Kansas Repeals Evolution Ruling

(CBS/AP)  The Kansas state Board of Education on Tuesday repealed science guidelines questioning evolution that had made the state an object of ridicule.

The new guidelines reflect mainstream scientific views of evolution and represent a political defeat for advocates of "intelligent design," who had helped write the standards that are being jettisoned. The intelligent design concept holds that life is so complex that it must have been created by a higher authority.

The board removed language suggesting that key evolutionary concepts are controversial and being challenged by new research, and approved a new definition of science that limits it to the search for natural explanations of what's observed in the universe, reports CBS Radio affiliate WIBW in Topeka. The new guidelines are the fifth set of science standards for Kansas public schools in eight years.

Also approved was a new definition of science, specifically limiting it to the search for natural explanations of what is observed in the universe.

"Those standards represent mainstream scientific consensus about both what science is and what evolution is," said Jack Krebs, a math and technology teacher who helped write the new guidelines. He is also president of Kansas Citizens for Science.

The state uses its standards to develop tests that measure how well students are learning science. Although decisions about what is taught in classrooms remain with 296 local school boards, both sides in the evolution dispute say the standards will influence teachers as they try to ensure that their students test well.

John Calvert, a retired attorney who helped found the Intelligent Design Network, said under the new standards, "students will be fed an answer which may be right or wrong" about questions like the origin of life.

"Who does that model put first?" he said. "The student, or those supplying the preordained 'natural explanation'?"

There have been debates or legal battles in several other states over evolution and the intelligent design argument, but none has inspired comedians' jokes or parodies like Kansas' ongoing battle has.

Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" had a four-part "Evolution Schmevolution" series in 2005, and hearings that year drew journalists from Canada, France, Britain and Japan.

[rational_1]

"This is even better! Now we aren't just discussing whether the belief in god is right or wrong... we have to discuss which god!!! Not only we have no proof that a god exists at all, but we have to squabble about who's got the right one... Does this tell you anything about the evils of religion? Can you see 2 atheists fighting over who's got it more right than the other? "

No, there's only one God - Science is God! I worship at the mighty laboratory bench from whence came formaldehyde. Being a priest of science I am, consequently, a master of aldehydes.

"LMAO" Me too!!

[sy2502]

This is even better! Now we aren't just discussing whether the belief in god is right or wrong... we have to discuss which god!!! Not only we have no proof that a god exists at all, but we have to squabble about who's got the right one... Does this tell you anything about the evils of religion? Can you see 2 atheists fighting over who's got it more right than the other? LMAO

[rational_1]

Here's you problem my friend. You think this is all about the "church". Well I'm here to tell you that being a Christian is NOT about the church, it's about accepting Jesus Christ as your personal savior and following His word, the Holy Bible. John 1:1 says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word WAS God."

And here's your problem - and it's actually everyone's problem as a result. Everyone interprets things a little differently. So, the Protestants think the Catholics are going to hell, the Sunni and Shia would cheerfully slit each other's throats, a lot of people would love to see Israel vaporized, and why? Ultimately, largely because of how they interpret their Holy Words. So don't tell me to read the Bible and form my own religion of one. How I, you, or anyone else, will interpret the Bible will vary. You may not like some of my interpretations, and why would you necessarily be right?

[rational_1]

"THERE IS NOTHING ABOUT EVOLUTION IN THE BIBLE.

STOP TWISTING GOD'S WORD!"

I'm not. As I wrote previously I certainly don't have a problem with teaching high school kids creationism, but and this is a big BUT, not in a science classroom, simply because the Bible (whatever Bible) is not a scientific document.

[rational_1]

"Read the book of Genesis, the BIBLE. Stop relying on the Roman Catholic Church and other "denominations" out there who are luring people away from God's word. The TRUTH is in the Bible..."

Oh, okay given a choice between listening to the head of a religious order that's 2000 years old and traces it's origin to Christ or listening to you, you really think I'd go with the latter? I'm not religious and don't follow Catholicism, but if I did I think I'd go with a well-established church rather than one started by a guy in backwoods Arkansas.


"It doesn't say ANYTHING about us "evolving" from apes in the Bible. What it does say is GOD CREATED US, from the DUST OF THE GROUND, and then He breathed into man's nostrils the "breath of life".

Of course it doesn't - because it's allegorical!!! It doesn't say anything about gravitation or thermodynamics either, so you questioning those as well?

[rational_1]

"Read the book of Genesis, the BIBLE. Stop relying on the Roman Catholic Church and other "denominations" out there who are luring people away from God's word. The TRUTH is in the Bible, and if you think there's no contradictions than you seriously aren't reading the book of Genesis very clearly."

Which Bible? The Hebrew Bible? The King James? New American Bible? New Revised Standard Version (why is someone revising the word of God?), The Western text-type, Alexandrian text-type or Byzantine text-type? Eastern Orthodox? Mormon? If the TRUTH is in the Bible, maybe you can tell me exactly which Bible?

Also, unless you can read the original in Hebrew or Aramaic, aren't you a bit trusting in the translation to English? Maybe Satan was affecting the minds of the translators and you're not really reading the intended words of God. Better bone up on your Aramaic.

[rational_1]

"We hold these truths to be CELL-EVIDENT, that all APES are created equal, that they are endowed by their OWN PIECE OF POND SCUM with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are MUTATION, Liberty and the pursuit of LIES."

Come on - you can do better than this. This is silly... no, it's downright stupid. There is no contradiction in believing that humans evolved from an ape-like ancestor and also believing in God. The Roman Catholic Church, a real church, not a wackjob evangelical one whose members handle rattlesnakes, has come to terms with evolution (probably still embarrassed over the whole Galileo thing). They reconcile the facts of evolution with their belief that God played a guiding role. Fine, if that works for them. My point is that 4004 BC biblical literalism is not the only path. There are lots of non-atheists (including evolutionary biologists) who let the rational parts of their brains actually help them in deciding things, rather than blindly adhering to the Bible.

[rational_1]

So, suppose I change my mind and decide that, yes, creationism should be taught to high school science students? In the interests of fairness I think that we shouldn't give any precedence to the Judeo-Christian theory; all creation theories should be given equal time. This could be tough. Look at the following web site to give you an idea of why this could prove problematic:

http://www.crystalinks.com/creationcountries.html

Hmmm, so many creation stories (18 North American!!), so little time. Well, if we're already going to short the kiddies on biology, we might as well also cut back on math, physics and chemistry to make sure we have enough time for creationism.

The only good thing about this plan is that many high school students are so inarticulate we don't ever have to worry about them passing on any of this 'knowledge' to anyone else.

[rational_1]

"interests of uniting tribes. Yahweh certainly wasnt a compassionate god at all, he believed in sacrifice like every other primitive deity, the notion of a loving, caring patriarchal god comes from the New Testament. "


Well, now it makes sense. The creationists are willing to sacrifice the futures of our high school students so they'll be scientific illiterates unable to compete with technologically and scientifically savvy Indians and Asians. Well that's my theory and I have no evidence in support of it, but I'll die before changing my mind and will refuse to listen to any rational argument. Sound familiar?

[rf35]

Sorry, I forgot to specify this post is directed primarily at singinrick.