Evolution V. Creationism in Kansas

HelloWell, anyway, let's get underway. Throughout a domain like the internet, I find all kinds of people to talk to. Are you a creationist, or do you accept the theory of evolution? What denomination/religion do you follow if you are a creationist? What do you think is the general opinion on this matter among your peers. On the recent decisions that the Kansas Board of Education has made, yay or nay? Some say that science is too general, and needs to be "expanded" to include more unorthodox ideas such as intellegent design. However, others counter that by saying that intellegent design is not a theory, merely an untestable hypothesis where it's only "evidence" is that which evolution does not explain. Also though, some people say exactly the same thing about evolution!I'm very curious to hear what the public has to say about this issue. Another thing that I want to talk about is the Kansas Board of Educations other policies on Sex Ed. I don't know if this qualifies for this forum, but it's related to Evolution v. Creationism in this way: The K-State Board of Ed. is considering also adapting a policy in which Sex Ed. would be a directly optional class, where kids have an option to "opt-in" rather than "opt-out." Here's the oninon: There have been hints that if they are successful with pushing this, they may try to make it so biology classrooms that do not discuss intellegent design would be open to the same policy. So, if you want to learn about evolution, you have to specify so, and let it go through the bureacracy. I personally think their ultimate goal is to remove evolution from public schools, but what do you think?This message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-09-2005 09:01 PM

To keep a topic moving along and make it possible for people to follow we like to keep the opening post (OP) pretty focussed.You might want to try joining in some existing threads first or if there is a topic that is not under discussion right now then you could edit this OP to make it more specific.You might pick up on some side issue made in another thread that you disagree with but would be too off topic if you asked about it in that thread. You could also pick some single issue that you are either most annoyed about or don't understand other veiws on.This topic, as is, can not be promoted.

Please understand, this is not meant to keep you from posing.We try to maintain somewhat organized threads. As admins, we try to work with posters to help them define the purpose and scope of threads.This attempt simply doesn't have much potential as it exists.I will leave this open so that you can work on it. What we like to see is some specific question to be discussed. Present your position is a summary paragraph, for example, since you started on Kansas and live there, you might want to discuss what the changes in Kansas might mean to high school students or to teachers.Look through the existing threads and join in discussions, or come back here and revise this one.If you revise this one, after you've finished, reply using the reply button on the right instead of the general reply button so I'll be notified to come back and look at it.Let's work together to see if we can get something promoted.

---

Wecome to EvCforum, wiseman45. And we really do welcome you, even if you are a little disappointed about your proposed new topics.From experience, we know that your topics would draw very few responses. The creationists who post here would probably decline to comment, so you would be preaching to the choir. Take a look at Help me understand Intelligent Design (part 2) and The utility of ID as examples. You would do better to wait until a creationist opens a new thread. In the meantime, post in some of our existing threads.If you want an example of recent creationist postings, take a look at Message 68 (post by Evopeach). Feel free to respond to that if you wish, but always respond with respect to the person even while pointing out problems in the argument.

Hey Admins if you're still not satisfied, I've hit a dead end. I see how there are people with forums already out there who agree with me. Unless you have further suggestions, I fold. Quit. Kapoot. See you in other forums.Wiseman45This message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-10-2005 11:01 AM

Much betterer but still needs a little work to tighten it up some.You can drop the apology in the first paragraph. That's ancient history and water under the bridge.The last two paragraphs are covered in our guidelines and as you'll find here, preaching out of place getts cut off fairly quickly. You might want to consider dropping those.The section below: has lots of potential for development. It might be possible to get a new view on discussions here out of that. For example, there happens to be a discussion among the various moderators here right now on the issue of whether we should have an area where people can discuss the social implications of science and legislative decisions regarding science. Is there some way you can refine the meat of your Original Post (OP) to create something even more directed than it stands now?How is your thread different from all the others on the Kansas or Dover decisions?Again, thanks for working with us and let's see what we can do.This message has been edited by AdminJar, 11-09-2005 03:41 PM

---

Hi, Wiseman...I see how you have given up on this one...which is OK...you can always discuss your viewpoint in other threads...so I'll close this one for now.