Kansas ... AGAIN!

MSN | Outlook, Office, Skype, Bing, Breaking News, and Latest Videos Barely has the case in Dover been completed (except for the final decision) and we have another one ... Kind of says it all doesn't it? Can't play within the rules, change the rules?This is rather blatant admission that ID is NOT science if they have to change the definition to make it fit.Sheesh.

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

We got a rid of a lot of radioactive waste the same way. Why, give me a dictionary to stand on, and I could move the world!

{edited}This message has been edited by Lam, 11-09-2005 01:40 AM

Lam, that strikes me as being troll-like behaviour, something we can and should be doing without.It's a bare link, which is a forum rule 5 violation. It also has nothing to do with discussing the topic, which is a forum rule 2 violation. In all, it might also a forum rule 10 violation.I won't, but I suggest you delete the content of your message.Don't reply to this message in this topic. If you must reply, pick the appropriate topic of the links below.Adminnemooseus The Forum Guidelines PageThis message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 11-09-2005 12:21 AM

---

I am truly saddened by this step back for humanity, I still do not, and maybe well never understand the reasons behind allowing this to happen.
I feel if anything it will open doors to allow other states to put forth junk science as something equal to evolution - that truly scares me I'm going to start writing someone to reverse this travesty

However, you might get a bit of hope from the other news from today...the Dover school board was ousted and ID will be removed from the curriculum.Page Unavailable - ABC News

Are we witnessing an attempt to teach perhaps Kant's notion of an "architectonic" of the sciences?Pierce had thought to include more than science in Science.
Page not found | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

quote:

---

The sheer number of sciences involved in Peirce's classification, then, meant that he needed to sub-divide them further. The basis of Peirce's sub-divisions is not altogether clear or straightforward, but he seems to count Philosophy as a "formal science of discovery." What Peirce means by this is that Philosophy is concerned with discovering the formal or necessary conditions for the objects with which it concerns itself. Whether this is an accurate classification of philosophy is hard to say, but the idea is that philosophy shares some formal (i.e. quest for necessary conditions) concerns with mathematics and shares a concern for discovering knowledge with the empirical or physical sciences, like chemistry or physics; hence philosophy is a "formal science of discovery."

---

Pehaps someone here on EVC in Kansas can say more, so that we can try to cognize why there was a difference between the East Coast and the Mid West? In one day what I said was "illegal" yesterday @
Topic: Dover science teachers refuse to read ID disclaimer
is now legal to some extant extent.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 11-09-2005 07:12 AM

so when does the Kansas board come up for re-election?(not soon enough?)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

If EZscience were still around he could probably tell us (he was a biology research professor in Kansas if memory serves).

The election for 4 out of the 6 board members who voted to change the science standards is taking place November 2006. Just thought you might want to know that. Unless my state is experiencing a real error, they'll be gone this time next year.Wiseman45

With any other state, I'd think so too. However, since it's Kansas, I'll have to wait and see before placing my bets.

Well, seeing as how I am from Kansas, I guess I might know a little more about this state than anyone else here (unless they're a scientist who just is infatuated with Kansas or they're from Kansas too.)Here's how it generally is:
1. Kansas is a conservative state. You probably knew that.
2. The kind of thinking which is pushing these new policies exists all over Kansas, but the only place where the people pushing it are a majority is generally in still very rural Western Kansas. There are several barriers between East and West--the first one being distance, (it takes 8 hours to get from Kansas City to Dodge City).
The second one is education (the place that I think is the pinnacle of education, and not surprisingly the most liberal town being Lawrence, while the West certainly isn't well known for it's educational facilities.) Now, I don't mean to be rude: Fundamentalism is a very popular relgious idea arround KC and LawrenceThe third one is elected politicians, who are affected by the above two things. 3 out of 6 board members who pushed for the new sci. standards are from West Kansas.
3. Fundamentalism and Narrow-Minded thinking like this exist predominatly in Western Kansas. Most church/other reilgious groups in the KC metro area (keyword being "most") mind their own business and focus their attention on other more pressing issues for groups like themselves, such as charity organizations and getting mroe members. However, when you hit Topeka (an extreme Chrisitian religious organization called the Phelps group is dedicated to eradicating gays from America). and head Westward, the majority of church groups consider themselves born-again disciples and feel it is their holy duty to impress their thinking on their surroundings and on everyone around them. They elect the kind of board members that are now sitting to push for their plans. Their ultimate goal (as revealed by the extreme measures taken in 2000) is to remove evolution from education, make it an established theory that the world is 6,000 years old and that God is both responsible for and controls everything that happens. Of course, thankfully, they will never get that far, but they can try anyway, and since the big book o' scientific rules prohibit religious ideas like Intellegent Design and Creationism from existing in a public scientific forum (like a biology classroom), they can't play by the rules so they have to change them. Very good point, Mr. RAZD, by the way. This is in their twisted, dumb minds as "the first step" to changing Kansas, and then America, in to a theocracy.Well, I'm done.
I'm sure creationists and ID people will want to criticize me if they read this, and I more than welcome it. I love being criticized and I love arguing. So, bring it on!Wiseman45This message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-10-2005 09:00 PMThis message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-10-2005 09:04 PM

Welcome to the fray Wiseman. No "mr" needed, I'm just your average humble rebel american zen diest ... Yes, redefinition is part of the game plan. We saw that with Behe in the Dover trial, redefining science so that astrology was included http://EvC Forum: Dover science teachers refuse to read ID disclaimer
Page has gone | New ScientistWhat this displays is a certain level of {delusion\wishful thinking\insecurity} -- they want the certainty that comes from the scientific process, the cachet of demonstrated results, but they want it for their beliefs. Let's leave the ad hominems to others, and attack the messages. Dawkins gave 4 possibilities: ignorant, stupid, insane or malicious, and talked about another possiblity of tormented -- what I add as deluded -- so there are other possibilities.(And attacking them just lets them play the victim and declare a moral victory while they side-step the arguments.)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Not to toot my own horn, but I have been pointing this out for some time. ID is not just questions about scientific evidence, but what counts as evidence, and what counts as science.Dembski's books and some of his articles explicitly state that this was an end that ID was seeking. He openly deplores the enlightenment and says that developments in scientific methodology during that time were hindrances to knowledge, while championing deductive systems in Greek and pre enlightenment science.I've never understood how in any of these discussions at the govt level (boards, courts, commissions) critics have not simply read from Dembski and explained what this means for science. The decision to rewrite science legally is much more important and dangerous than simply teaching people to doubt evo.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)