Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed - Science Under Attack
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 226 of 438 (500544)
02-27-2009 7:07 AM
Reply to: Message 224 by shalamabobbi
02-27-2009 5:33 AM


Re: wedge or wedgy?
Even before seeing Mod's post that included specific information about ICR's finances, it was obvious that ICR's claim to having a budget of only $650,000/year could not be accurate. The page you took the information from was written by Henry Morris, now deceased. That particular paragraph could only be true if written 20 or more years ago.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by shalamabobbi, posted 02-27-2009 5:33 AM shalamabobbi has not replied

shalamabobbi
Member (Idle past 2848 days)
Posts: 397
Joined: 01-10-2009


Message 227 of 438 (500550)
02-27-2009 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 225 by Modulous
02-27-2009 6:32 AM


Re: wedge or wedgy?
Looks like wedgy then..
The article pulls up as though it is current. The date for the article is listed as "accessed Feb 27, 2009" but in different print "This article was originally published in July, 1981."
The university in Dallas Texas shows an annual budget of $7 million with a faculty of 4 full time and a student body amounting to 50 approx. Date for this is Dec 16, 2007.
School: The institute runs its own graduate school that offers master’s of science education degrees. Its stated mission: to research, educate and communicate Truth involving the study and promotion of scientific creationism, Biblical creationism, and related fields.
How in the hell did they get accreditation with that mission statement?
So they're spitting out about 10 graduates per year..
Institute for Creation Research in Dallas wants to train future science teachers
ICR is Creation Research. Stein was looking for the Discovery Institute (I know, it is difficult to keep them straight sometimes)
yep the discovery institute was what I remembered from the documentary - located in Washington.
I'll have to rewatch it to see if they mentioned the budgets. I don't remember anything along those lines.
Looks like they had a budget of approx 4 million annual. Funded by Baptists who hoped they'd be able to disprove evolution. Guess some things can't be bought.
Think Tank.. bit of an oxymoron.
Edited by shalamabobbi, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Modulous, posted 02-27-2009 6:32 AM Modulous has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by JonF, posted 02-27-2009 2:14 PM shalamabobbi has replied

JonF
Member (Idle past 167 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 228 of 438 (500588)
02-27-2009 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by shalamabobbi
02-27-2009 8:06 AM


Re: wedge or wedgy?
How in the hell did they get accreditation …?
They didn't.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by shalamabobbi, posted 02-27-2009 8:06 AM shalamabobbi has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by shalamabobbi, posted 02-27-2009 3:48 PM JonF has not replied

shalamabobbi
Member (Idle past 2848 days)
Posts: 397
Joined: 01-10-2009


Message 229 of 438 (500591)
02-27-2009 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by JonF
02-27-2009 2:14 PM


Re: wedge or wedgy?
They didn't.
quote:
In 1988, California education officials tried to remove the institute’s authority to grant master’s of science degrees, arguing that the program didn’t pass academic muster. The institute sued the state, arguing that the decision violated its constitutional rights. The school received $225,000 in a 1992 settlement. By then, a new state panel was in charge of evaluating such private schools.
Sounds like they were given a green light for a number of years.
But they've been found out, the wedge plan discovered, ID discovered to be the regrouping of creation science. So how is there now any worry that they can still be successful in their efforts? Will they now recast ID again? 'Teach the controversy' is going to find adherents. But I'd wager the vast majority of them will be people in transition from a lack of knowledge about evolution to becoming aware of all the current evidence.
All that annual budget supposedly went into paying scientists to research creationism. What have they come up with? Polonium halos? Big whoop. I met one old lady, a neighbor, who found that one convincing, but again she was already in that camp of thought. What is really happening is that all the possible/apparent arguments against evolution are being taken up and disposed of one by one. They are in actuality proving it true by failing to be capable of proving it false. By fighting evolution they are advancing it's dissemination into the public mind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by JonF, posted 02-27-2009 2:14 PM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by anglagard, posted 02-27-2009 4:27 PM shalamabobbi has not replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 230 of 438 (500593)
02-27-2009 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by shalamabobbi
02-27-2009 3:48 PM


Re: wedge or wedgy?
shalamabobbi writes:
Sounds like they were given a green light for a number of years.
Not now.
From Institute for Creation Research - Wikipedia
quote:
Now that the ICR has relocated to Texas, the institute must either obtain Texas state approval or become accredited by a regional accrediting agency, in this case Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS).[27] The ICR has applied for a temporary state certification there which, if granted, would allow the institute to operate while it pursues accreditation through SACS.[28] In December 2007, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board received an advisory committee recommendation to allow the ICR to start offering online master’s degrees in science education. The Board originally planned to decide on the issue at their January 2008 meeting.[27] At the time it applied, ICR graduate school had approximately 30 to 50 students, most teachers at private Christian schools or homeschoolers, and four full-time faculty.[1][2][29]
After seeking the advice from an independent panel, the Chairman of the Texas Board requested information about the research conducted by the faculty, how an on-line program would expose students to the experimental side of science, and asked why "[t]heir curriculum doesn't line up very well with the curriculum available in conventional master of science programs."[30] Subsequently, the ICR asked the THECB to delay its decision until their next meeting, on April 24, 2008 to give them time to respond.[30] Inside Higher Ed reports that "lobbying by scientists against the institute, and by others in its favor is going strong."[31] The Dallas Morning News obtained some of the messages sent to the board and published a number of examples and summaries that illustrate just how intense the debate has become.[32] Following the recent response from the ICR to the Board, Steven Schafersman, of the Texas Citizens for Science, reported that the ICR sent out "prayer requests" and is currently arguing a creationist derived distinction of science in their application for approval.[33]
On April 23, 2008 education board's Academic Excellence and Research Committee unanimously voted against allowing the ICR to issue science degrees citing "the institute’s program is infused with creationism and runs counter to conventions of science that hold that claims of supernatural intervention are not testable and therefore lie outside the realm of science."[34] On the following day the full Board unanimously voted against allowing the ICR to issue science degrees. The decision was "based the recommendation on two considerations: 1) that ICR failed to demonstrate that the proposed degree program meets acceptable standards of science and science education; and 2) that the proposed degree is inconsistent with Coordinating Board rules which require the accurate labeling or designation of programs ... Since the proposed degree program inadequately covers key areas of science, it cannot be properly designated either as 'science' or 'science education.'"[35] The ICR is appealing the decision saying the Education Board is guilty of "viewpoint discrimination."[36]
And if SACS and THECB has anything to do with it, I doubt ever.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon
The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by shalamabobbi, posted 02-27-2009 3:48 PM shalamabobbi has not replied

shalamabobbi
Member (Idle past 2848 days)
Posts: 397
Joined: 01-10-2009


Message 231 of 438 (500617)
02-28-2009 3:45 AM
Reply to: Message 225 by Modulous
02-27-2009 6:32 AM


funding not mentioned in Expelled
Hi Mod,
Just finished re-watching the documentary. When Stein is interviewing Bruce Chapman from the Discovery Institute he asks "when you go out and raise funds do you tell people, oh by the way we're going to get Jesus back into the classroom?". Then follows the denial that ID is a religious issue.
The only other place where funding is mentioned follows shortly thereafter when interviewing Paul Nelson at Boila University with ties to the Discovery Institute. Stein asks him if he has ever gotten any money from Jerry Fawell or Pat Robertson with a little laughter, the point again being that ID is not a religious issue (per the documentary).
The documentary focuses most of its sentiment on the concept of academic freedom, persecution of dissenting professors from Darwinism, and ending with how Darwinism was the basis of Hitler's mistakes and is still behind planned parenthood keeping undesirable low lifes from breeding within society by promoting abortions.
The funding would not be considered an issue in American culture because of freedom of religion. No one would view that information in a negative light. There is no regulation of how people choose to throw away their money. The fact that the funding came/comes from Baptists would however disclose the fallacy that ID doesn't involve religion.
What have they accomplished though with all the funds? Polonium halo studies and the like. Give them 10 times the funds and they would squander it all down the hole without much threat of overthrowing evolution in the classroom.
One unfortunate result of Stein's interview with Dawkins is to polarize the audience by creating a false dichotomy between ToE and religion. This was likely intentional to focus the religious crowd to fight for ID.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Modulous, posted 02-27-2009 6:32 AM Modulous has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by Theodoric, posted 02-28-2009 9:59 AM shalamabobbi has not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 232 of 438 (500626)
02-28-2009 9:59 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by shalamabobbi
02-28-2009 3:45 AM


Re: funding not mentioned in Expelled
Around here it isn't the Baptists as much as the Missouri Synod Lutherans. These are not like your classic easy going Garrison Keillor, Lake Woebegon lutherans. These Lutherans are bible literalists and strongly proclaim inerrancy.
The Bible is God's inerrant and infallible Word, in which He reveals His Law and His Gospel of salvation in Jesus Christ. It is the sole rule and norm for Christian doctrine.
Missouri Synod Web Site

This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by shalamabobbi, posted 02-28-2009 3:45 AM shalamabobbi has not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 233 of 438 (501254)
03-05-2009 12:19 PM


Pastor of church that sponsored movie responds
Unfortunately the local newspaper does not archive letters so this will disappear from their site next week.
Link
Here are some choice comments from the letter. I am posting the letter here also, so that there is some sort of permanent digital record.
It is worth noting that atheism is a type of religion totally dependent upon evolution as an undergirding doctrine. Christianity is not nearly as dependent upon ID or creation, in the sense that many Christians believe that evolution was God’s way of creating (theistic evolution). That is not my belief, and there are serious problems with that position, in my view, but the point is that there are Christian evolutionists, but there is not one atheistic creationist in existence! This would explain why atheists are fighting so hard to be rid of ID.
It is said the COURTS have decided that ID is not science. That is true. But the Supreme Court also ruled 152 years ago in favor of slavery (Dred Scott Decision). Just because the court says it doesn’t make it right!
Regarding Nazism and evolution, watch the movie and judge for yourself. Darwinism was not sufficient for the holocaust, says Berlinski, but it was necessary. Certainly Darwinism contributed to an earlier holocaust horror against Australian aborigines in the early 20th century (not mentioned in the movie).
Unfortunately, I have been requested by my wife not to respond. In a small town a professional cannot afford to alienate any part of the population.

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by Percy, posted 03-05-2009 2:53 PM Theodoric has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 234 of 438 (501299)
03-05-2009 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by Theodoric
03-05-2009 12:19 PM


Re: Pastor of church that sponsored movie responds
I wonder how many people here would be willing to step up to the plate to write one letter to your local newspaper, spaced out at the rate of one per week to keep things going.
I'll write one.
Whoever else is willing to write a letter, post a note here and I'll put together a schedule.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by Theodoric, posted 03-05-2009 12:19 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 235 by Theodoric, posted 03-05-2009 3:06 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 235 of 438 (501304)
03-05-2009 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by Percy
03-05-2009 2:53 PM


Letter info
Here is link to the letters page. They do require a hard copy(no emails)and it has to be signed and a phone # so they can verify. It will be interesting to see if and what letters they publish.
Also if you do send a letter can you either leave a comment here or email me a copy. bfuente@gmail.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Percy, posted 03-05-2009 2:53 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

crawler30
Junior Member (Idle past 4776 days)
Posts: 15
From: Florida
Joined: 07-23-2009


Message 236 of 438 (516268)
07-24-2009 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Modulous
12-27-2007 4:45 AM


Re: Excerpts from a review
I am not about to defend the film as far as its arguements because I have not seen it but I thought I would point out that it is completely incorrect to state that Richard M. Sternberg did not suffer ill effects from publishing the article in question. This is a completely misguided attempt at debunking the entire film because it does not agree with your beliefs. If you want more info. on Sternberg and what happened to him because of his beliefs you only need to google it. There is plenty of information available on the subject. BTW there is an article on wikipedia that is pretty short but explains the issue. Sternberg peer review controversy - Wikipedia
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Fixed link by making "s" of "sternberg" upper-case (make "r" of "Richard" upper-case while I was at it. The Wiki error page said "Titles on Wikipedia are case sensitive except for the first character; please check alternate capitalizations and consider adding a redirect here to the correct title."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Modulous, posted 12-27-2007 4:45 AM Modulous has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 237 by Coyote, posted 07-24-2009 12:14 PM crawler30 has replied
 Message 238 by Percy, posted 07-24-2009 12:17 PM crawler30 has replied

Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 237 of 438 (516271)
07-24-2009 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 236 by crawler30
07-24-2009 11:49 AM


Re: Excerpts from a review
Sternberg didn't get half the kicking around he deserved.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by crawler30, posted 07-24-2009 11:49 AM crawler30 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by crawler30, posted 07-24-2009 12:52 PM Coyote has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 238 of 438 (516272)
07-24-2009 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 236 by crawler30
07-24-2009 11:49 AM


Re: Excerpts from a review
crawler30 writes:
...it is completely incorrect to state that Richard M. Sternberg did not suffer ill effects from publishing the article in question.
What were those ill effects?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by crawler30, posted 07-24-2009 11:49 AM crawler30 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 239 by crawler30, posted 07-24-2009 12:49 PM Percy has replied

crawler30
Junior Member (Idle past 4776 days)
Posts: 15
From: Florida
Joined: 07-23-2009


Message 239 of 438 (516281)
07-24-2009 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by Percy
07-24-2009 12:17 PM


Re: Excerpts from a review
did you try to read up on it? The article says he was discriminated against. There is also another article at http://www.evolutionnews.org/...use_government_reformsu.html which indicates that the accusation of discrimination was found to be credible by the Office of Special Council but that the OSC did not have jurisdiction to persecute the offense. Wheather or not you agree with the mans arguments everyone deserves the right to believe and say as they please without the fear of reprisal against them for it. Freedom of speach is a right we all enjoy and it really is not fair to be treated unfairly (especially at work) because of your beliefs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by Percy, posted 07-24-2009 12:17 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by PaulK, posted 07-24-2009 1:36 PM crawler30 has not replied
 Message 242 by Percy, posted 07-24-2009 4:13 PM crawler30 has not replied
 Message 245 by subbie, posted 07-24-2009 4:41 PM crawler30 has not replied
 Message 246 by AZPaul3, posted 07-24-2009 6:11 PM crawler30 has not replied

crawler30
Junior Member (Idle past 4776 days)
Posts: 15
From: Florida
Joined: 07-23-2009


Message 240 of 438 (516283)
07-24-2009 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 237 by Coyote
07-24-2009 12:14 PM


Re: Excerpts from a review
your own personal beliefs s being different from others does not give you the right to "kick" people around. That is called discrimination, and is wrong no matter how you try to justify it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by Coyote, posted 07-24-2009 12:14 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Rahvin, posted 07-24-2009 4:40 PM crawler30 has not replied
 Message 247 by Coyote, posted 07-25-2009 1:02 AM crawler30 has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024