Evolution In The Classroom

[Touchstone]

Natural selection is not selection at all - selection implies intelligent determination - unless you want to go for a kind of pantheistic interpretation, at which point you are still beginning to point towards intelligent design

This is the core insight of evolutionary theory – that natural selection is selective in an impersonal, non-cognitive way.

If you take a shovel full of gravel, and dump it into a colander or similar sieve, you will see selection happening before your eyes – small stones fall through, and big stones remain. The sieve doesn’t think, it doesn’t choose or refuse based on any intelligence it has. It’s an inanimate object, and the selection of big stones is just an artifact of its physical structure – its holes permit small stones through, and won’t let stones bigger than its holes.

That’s a very simple bit of pedagogy, but it demonstrates the process of selection as description of impersonal, physical processes. Natural selection is a much more complicated, dynamic sieve, and the criteria for what “stones pass through” are much more complex than the simple, regular lattice of the colander under your sink, but the principle is the same - natural, impersonal processes doing their thing.

-TS

 

[StAnastasia]

In recent years, the NCSE has spearheaded a PR campaign to convince religious believers that evolution and religion are compatible. On a taxpayer-funded website that the NCSE helped design, teachers and students are directed to a list of statements by religious groups endorsing evolution, and Eugenie Scott, the group’s executive director, encourages biology teachers to spend class time having students read statements by religious leaders supporting evolution.]

So what? Tax payers fund lots of things, like dubious wars and waterboarding of prisoners.

Why shouldn’t a great public university like UC put up a website to educate people about how evolution works? Or are you opposed to public universities in general? Are you opposed to education? Or is it learning in general to which you are opposed?

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

Exactly, PS. I fail to see how he can know the merrits of a subject he knows nothing about.

Siuntists evil! They make us theenk. Theenking hard. Les go labitoree wif pichforx an torchis. Keel evilushunists!

 

[buffalo]

So what? Tax payers fund lots of things, like dubious wars and waterboarding of prisoners.

Why shouldn’t a great public university like UC put up a website to educate people about how evolution works? Or are you opposed to public universities in general? Are you opposed to education? Or is it learning in general to which you are opposed?

StAnastasia

I’ll add this to the ridiculous arguments. My bogus detector goes off the charts every time you post.

And as predicted you ignored this:

The NCSE’s effort to inject religion into public school science classes in order to promote evolution is a remarkable act of chutzpah for an organization that routinely chastises “antievolutionists” for supposedly trying to insert “religion” into science classes. Apparently, religion in biology class is OK so long as it is used to endorse Darwin’s theory.

 

[edwest2]

So what? Tax payers fund lots of things, like dubious wars and waterboarding of prisoners.

Why shouldn’t a great public university like UC put up a website to educate people about how evolution works? Or are you opposed to public universities in general? Are you opposed to education? Or is it learning in general to which you are opposed?

StAnastasia

I wish you’d stop the obfuscation and deal with the issue raised. The ACLU has made it their sacred duty to remove all vestiges of religion from public buildings which they then explain is for everyone’s ‘good.’ Yeah, right. Meanwhile, public school kids, which are free of school prayer and references to God, need to be indoctrinated by the NCSE to believe in a fable called evolution. So those who are willing to fight for what they call a separation of Church and State will even make a deal with their version of the devil, religion, to get their ideology into the hearts and minds of kids. This is yet another proof that evolution, while having virtually no practical scientific value, is being used to promote atheism.

Peace,
Ed

 

[StAnastasia]

The NCSE’s effort to inject religion into public school science classes in order to promote evolution is a remarkable act of chutzpah for an organization that routinely chastises “antievolutionists” for supposedly trying to insert “religion” into science classes. Apparently, religion in biology class is OK so long as it is used to endorse Darwin’s theory.

Buffalo, can you offer any evidence at all that NCSE is trying to “inject religion into public school science classes,” or is this another of your wild and groundless claims?

 

[buffalo]

Buffalo, can you offer any evidence at all that NCSE is trying to “inject religion into public school science classes,” or is this another of your wild and groundless claims?

In her tips for activists who want to support evolution before their school board, Eugenie Scott advises: “Call on the clergy. Pro-evolution clergy are essential to refuting the idea that evolution is incompatible with faith…If no member of the clergy is available to testify, be sure to have someone do so—the religious issue must be addressed in order to resolve the controversy successfully.” Eugenie C. Scott, “12 Tips for Testifying at School Board Meetings,” ncseweb.org/resources/articles/7956_12_tips_for_testifying_at_scho_3_19_2001.asp (accessed July 16, 2005), emphasis in original.

 

[edwest2]

Siuntists evil! They make us theenk. Theenking hard. Les go labitoree wif pichforx an torchis. Keel evilushunists!

Silent Death:

Science is silent about God.
The biology textbook is silent about God.
The public schools are silent about God.
The public buildings are silent about God.
The children are silent about God.

Peace,
Ed

Except for the NCSE.

 

[rossum]

I’m not talking about some young Earth creationist model - I’m talking about the evolutionary model.

More strictly you are talking about an ID/Creationist mathematical model of their understanding of evolution. Until we have seen the details of that model, and ascertained whether or not it correctly models the effects of chemistry, natural selection etc. we will not accept its results. Please give a reference to the paper where the model is described, the calculations performed and the result of those calculations.

Factoring in the possibility of life popping into existence for no reason in the first place, the right kind of planet circling the right kind of sun, all the way back to the Flying Spaghetti Monsters - sorry, other universes (or whatever it’s supposed to be - Memes?) - bumping into each other in the first place to kick start a big bang

You need to read up on the anthropic principle. You also need to look at the differences between cosmology, abiogenesis and evolution.

Natural selection is not selection at all - selection implies intelligent determination - unless you want to go for a kind of pantheistic interpretation, at which point you are still beginning to point towards intelligent design

False. Natural selection is roughly a count of the number of grandchildren you have. The example of a sieve has already been given. Natural selection sieves out all the genes that do not reproduce or that reproduce less well than average. It amplifies genes that reproduce better than average. The humorous version:If your parents didn’t have any children then the chances are you won’t have any either.

rossum

 

[StAnastasia]

Meanwhile, public school kids, which are free of school prayer and references to God, need to be indoctrinated by the NCSE to believe in a fable called evolution. So those who are willing to fight for what they call a separation of Church and State will even make a deal with their version of the devil, religion, to get their ideology into the hearts and minds of kids. This is yet another proof that evolution, while having virtually no practical scientific value, is being used to promote atheism.Peace,Ed

Ed, you make wild accusations with no proof. Do you have an evidence that evolution is a fable? Can you offer any evidence that evolution has no practical value? Have you any evidence that NCSE has made a deal with religion? Can you prove that Archbishop Josef Zycinski of Lublin, Poland is using evolution to promote atheism in his thoughtful book God and Evolution (2006)?

Your posts are always fulminating with scarcely repressed anger. Could you and the other anti-science people here try a calm, thoughtful, and reasoned approach? You might find it more conducive of constructive dialogue.

StAnastasia

 

[StAnastasia]

In her tips for activists who want to support evolution before their school board, Eugenie Scott advises: “Call on the clergy. Pro-evolution clergy are essential to refuting the idea that evolution is incompatible with faith…If no member of the clergy is available to testify, be sure to have someone do so—the religious issue must be addressed in order to resolve the controversy successfully.” Eugenie C. Scott, “12 Tips for Testifying at School Board Meetings,” ncseweb.org/resources/articles/7956_12_tips_for_testifying_at_scho_3_19_2001.asp (accessed July 16, 2005), emphasis in original.

So Buffalo, have we caught you red-handed lying about NCSE “injecting religion into public school science classes”? If you’re a Catholic, you should know that lying is wrong.

 

[rossum]

Silent Death:

Science is silent about God.
The biology textbook is silent about God.
The public schools are silent about God.

Move to the UK. Religions Instruction classes are mandatory in all state schools.

The public buildings are silent about God.

Not in the UK. We have no constitutional bars on religious imagery on public buildings.

The children are silent about God.

Some are, some aren’t.

rossum

 

[edwest2]

Siuntists evil! They make us theenk. Theenking hard. Les go labitoree wif pichforx an torchis. Keel evilushunists!

I’m fulminating? Can you explain this post? Can you point out the calm, thoughtful, reasoned part?

Peace,
Ed

 

[buffalo]

So Buffalo, have we caught you red-handed lying about NCSE “injecting religion into public school science classes”? If you’re a Catholic, you should know that lying is wrong.

Nice try.

The door to the classroom goes through the board.

This is a promoted by an atheist.

For too long, the misperception that science and religion are inevitably in conflict has created unnecessary division and confusion, especially concerning the teaching of evolution. I wanted to let the public know that numerous clergy from most denominations have tremendous respect for evolutionary theory and have embraced it as a core component of human knowledge, fully harmonious with religious faith - Michael Zimmerman, Dean, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Butler University.

---

On a taxpayer-funded website that the NCSE helped design, teachers and students are directed to a list of statements by religious groups endorsing evolution, and Eugenie Scott, the group’s executive director, encourages biology teachers to spend class time having students read statements by religious leaders supporting evolution. Scott even suggests that students be assigned to interview local ministers about their views on evolution—but not if the community is “conservative Christian,” because then the lesson that “Evolution is OK!” may not come through.2

See “Misconception: Evolution and religion are incompatible,” evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/misconceps/IVAandreligion.shtml; Statements from Religious Organizations (Oakland, California: National Center for Science Education), ncseweb.org/resources/articles/5025_statements_from_religious_orga_12_19_2002.asp#home (accessed July 16, 2005); Eugenie Scott, “Dealing with Antievolutionism,” ucmp.berkeley.edu/fosrec/Scott2.html (accessed August 25, 2006).

---

Darwin Day and the New Campaign to Inject Religion into Public Schools

 

[StAnastasia]

Eugenie Scott, the group’s executive director, encourages biology teachers to spend class time having students read statements by religious leaders supporting evolution.

Do you have evidence from Dr. Scott’s writings to support his claim?

 

[StAnastasia]

This is a promoted by an atheist.

For too long, the misperception that science and religion are inevitably in conflict has created unnecessary division and confusion, especially concerning the teaching of evolution. I wanted to let the public know that numerous clergy from most denominations have tremendous respect for evolutionary theory and have embraced it as a core component of human knowledge, fully harmonious with religious faith - Michael Zimmerman, Dean, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Butler University.

Michael is correct – over 12,000 clergy accept the evidence supporting evolution. He is not promoting religion in science classes.

 

[buffalo]

Michael is correct – over 12,000 clergy accept the evidence supporting evolution. He is not promoting religion in science classes.

Let’s take it from the top.

To keep the religion of evolution in the science class the NCES is promoting reading clergy letters in the class that state evolution and religion are not in conflict.

This means that they are informing the students it is OK to believe in God and evolution. See here, we will read you clergy letters. (Most of them probably do not mention God explicitly but students are not stupid.)

Now why should these even be read in a Godless public school. Fighting has been going on for years to keep God out, but when it suits the atheists goals it can be tolerated. This is a clever but disingenuous approach. Next thing you know they will be reading your list of 100,000 working biologists.

 

[StAnastasia]

To keep the religion of evolution in the science class the NCES is promoting reading clergy letters in the class that state evolution and religion are not in conflict. This means that they are informing the students it is OK to believe in God and evolution. See here, we will read you clergy letters. (Most of them probably do not mention God explicitly but students are not stupid.

Can you offer any evidence to support this assertion? And the mumblings of Discovery Institute members does not count as evidence of what NCSE or the Clergy Letter Project are doing.

 

[buffalo]

Can you offer any evidence to support this assertion? And the mumblings of Discovery Institute members does not count as evidence of what NCSE or the Clergy Letter Project are doing.

The Discovery Article is complete with reference and footnotes. Everyone is free to read them and draw their conclusions.

 

[StAnastasia]

The Discovery Article is complete with reference and footnotes. Everyone is free to read them and draw their conclusions.

The credibility of the Discovery Institute is worthless. Until I see your quotation from Dr. Scott herself promoting religion in science classes, I shall take this as your admission that you have no evidence to support your claim.