Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 77 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-22-2019 11:59 AM
35 online now:
dwise1, edge, JonF, PaulK, Percy (Admin), ringo, Stile, Tangle, Tanypteryx, Theodoric (10 members, 25 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 850,050 Year: 5,087/19,786 Month: 1,209/873 Week: 105/460 Day: 47/58 Hour: 11/12


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23Next
Author Topic:   Kansas ... AGAIN!
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19816
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 1 of 38 (258011)
11-08-2005 10:52 PM


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9967813

Risking the kind of nationwide ridicule it faced six years ago, the Kansas Board of Education approved new public-school science standards Tuesday that cast doubt on the theory of evolution.

The 6-4 vote was a victory for “intelligent design” advocates who helped draft the standards. Intelligent design holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by a higher power.

Critics of the new language charged that it was an attempt to inject God and creationism into public schools, in violation of the constitutional ban on state establishment of religion.

Barely has the case in Dover been completed (except for the final decision) and we have another one ...

In addition, the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.

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.


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Omnivorous, posted 11-08-2005 11:35 PM RAZD has not yet responded
 Message 4 by Lammy, posted 11-08-2005 11:50 PM RAZD has not yet responded
 Message 8 by Brad McFall, posted 11-09-2005 7:08 AM RAZD has not yet responded

  
AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 38 (258015)
11-08-2005 11:27 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
  
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1075 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 3 of 38 (258016)
11-08-2005 11:35 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
11-08-2005 10:52 PM


Works for radiation.
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.

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!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 11-08-2005 10:52 PM RAZD has not yet responded

    
Lammy
Member
Posts: 3607
From: Chicago
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 4 of 38 (258019)
11-08-2005 11:50 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
11-08-2005 10:52 PM


{edited}

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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 11-08-2005 10:52 PM RAZD has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Adminnemooseus, posted 11-09-2005 12:17 AM Lammy has not yet responded

    
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3879
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 5 of 38 (258020)
11-09-2005 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Lammy
11-08-2005 11:50 PM


Bad Lam
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 Page

This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 11-09-2005 12:21 AM


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Lammy, posted 11-08-2005 11:50 PM Lammy has not yet responded

    
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 2218 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 6 of 38 (258025)
11-09-2005 2:09 AM


As some one from Kansas...
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


Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Mammuthus, posted 11-09-2005 6:28 AM ReverendDG has not yet responded

    
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 4583 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 7 of 38 (258040)
11-09-2005 6:28 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by ReverendDG
11-09-2005 2:09 AM


Re: As some one from Kansas...
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.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1294547


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by ReverendDG, posted 11-09-2005 2:09 AM ReverendDG has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by RAZD, posted 11-09-2005 7:10 AM Mammuthus has responded

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3140 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 8 of 38 (258042)
11-09-2005 7:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
11-08-2005 10:52 PM


in one day all things change
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.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/p/PeirceAr.htm

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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 11-08-2005 10:52 PM RAZD has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19816
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 9 of 38 (258043)
11-09-2005 7:10 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Mammuthus
11-09-2005 6:28 AM


Re: As some one from Kansas...
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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Mammuthus, posted 11-09-2005 6:28 AM Mammuthus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Mammuthus, posted 11-09-2005 8:31 AM RAZD has not yet responded
 Message 11 by wiseman45, posted 11-09-2005 9:11 PM RAZD has not yet responded

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 4583 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 10 of 38 (258057)
11-09-2005 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by RAZD
11-09-2005 7:10 AM


Re: As some one from Kansas...
If EZscience were still around he could probably tell us (he was a biology research professor in Kansas if memory serves).
This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by RAZD, posted 11-09-2005 7:10 AM RAZD has not yet responded

  
wiseman45
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 38 (258316)
11-09-2005 9:11 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by RAZD
11-09-2005 7:10 AM


Re: As some one from Kansas...
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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by RAZD, posted 11-09-2005 7:10 AM RAZD has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Lammy, posted 11-10-2005 3:01 AM wiseman45 has responded

  
Lammy
Member
Posts: 3607
From: Chicago
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 12 of 38 (258367)
11-10-2005 3:01 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by wiseman45
11-09-2005 9:11 PM


Re: As some one from Kansas...
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.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by wiseman45, posted 11-09-2005 9:11 PM wiseman45 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by wiseman45, posted 11-10-2005 8:58 PM Lammy has not yet responded

    
wiseman45
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 38 (258690)
11-10-2005 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Lammy
11-10-2005 3:01 AM


Re: As some one from Kansas...
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 Lawrence

The 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!

Wiseman45

This message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-10-2005 09:00 PM

This message has been edited by wiseman45, 11-10-2005 09:04 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Lammy, posted 11-10-2005 3:01 AM Lammy has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by RAZD, posted 11-11-2005 1:30 PM wiseman45 has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19816
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 14 of 38 (258870)
11-11-2005 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by wiseman45
11-10-2005 8:58 PM


Re: As some one from Kansas...
Welcome to the fray Wiseman.

they can't play by the rules so they have to change them. Very good point, Mr. RAZD,

No "mr" needed, I'm just your average humble rebel american zen diest ... :rolleyes:

Yes, redefinition is part of the game plan. We saw that with Behe in the Dover trial, redefining science so that astrology was included :laugh:

http://http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=4&t=87&m=107#97
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8178

What 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.

... their twisted, dumb minds ...

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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by wiseman45, posted 11-10-2005 8:58 PM wiseman45 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Silent H, posted 11-12-2005 7:49 AM RAZD has responded

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 15 of 38 (259040)
11-12-2005 7:49 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by RAZD
11-11-2005 1:30 PM


Re: As some one from Kansas...
Yes, redefinition is part of the game plan. We saw that with Behe in the Dover trial, redefining science so that astrology was included

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)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by RAZD, posted 11-11-2005 1:30 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by RAZD, posted 11-12-2005 8:48 AM Silent H has responded

    
1
23Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019