Opposing Science if it agrees with Christians

[BobRyan]

In the recent debate Over intelligent Design - some have "supposed" that this is a case where a School Board was denied the right to have their schools offer a class in ID to students in Pennsylvania.

This is in fact a bold landmark decision to deny the right of local school disctricts to inform their students that "ID EXISTS" as a theory WHILE still towing-the-line and teaching Evolutionism as if it was science fact.

Instead of the school board "trying to teach ID" they were in fact "trying to teaching ONLY Evolutionism" - they simply wanted to open the students minds to the wider fact that the theory of ID exists!! (As in a 4 paragraph preface statement to the "Evolution indoctrination" that calls the students to be informed about the existence of other views)

Further it DENIES the school districts the right to QUESTION evolutionism in any way - (even if it is just a 4 paragraph statement as the start of a class ON EVOLUTIONISM that tells the student that the theory still has some gaps in it.)

The decision claims that it is unconstitutional to QUESTION evolutionism AND ALSO to admit to the existence of ID.

The district school board was "trying" to get a 4 paragraph statement ADDED that simply said that "There is a book called Of Pandas and People"

Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life
that differs from Darwin’s view. The reference book, Of
Pandas and People, is available for students who might
be interested in gaining an understanding of what
Intelligent Design actually involves.

Admitting to the existence of the theory and existence of the book was viewed as "inane" by the activist judge in this case.

The summary is in essence - that it is "unconstitutional" for Christians to express their view of nature AS IF that was real science instead of just stupid blind dark-ages superstition!

#1. “makes it abundantly clear that the Board’s ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause.”
#2. “our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom.”

--Specific actions hidden behind the pretext of protecting first amendment rights of ALL (excluding objective thinking students, parents, scientists, etc - i.e. the majority of U.S citizens) --

“we will enter an order permanently enjoining Defendants from maintaining the ID Policy in any school
within the Dover Area School District,
from requiring teachers to denigrate or disparage the scientific theory of evolution,
and from requiring teachers to refer to a religious, alternative theory known as ID.”

The constitution is being "bent" to oppose discoveries in science that SUPPORT the Creator's own statements on Nature, life, species or the Bible history of mankind's existence.

The constitution is being "bent" to oppose any discussion of scientific data that calls into question that humanist religion we know today as evolutionism.

Is Christianity really such a disgusting instiution that Science ITSELF must be 'censored' to abolish discussion of all data that might question evolutionism and favor Christianity??

Have we come so far from our own "Declaration of Independence"
http://www.cs.indiana.edu/statecraft/decl.html

that it is now "UNCONSTITIONAL" to speak of what we SEE IN nature - as having its origin in the Creator - who DID something that CAN BE SEEN as having been DONE by HIM - that SHOWS that He has an ounce of intelligence?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,

So at one time it was "SELF EVIDENT" for ALL - no matter what faith and was essential to the wellbeing of our nation -- but NOW it is "NO LONGER ALLOWED to be self-evident" unless you are in church or possibly studing mythology???

What is this sub-class this non-citizen that we call "Christian"? Such a low, despised creature that scientific data that may be seen as confirming the Creator's words must be CENSORED from the science class room!!

How did we fall BELOW the level of basic freedoms and protection provided by our nation's constitution?

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Here is the 4 paragraph preface to the course on evolutionism and ONLY evolutionism that was "censored" by the activist judicial system in Pennsylvania --

The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students
to learn about Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and
eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution
is a part.

Because Darwin’s Theory is a theory, it continues to be
tested as new evidence is discovered. The Theory is not
a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no
evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation
that unifies a broad range of observations.

Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life
that differs from Darwin’s view. The reference book, Of
Pandas and People, is available for students who might
be interested in gaining an understanding of what
Intelligent Design actually involves.

With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to
keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of
the Origins of Life to individual students and their
families. As a Standards-driven district, class instruction
focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency
on Standards-based assessments.

 

[BobRyan]

So although this statement STILL requires that ALL students swallow the propaganda of Darwinian evolutionism - it allows a tiny bit of light into the room for just a microsecond.

It merely "informs" the student that IF they have some intellectual curiosity beyond the brainwashing being offerred in the course - they are free to go to the library and look up an alternative view - namely - ID.

And of course - freedom of thought that might possibly expose the flaws in evolutionism or might allow the READING of scientific data IN FAVOR of Christianity - must be "censored" for everybody's good!!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[mioque]

The curriculum vitae of the judge responsible.
http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/bios/jones.htm

 

[BobRyan]

Hmmph - he appears to be a judge after all.

 

[billwald]

' "ID EXISTS" as a theory WHILE still towing-the-line and teaching Evolutionism as if it was science fact.'

Bout time for you all to learn the meaning of the word, "theory."

 

[BobRyan]

Theory just means "a framework for explaining the data we extract from nature" in science.

For example evolutionism "at best" is described as a theory (and also doubles as religion for humanists).

Intelligent Design is also a "theory" a framework for explaining the data.

That is the "easy part" of the discussion.

Recall that this was not a trial about "teaching" something other than evolutionism and the associated myths and dogmas needed by that system of faith. There was no attempt to "Teach" anything but EVOLUTIONISM.


RATHER it was a trial about intellectual honesty vs brainwashing. It was about "Admitting to the EXISTENCE" of other theories specifically the EXISTENCE of ID theory and the EXISTENCE of a book that defines it that is available in the library!! It was about admitting to the EXISTENCE of debates among scientists and in science contexts between two theories!

The opening arguments FROM the evolutionist witnesses ADMITTED to these debates and to the discussions among scientists AND to the book "in the library" they just did not want this SAME information to be made known to the students as a "one paragraph REFERENCE" to the fact that such information existed in the library.

A more blatant, extreme, severe case of "pure censorship" could hardly be imagined!!


In Christ,

Bob

[ December 29, 2005, 04:50 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]

 

[BobRyan]

Here "Again" is the exhaustive list of the data - the views - the facts that evolutionists determined as NEEDING to be hidden from the students.

The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students
to learn about Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and
eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution
is a part.


Because Darwin’s Theory is a theory, it continues to be
tested as new evidence is discovered. The Theory is not
a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no
evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation
that unifies a broad range of observations.

Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life
that differs from Darwin’s view. The reference book, Of
Pandas and People, is available for students who might
be interested in gaining an understanding of what
Intelligent Design actually involves.



With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to
keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of
the Origins of Life to individual students and their
families. As a Standards-driven district, class instruction
focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency
on Standards-based assessments.

Witnesses for evolutionists ADMITTED that the evolutionary theory continues to be tested as do all theories. Continually compared against the data (until facts eventually outweigh bias in the case of evolutionism.)

They also admit that they found tests for the ID theory.

BOTH sides claimed to debunk/refute the other side's "theory" in the tests/data they provided. (No big surprise there. At some level - Proponents for opposing theories have been doing that for a long time in all branches of science).

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

The interesting thing is that when evolutionists pronounce victory over the subject by claiming that they "redefined science as evolutionism and everything else as religion" - they "pretend surprise" that this trick is not accepted by objective minds on the other side of the fence.

But as I said before - that is not the question here. The point here is the level of censorship being applied to students and science itself on behalf of protectionist-evolutionists who claim that any science fact, data, theory that is not favorable to evolutionism must be censored! Even if it is merely to "Admit the existence" of a book in the Library on a competing theory.

In Christ,

Bob

[ December 29, 2005, 05:14 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]

 

[BobRyan]

Your Honor, it is our pleasure to appear on behalf of our clients today because I am confident that at the conclusion of these proceedings, you will find that the evidence shows that these citizens seated before you today were engaged in a legitimate exercise of their lawful authority where they enacted a modest change to the biology curriculum for the purpose of enhancing science education, for the evidence will show that the purpose and effect truly at issue in this litigation is the purpose and effect of a curriculum change that was worked out after a process of deliberation involving the board, the administration, the science faculty, and the public.

And it resulted in a modest four-paragraph statement which mentions intelligent design, makes students aware of the existence of the theory, makes them aware that it's a theory of the origins of life different from Darwin's theory of evolution. It explains that there's a book in the library, Of Pandas and People, that deals with intelligent design theory or IDT.
In fact, the evidence will show that the more recent statement points students to other books in the library addressing intelligent design theory and that three of those books are penned by the plaintiffs' experts and critical of the theory. This case is about free inquiry in education, not about a religious agenda.
Your Honor, the evidence will also show that this four-paragraph statement is the total actual effect that the curriculum change has on science instruction in the district, because apart from that four-paragraph statement, science teachers teach evolutionary theory as required by Pennsylvania state standards. The use of texts presents the evolutionary theory. Biology by and Levine, one of the coauthors, Ken Miller, is one of the plaintiffs' experts in this case.

In this way, the evidence will show that while students are taught evolutionary theory, they are merely made aware of the existence of another theory, the intelligent design theory, and that while students are assigned a basal text that presents evolutionary theory, they're merely made aware of the existence of a reference text in the library that deals with intelligent design theory, if they care to check it out. And they are told that they will be tested on evolutionary theory, as required by Pennsylvania state standards.

Further, the evidence will show that Superintendent Richard Nilsen, in response to concerns addressed by science faculty about the implementation of the curriculum change, issued specific guidelines that intelligent design theory would not be taught, that creationism would not be taught. Teachers would not teach their own religious beliefs.

 

[billwald]

"Intelligent Design is also a "theory" a framework for explaining the data."

God or space aliens or time travelers poofed everything.

 

[Kamoroso]

Does anybody know where the Catholic Church stands on this issue? Since they beleive evolution is not contradictory to the scriptures, does that mean that they stand with the evolutionists on this one? Or are they just not persuing this one, since it doesn't really matter to them?

Bye for now. Y. b. in C. Keith

 

[zealouswest]

Augustine of Hipo, the Catholic Bishop who wrote "the Confessions" said this:

"It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 1:19–20 [A.D. 408]).

Essentially I believe a Catholic may believe in evolution so long as that belief doesn't deny in any way God's hand in creation and his ultimate providence over all things. God could use evolution. There is no reason to suppose that Genesis 1 is literal 100%, especially when Genesis 2 contradicts an absolutely literal understanding of it.

 

[mioque]

Science conflicts like these ought to be decided by scientists instead of by lawyers and schoolboards.
I believe that evolution is a flawed theory, if I'm right it will collapse under it's own weight eventually.

 

[mioque]

Keith
"Does anybody know where the Catholic Church stands on this issue?"
"
Very much divided as usual.
Behe and most of the legal team that was on the side of the Dover schoolboard are Roman Catholic.
On the other hand Theistic Evolution is an equally accepted RC viewpoint.

 

[James Flagg]

As soon as we Christians get ID into the schools, we're going to start teaching OB/GYN residents the "stork theory".

After that we're going to start teaching the "green cheese theory" in planetary science courses.

And finally, we'll start teaching atmospheric science majors the "Thor Theory".

We don't need none of that fancy grade school learnin'.

 

[just-want-peace]

As soon as we Christians get ID into the schools, we're going to start teaching OB/GYN residents the "stork theory".

After that we're going to start teaching the "green cheese theory" in planetary science courses.

And finally, we'll start teaching atmospheric science majors the "Thor Theory".

We don't need none of that fancy grade school learnin'.

Need any more to understand why "evolutionists" are so rabid against what God said?

The ONLY science, to my knowledge, that rejects any form of opposition! But then again, evolution is not really science, is it?

It's a belief system, just like creationism. The only difference is that the evos believe man rather than God.

Oh! One more very important difference--creationists ADMIT that they believe as they do simply because God tell us how He did it; He spoke, and it was created. Evos refuse to admit that they just accept what they've been taught (with all it's assumptions) and that in truth it's just blind faith in their predecessors beliefs.

Bottom line--you either believe God or man!

 

[BobRyan]

Keith
"Does anybody know where the Catholic Church stands on this issue?"

The RCC is evolutionist all the way. They teach it as if it was really science.

But I think the Pope is more of a "Christian" evolutionist like Behe rather than a rank atheist evolutionist like most of what you find on this board passing for Christian evolutionism.

The Pope made a brief mention lately about ID being the right view.

ID is the claim that while evolutionism in all of its myth and discredited speculation is "true" yet some things go far beyond merely "boiling water" in showing actual design.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[zealouswest]

The RCC is evolutionist all the way. They teach it as if it was really science.

What part of evolution ISN'T science?

But I think the Pope is more of a "Christian" evolutionist like Behe rather than a rank atheist evolutionist like most of what you find on this board passing for Christian evolutionism.[/quote

John Paul II, at least. Benedict XVI, however, is most likely in the same line with the late John Paul II.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by James Flagg:
As soon as we Christians get ID into the schools, we're going to start teaching OB/GYN residents the "stork theory".

After that we're going to start teaching the "green cheese theory" in planetary science courses.

And finally, we'll start teaching atmospheric science majors the "Thor Theory".

We don't need none of that fancy grade school learnin'.

This is the classic atheist/agnostic view that "if God has a half a brain then we must believe the moon was made out of green cheese".

Not surprising when we read this as authored BY atheists - but when Christians do it too - you gotta wonder about their thinking.

ID is NOT a claim about God is a claim that "the PAINTING SHOWS intelligence BEYOND the level of rocks falling in mud"

Quite a stretch for what passes as "Christian evolutionism" here.

But the point of this thread was NOT "do you have enough intelligence to admit that GOD SHOWS intelligence in what HE DOES just like the Bible says HE DOES" -- rather the point of the thread is about censorship against anything that "Admits" to intelligence in nature!!

Rank censorship in this case where the facts that WERE confessed to in the trial COULD NOT be told to the students according to the judge!!

Censorship of BOTH science AND students so blatant and obvious and egregious that one would expect ALL CITIZENS to object not just intelligent ones.

But then -- maybe I was not giving enough credit to the effects of evolutionism on the faithful devotees to that religion.

In Christ,

Bob