It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The bottom line is this: Evolution can be tested by science.
How about if I put a sticker in theology books saying that God is a conceptual theory and no proof exists
"This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."
the·o·ry ( P ) Pronunciation Key (th-r, thîr)
1. A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
2. The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fine musician who had never studied theory.
3. A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
4. Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.
5. A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.
6. An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
this according to Judge Cooper who also says,
conveys an impermissible message of endorsement and tells some citizens that they are political outsiders while telling others they are political insiders
WHAT AN ASSUMPTIVE LEAP OF LOGIC this judge has!!!
, even though the sticker does not specifically reference any alternative theories,"
The stickers were added after more than 2,000 parents complained that the textbooks presented evolution as fact, without mentioning rival ideas about the beginnings of life, such as the biblical story of creation.
Arent ALL theories suspect as potentially being proved incorrect, or even correct for that matter? DUH!!!
Six parents and the American Civil Liberties Union then sued, contending the disclaimers violated the separation of church and state and unfairly singled out evolution from thousands of other scientific theories as suspect.
A July, 2002, editorial in Scientific American magazine spotlights Cobb County's school board, not because of the excellence of our science programs but because it decided to import the mistakes of Alabama. It wrote stickers for science textbooks and now proposes that we teach Intelligent Design creationism in our science classes out of "fairness."
The board twists our natural sense of fairness upside down, while reducing our school's credibility.
Language is the primary tool of an educator. By choosing imprecise and antiscientific language, our school board has abandoned clarity and embraced confusion. Intelligent Design creationism teaches that evolution of species never occurred, and that scientific evidence proves that God performed a special creation for each species. But that cant be called science, because science can provide no information about God.
www.georgiascience.org...
Originally posted by CazMedia
This thread is not about weather or not creationism or evolution is provable and if so how,its about a court interpretating that a sticker on a book, which says that evolution is a theory, here it is
The problem with this is that the word “theory” means something very different to a scientist than to a layperson. Calling a scientific explanation a theory expresses the highest possible confidence that it is a correct explanation of a set of facts and laws. To be awarded the title of theory, a scientific explanation must have undergone decades of rigorous experimentation and must not be in conflict with independent observations from other areas of science. A theory must be based on natural, not supernatural phenomena (one reason why creationism and intelligent design theory are not considered scientific theories). A scientific theory is thus quite different from a hunch about which lottery numbers will come up or which horse will win at the track.
www.georgiascience.org...
Why would an apparent majority of citizens not be able to demand their community standards include other information than a smaller group desires to let be known?
In 1968, in Epperson v. Arkansas, the United States Supreme Court invalidated an Arkansas statute that prohibited the teaching of evolution.
In 1981, in Segraves v. State of California, the court found that the California State Board of Education's Science Framework, as written and as qualified by its antidogmatism policy, gave sufficient accommodation to the views of Segraves, contrary to his contention that class discussion of evolution prohibited his and his children's free exercise of religion.
In 1982, in McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, a federal court held that a "balanced treatment" statute violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Arkansas statute required public schools to give balanced treatment to "creation-science" and "evolution-science". In a decision that gave a detailed definition of the term "science", the court declared that "creation science" is not in fact a science.
. In 1987, in Edwards v. Aguillard, the U.S. Supreme Court held unconstitutional Louisiana's "Creationism Act". This statute prohibited the teaching of evolution in public schools, except when it was accompanied by instruction in "creation science".
In 1990, in Webster v. New Lenox School District, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals found that a school district may prohibit a teacher from teaching creation science in fulfilling its responsibility to ensure that the First Amendment's establishment clause is not violated and that religious beliefs are not injected into the public school curriculum.
In 1994, in Peloza v. Capistrano School District, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court finding that a teacher's First Amendment right to free exercise of religion is not violated by a school district's requirement that evolution be taught in biology classes.
In 1997, in Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana rejected a policy requiring teachers to read aloud a disclaimer whenever they taught about evolution, ostensibly to promote "critical thinking".
In 2000, District Court Judge Bernard E. Borene dismissed the case of Rodney LeVake v Independent School District 656, et al. (Order Granting Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum, Court File Nr. CX-99-793, District Court for the Third Judicial District of the State of Minnesota [2000]). High school biology teacher LeVake had argued for his right to teach "evidence both for and against the theory" of evolution. The school district considered the content of what he was teaching and concluded that it did not match the curriculum, which required the teaching of evolution.
Not a Science
Originally posted by Intelearthling
Come on! Get real! If man evolved from Monkeys or apes to be exact as "evolution" would have us believe, then, WHY ARE THERE STILL APES AROUND?
Hmmmm?
Originally posted by Johannmon
Originally posted by Damned
Biologists consider the existence of biological evolution to be a fact. It can be demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is overwhelming.
The mechanism of micro-evolution has never been shown to apply to macro-evolution even when significant effort and intelligence is applied to attempt to make it happen. Science has been attempting through a variety of methods to create new species from the DNA of other species but has yet to succeed in creating even a single new species. Now any number of subspecies can be created from an original sample, this is micro-evolution. Even it has its limitations since it has yet to be observed where new genetic material has ever been added to the species evolved. Instead what happens in Micro-evolution is that there is a reshuffling of the genetic material present and its order causing abnormalities to appear in the code. At no time however has that code been shown to have taken on greater complexity than the orginal copy. That increase in complexity is what is necessary to prove that a lizard can become an alligator. There needs to be demostrated a mechanism by which the genetic code can become more complex and not just reshuffled.
Until such a mechanism is discovered and tested the theory of Evolution, which relies on macro-evolution, is just that, a THEORY, and an unsubstantiated one at that.
Originally posted by CazMedia
Please, tell me honestly that by reading the sticker, ANYONE can infer a motive behind it, or whom it came from...
If so, what motive can be infered from reading the stickers text?
Whom could have written such a thing?
lets assume ANY motive we want...but that cant be supported by the text.
lets dream up ANY group we think could have penned this, yet the text would offer NO clues to the authors.
Now tell us, is this a true or false statement?
"This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."
I laugh at how you miss the point that your own words speak!!
Yes yes the words were vague, however, it was enough to cast doubt on evolution and Intent is everything.
As evolution is a THEORY, there is already doubt cast upon it or it would be called FACT!!! Do you understand the differance between FACTS and THEORY?
it was enough to cast doubt on evolution
To which Spacemunkey responds,
Why would an apparent majority of citizens not be able to demand their community standards include other information than a smaller group desires to let be known?
The FACT is, despite scientific THEORY, millions of people believe, for whatever and varied reasons(different gods), that some form of creationism is the origin of life.
because this is a science book, based on scientific principles and facts, not hearsay.