
"The Lord gave me a fire in my bones," Ham says. "The Lord has put this burden in my heart: 'You've got to get this information out.'"
___
I wanna pipe bomb this place. |
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 05/26/2005 : 12:02:45 AM
I've heard the intelligent design thing before with the there's no way all these intricacies formed together and all that. It's intruiging to think about, but the problem is I believe the way in which you look at it as that we are the completed project of all this evoloution of both physical evoloution and the biological evoloution. The problem I think lies in our fundamental misunderstanding of the universe. String theory for example has provided humans with a profound view of what the universe is and even though it still remains unproven it has helped out in many other areas of physics. What I believe this offers towards a different view of what life is. As even the strings have elaborate structures.
I'll try to explain my views on what life is or at best hint at it. One of the first things that profoundly changed my views on life was something Regi Wooten said. "Nature is the Mother of Man,
Music is the Mother of Nature" I think it's pretty easy to see how this lines up with string theory of course. Then Shenker of course who wrote the monumental Harmony, said that these tones or vibrational frequencies should be viewed as living creatures. It sounds odd at first, but I'm coming to understand it more everday. With those things in mind I would like to remind people of the term universal expression, and let people know that I believe that the universe is an expression. If string theory is proven correct then the universe or perhaps more closely the omniverse is based on music. What I think is that if this is true I believe it speaks volumes to support the universal expression idea and that all of the universe is and expression of life.
When termed this way it doesn't seem as amazing to me or like things were organized so proficiently that only a genious creator could have done it. What isn't life then when we view things like this? Even the atoms are alive down to the strings themselves. We are but a form of an expression. I guess what I'm coming down to is that I don't believe in a divine creator but more reason that we are all the divine creator. Like another thing Regi said "the Creator presented Itself in this dimension as Music." Now I guess it comes down on how you view creator. What is manifested to us is music. Everything we sense from light to well everything comes down to vibrational frequency. In which case I would say that we are all part of the music of the universe and as such why as living things could we not have evolved just like we evolve and change everyday? I mean evoloution on a grander scale then monkey to humans too. I also mean everything that took place in the big bang like creation of dimensions and creation of the elements and so forth.
It's hard to explain my thoughts in words when I get this deep into it. I just don't like the idea of saying well there is no way of us evolving because the chances are to slim. Why? If life is understood correctly I believe it will be shown that the so called complexities will be viewed as nothing extrodinary. I don't think it makes any sense to say we were created without offering an explanation though of how the creator came to be. I don't know though just some of my thoughts, but they are kinda jumbled.
|
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 05/25/2005 : 8:32:45 PM
Actually there are plenty of very scientific people who believe in divine intervention creating life. They compare it to be the equivalent of a hurricane twisting the shrapnel in a junkyard into a Boeing 777. The chances of fitting the pieces together are so unbelievably slim. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 05/25/2005 : 5:55:40 PM
i've heard worse things about your great great grandaddy. |
| Muskrat |
Posted - 05/25/2005 : 5:52:23 PM
I agree Zach, there is no scientific way of presenting Creationism as a theory. But I personally don't think the scientific evolutionist's theory works. Some might think I'm crazy for thinking an intelligent Creator formed everything, and I don't blame them: I think they're crazy for thinking my great-great-grandaddy was a slug. |
| Jiyra |
Posted - 05/25/2005 : 3:17:17 PM
this is why I think we should send all the stupid people to Utah, and then flood the entire state. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 05/25/2005 : 11:55:23 AM
banning dodgeball in schools. total bullshit. too aggressive? yeah, obviously kids agression comes from a game of dodgeball and not, you know, bad teachers, bad peers and bad parents. it's gotta be dodgeball and videogames. otherwise they'd have to blame themselves, and god for-fucking-bid that. |
| therippa |
Posted - 05/25/2005 : 01:36:57 AM
 |
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 05/24/2005 : 10:54:39 PM
I actually shouldn't have said laws as it's not so much a breaking of those "laws of science" as it is a denial of so many features of evoloution. I mean I've heard some outrageous stuff from creationists, and one kid at school even tried to tell me carbon dating is completely inaccurate and all this stuff, but I just don't think that anyone can really make a scientific case for creationism. I haven't seen one that makes any sense to me. |
| Muskrat |
Posted - 05/24/2005 : 10:33:30 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Zachmozach
In response though, I love how creationists ignore all other laws, but feel free to explain to everyone how we have overlooked the second law of thermodynamics.
lol, I expected no less... what laws tho, so I can look 'em up? |
| pcbTIM |
Posted - 05/24/2005 : 10:27:19 PM
It's times like this where I wonder what state the world will be in when these kids become adults. How will they be able to function in the real world when they have been sheltered from every bad thing possible (e.g. banning dodge ball in schools) and have been spoon-fed other people's ideas their entire lives. |
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 05/24/2005 : 10:21:28 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Muskrat
I love how evolutionists seem to ignore the second law of thermodynamics. Not to start a debate or anything.
This isn't the first time the second law of thermodynamics has been overlooked. Steven Hawkings also went against it in his work on black holes, but string theory has brought about new answers to those questions.
In response though, I love how creationists ignore all other laws, but feel free to explain to everyone how we have overlooked the second law of thermodynamics. |
| Muskrat |
Posted - 05/24/2005 : 10:04:56 PM
I love how evolutionists seem to ignore the second law of thermodynamics. Not to start a debate or anything. |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 05/23/2005 : 9:03:14 PM
AHHAH I love the farside. Gary Larson is an absolute genius at mocking the everyday world. |
| therippa |
Posted - 05/23/2005 : 6:06:45 PM
 |
| dan p. |
Posted - 05/23/2005 : 5:18:49 PM
well the lightning bolt thing is more scientific, regardless of whether it was planned or random. |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 05/23/2005 : 2:35:58 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dan p.
the problem with creationism in science class is that it isn't really science. it belongs in that social studies class that discusses religion. it should be mentioned in school in that context, but not really in science class.
I disagree, I believe it could be discussed in either class, depending on what theories you're talking about. If you're talking about "let there be light" and all that jazz, then social studies would be most appropriate, but if you're talking about a lightning bolt hitting a pile of primordial ooze and turning it into Skippy the Dog, then science class it is. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 05/23/2005 : 10:23:52 AM
yeah, i mean, group prayer in school is one thing. i can see that being arguable. you know, having the whole class do prayers isn't something i'm that thrilled with because that's not the function of school, all other church/state things aside. the function of school, ideally anyway, is to teach. but if a kid wants to say a prayer or something by himself at lunch, then i say pray away there, guy. he's not hurting anyone. many say that pot should be legal because smoking it isn't hurting anyone else. well neither is that kid saying a prayer to himself. as long as it's not during class. if it's at lunch, or in the hall or something, fine. who fucking cares really, if a kids feels like saying grace for himself. i know i don't. it's not all that important.
islam should be studied, in a historical and cultural context in a social studies class like world history because, you know, it's there. same with judism and christianity. those are, i believe, the 3 most practiced religions. i guess you can throw hinduism and buddhism in there, too. those are important. about the jihad fighting with dice, i'm glad to here they're doing that. dungeons and dragons is school-worthy. and i could kick any of those kids' asses. i roll 20s, bitch.
the problem with creationism in science class is that it isn't really science. it belongs in that social studies class that discusses religion. it should be mentioned in school in that context, but not really in science class. |
| Muskrat |
Posted - 05/23/2005 : 12:09:42 AM
First of all I disagree with public schooling in general but if the teachers are presenting evolution as unarguable truth, then that's forcing someone's belief onto someone else.
The kind of stuff that makes ME sick is not being allowed to pray aloud in Jesus' name, even one kid, for himself, at freakin' lunch, without being reprimanded, but there are schools, I think in CA (can't find the article now, figures) that, after 9/11, started special required studies on Islam for elementary and middle school kids, in which children were given their "Muslim name" and made prayer mats and played out mock "jihads" with dice. Separation of church and state, my big white behind.
Man I wish I could find that article, but anyway trust me, I'm not making any of that up. |
| Zachmozach |
Posted - 05/18/2005 : 9:59:21 PM
Ya it's just one more step this country is taking in the wrong direction. I think I'll have to take up German again so I can go live in a secular state. Like dan said it's not science and that's all there is to it.
Chomksy has warned several times to watch out for the religous extremists as they will be more dangerous than hitler, but we seem to continue to move in that direction. |
| guitarisPIMP |
Posted - 05/18/2005 : 8:48:48 PM
I don't understand how people feel that this kind of reform is justifiable.
I am signed up to take a world religions class for my senior year come next fall. There is no fundamental difference, at least there shouldn't be, between the teaching of creationism through religious myths around the world and the teaching of creationism through evolution. But, you know, evolution disagrees with CHRISTIANITY! Shit, guys, we better back off that one, don't want to teach kids what the fundamentalists disagree with. Nevermind Buddhism, the kids won't buy into that.
The only way a student could come out of a science class after learning about evolution and denounce his religion is from two highly probable causes: the teacher presented the information in a manner that implies truth over religion rather than mere theory or concepts, or the student simply decided for himself that he believes in evolution rather than his religion's creation ideas.
What should be done, if anything, is to simply reinforce the fact that teacher's aren't there to teach truth, merely present concepts, and measure a student's ability to absorb and grasp everything. |
| Mechman293 |
Posted - 05/18/2005 : 5:02:10 PM
In the end it comes down to "School sucks"
classes suck, hanging out with ya friends rocks,
|
| Jiyra |
Posted - 05/18/2005 : 4:56:16 PM
quote:
Originally posted by guitarisPIMP
The world is full of other ideas, and if you can't cope with the fact that you've got to LEARN, HEAR, and EXPLORE new ideas, then go dig a hole for yourself and die.
woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!
why in the world is this happening? I thought we had that great "separation of church and state thing"? I guess it's not so great, otherwise there are a whole slew of people in Kansas who are violating a whole bunch of peoples rights. |
| PJK |
Posted - 05/18/2005 : 4:45:57 PM
Since we are bashing schools I thought I would throw this in as it is one of my PET PEEVES!!! The Damned NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT
No Child Left Behind Act, New Program
In response to President Bush's Federal "No Child Left Behind" act, (NCLB), it is proposed that students will have to pass a test to be promoted to the next grade level. The new test will be called the Federal Arithmetic and Reading Test (FART)
All Students who cannot pass a FART in the second grade will be retested in grades 3,4,and 5 until they are capable of passing a FART with a score of 80%. If a student does not successfully FART by grade 5, that student shall be placed in a separate English program known as the Special Mastery Elective for Learning Language (SMELL)
If, with this increased SMELL program, the students cannot pass the required FART test, he or she can still graduate to Middle School by taking another one semester course in Comprehensive Reading and Arithmetic Preparation (CRAP)
If, by the age of fourteen, the student cannot FART, SMELL, or CRAP, he or she can earn promotion in an intensive one week seminar known as the Preparatory Reading for Unprepared Nationally Exempted Students (PRUNES)
It is the opinion of the Department of Instruction for Public Schools (DIPS) that an intensive week of PRUNES will enable any student to FART, SMELL, or CRAP.
This revised provision of the student component of the House Bill 101 should help "clear the air" as part of the "No School Left Standing" Act. |
| dan p. |
Posted - 05/18/2005 : 2:55:49 PM
intellegent designer theory isn't science. bam. |
| Robin |
Posted - 05/18/2005 : 2:27:34 PM
I actually heard about this a few months ago. Home school your kids!!! I feel the world getting narrower all the TIMe. Peace, Robin |
|
|
