|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 06/27/2001 : 10:28:38
|
Dear CSICOP List Reader,
an action alert from one of our fellow readers
see this website:
Update on Evolution and Congress
As I'm sure your aware the Senate just passed an Education Bill into which
language has been added that essentially calls upon teachers to tell
students that evolutionary theory is not science and that the controversy
over evolution is due to the lack of scientific credibility of evolution.
The Senate bill states:
"It is the sense of the Senate that-
(1) good science education should prepare students to
distinguish the data or testable theories of science from
philosophical or religious claims that are made in the name
of science; and
(2) where biological evolution is taught, the curriculum
should help students to understand why this subject
generates so much continuing controversy, and should prepare
the students to be informed participants in public
discussions regarding the subject."
In case people are mislead by the vague wording and think it sounds like
it is promoting critical thought, this amendment was orchestrated by
Senators who accept Intelligent Design theory and think it should be
taught in public schools. The "philosophical claims made in the name of
science" is a reference to evolution and the theory of common
descent whom the amendments authors claim is "not science because science
must be observed."
Part 2 was clearly crafted to allow teachers to claim that
the controversy arises b/c evolution is not observable science and that
there is scientific evidence of intelligent design.
A Senator from Kansas hailed this amendment as a vindication of the Kansas
school board's 1999 decision to eliminate evolution.
The language is only in the Senate version. It can be
removed in committee, which is what the National Association of
Biology Teachers is recommending. Call or write your Senator or
Congressman and alert your colleagues.
Thomas Griffin, M.A.
Department Of Psychology
University of Illinois at Chicago
|
|
|
Rift
Skeptic Friend
USA
333 Posts |
Posted - 06/27/2001 : 12:00:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
A Senator from Kansas hailed this amendment as a vindication of the Kansas
school board's 1999 decision to eliminate evolution.
Well, I'm voting against Sam Brownback next election (the moron from Kansas that said this). Here's his actual quote-"The great and bold statement that the Kansas School
Board made was … simply that we observe micro-evolution and therefore it is scientific fact; and that it is impossible to observe macro-evolution, it is scientific assumption.... [Santorum] clarifies the opinion of the Senate that the debate of scientific fact versus scientific assumption is an important debate to embrace."
What's funny is nearly everyone was against the stupid thing (including our republican governor) and the thing got defeated in 2000. All the creationists got voted out of the BOE by a landslide. The stupid thing backfired and now there are more science teachers and evolutionists on the Board.
What the hell is Brownback thinking? The people of Kansas voted to KEEP evolution in the schools and voted the silly thing out.
|
 |
|
|
Lisa
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 06/27/2001 : 12:44:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
What the hell is Brownback thinking? The people of Kansas voted to KEEP evolution in the schools and voted the silly thing out.
Seems to me his favourite sacred cow is headed for hamburger and steaks. You know how whiny and reactionary people get when that happens. If the people of Kansas have voted more science teachers and evolutionsts to the BOE, I hope this guy has some skills to help him survive in the private sector. How long has he been in office?
I followed the Kansas BOE battle a bit, and was greatly heartened when "our side" won. Maybe Brownback needs to work on his math skills.
Lisa
Chaos...Confusion...Destruction...My Work Here Is Done |
|
|
|
Rift
Skeptic Friend
USA
333 Posts |
Posted - 06/27/2001 : 15:04:18 [Permalink]
|
Brownback has been in office since 1996, he was elected to fill Dole's seat when he left to run for president. (No Dole joke's please, I liked the guy, and he's better then that joker in the white house now :P) He was re-elected in 1998 so we got him till 2004 ::sigh::
What pisses me off is that he's suppose to represent US. And the majority of Kansans want evolution taught in schools. Why he is championing a failed cause is beyond me. We elected the guy to represent us, not champion private beliefs. (I told this to my sister at lunch today, and she told me "You are so naive" lol)
BTW I didn't vote for the dork. :P
|
|
|
|
Lisa
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 06/27/2001 : 15:37:36 [Permalink]
|
Wow, until 2004? He can cause a lot of mischief in that amount of time.
And yeah, you're a little naive. As an armchair observer of politics, I've noticed very few try to office to really serve the public. Most seem to have a private agenda. There's so many sacred cows in DC that they should go into the fertilizer business. Depending on your point of view, they may be already.
Lisa
Chaos...Confusion...Destruction...My Work Here Is Done |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2001 : 00:52:17 [Permalink]
|
Lisa, they ARE in the fertilizer and mushroom business.
Rift, they're suppossed to support the majority, however, once elected they are allowed to vote as they see best for their constituants. (Personal beliefs color this aspect in a serious way.)
The unfortunate side effect of this, he's in until 2004 - how many are going to remember this little blip in his voting record then?
He's YOUR god, they're YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell! |
|
|
|
Rift
Skeptic Friend
USA
333 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2001 : 03:40:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The unfortunate side effect of this, he's in until 2004 - how many are going to remember this little blip in his voting record then?
Well, the good news is that the science community here in Kansas got a huge wake up call in 1999. Creationism had never been a big problem here, and really doesn't have much support, as the 2000 elections proved. I have to admit I had no idea who my representive on the Board of Education was before this mess came up, and I was one of those asleep. Now, however, we are all wide awake and I don't think the anti-creationists are going to go back to sleep for a loooong while here in Kansas. Come 2004 I have no doubt there will be pleanty of voices reminding people of Brownback's remarks... Which is what confuses me, this seems like a self-destructive move to me on Brownback's part. But then again, I'm really naive when it comes to politics. :)
|
|
|
|
comradebillyboy
Skeptic Friend
USA
188 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2001 : 22:53:39 [Permalink]
|
I teach math and physics in high-school. I believe it is very necessary to address the idea of creation science and what it means in the context of the scientific method. I try to explain that science is not absolute truth, and then explian why creationism has no relationship to science.
The info on sites like this really helps me deal intellegently with student questions.
Fortunatly for me outraged fundis have not tried to have me fired yet.
comrade billyboy |
|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
Posted - 06/28/2001 : 23:01:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I teach math and physics in high-school. I believe it is very necessary to address the idea of creation science and what it means in the context of the scientific method. I try to explain that science is not absolute truth, and then explian why creationism has no relationship to science.
The info on sites like this really helps me deal intellegently with student questions.
Fortunatly for me outraged fundis have not tried to have me fired yet.
comrade billyboy
My situation is almost identical to yours...I constantly mine websites to prepare myself for the next question.
The real trick is to get the kids to think for themselves...not just parrot what they hear (even from me...especially from me).
By the time they're adults, their habits of thought are deeply ingrained...sometimes happens by the time I see them. But I keep plugging away.
|
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 06/29/2001 : 20:18:49 [Permalink]
|
This is very sad. Very, very sad.
I would like to see a rundown of the vote in this matter. It is hard to believe that there is such a majority (almost unanimous in this case) of ignorant politicians in Washington.
ljbrs
*Who ordered that?* Richard Feynman, et al.
|
|
|
|
Greg
Skeptic Friend
USA
281 Posts |
Posted - 06/30/2001 : 07:00:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I would like to see a rundown of the vote in this matter. It is hard to believe that there is such a majority (almost unanimous in this case) of ignorant politicians in Washington.
I believe that the wording was added as an "afterthought" at the 11th hour and that most of the senators probably did't even read it since it was "non-binding" in nature (although philosophy is another matter). Now isn't it sad that the "truth" has to be added in such a sleazy way?
Regards,
Greg.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
