Censoring questions about evolution. Why?, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times
Topic started on 26-3-2009 @ 02:25 PM by B.A.C.
I ran across this article and found it interesting that activists don't want any questions of weaknesses or analyzing of Evolutionary Theory conducted within Schools.


darwiniana.com...
In January, the evolution lobby convinced a slim majority of the board to tentatively remove the required teaching of “weaknesses” from the standard. Now the same activists are demanding that the board cut the words “analyze and evaluate” from the high school biology standards dealing directly with evolution. It is the Darwinian activists who are picking the fight.

These proposals represent an extreme attempt to censor the science curriculum and will harm the interests of both students and science. We must not permit scientific data to be concealed to serve a political agenda.

Evolution activists have raised a string of phony issues. They claim that board members are trying to insert creationism and a “young earth” into the science standards. Completely false. Remember, it is the Darwinian extremists who are attempting to change the existing science directives. Under the existing standards there has not been a single reported case of a teacher using the standard as a pretext to teach religion, creationism, or anything other than science.

The phoniest issue of all is the assertion that evolution has no scientific weaknesses, which is a claim few scientists would make among themselves. In January, the board was presented with more than 100 articles from mainstream scientific publications documenting unresolved problems in contemporary evolutionary theory. These problems include the inexplicable origin of information contained in DNA molecules, irreducibly complex biological features, geologically abrupt appearances of new life forms in the Cambrian Explosion, fossil record gaps and intractable origin of life chemistry.


You can read the full article here:darwiniana.com...

Any thoughts on this? Or opinions?


reply posted on 26-3-2009 @ 04:13 PM by B.A.C.
reply to post by dnaobs



Yes, this type of censorship isn't just related to Evolution, it comes in play whenever anyone including other scientists question accepted science. ie; Global Warming, Human Cloning, etc..


Here's an example of a state passing a law to protect against this type of censorship:

article.nationalreview.com...
To the chagrin of the science thought police, Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal has signed into law an act to protect teachers who want to encourage critical thinking about hot-button science issues such as global warming, human cloning, and yes, evolution and the origin of life.

Opponents allege that the Louisiana Science Education Act is “anti-science.” In reality, the opposition’s efforts to silence anyone who disagrees with them is the true affront to scientific inquiry.



reply posted on 26-3-2009 @ 10:06 PM by B.A.C.
reply to post by whoshotJR



This vote was about teaching "strength and weaknesses" in ANY theory. It has nothing to do with religion.

No matter what anyone's beliefs are, we shouldn't censor information about theories that ARE taught in the classroom.

I don't think creationism or ID should be taught in school. That isn't what this is about though.


reply posted on 26-3-2009 @ 10:08 PM by RichM
Originally posted by B.A.C.
reply to
post by dnaobs



Yes, this type of censorship isn't just related to Evolution, it comes in play whenever anyone including other scientists question accepted science. ie; Global Warming, Human Cloning, etc..


Agreed. The biggest error of the types of arguements is that it turns something scientific (peer reviewed and ran through the scientific method) like evolution into the very thing these people are trying to rid our education system of.... that being religion. For science to be accurate and for it to truely benefit mankind all observable evidence (pro AND con) must have equal clout. Young minds are impressionable and we live in a free society that has prospered from scientific discovery, therefor the details that these religious evolutionary types want to have omitted from the textbooks that they deem detrimental to THEIR views, quite possibly could have inspired some young future biologist to make some great new discovery that refines or changes the current paradigm. I myself find either evolution or E.T. seeding currently the most probable explainations for the origin of life. HOWEVER I will not follow either of those theories to the gates of hell, nor will I ignore any evidence that might disprove them. That would be very un-scientific for anyone to do because it implies faith(of the burying your head in the sand type). With that, I do believe claims of traditional omnipotent creation has no place in the classroom, the U.S. constitution is very specific about that.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



How Are Plants Aware of the World Around Them?
  Posted 1 days ago with 5 member flags
The Genesis Code
  Posted 8 days ago with 4 member flags
Explain Diversity Reloaded
  Posted 9 days ago with 3 member flags
Tree of Life and Tree of Knowledge
  Posted 4 days ago with 3 member flags
The carrot (chicken or egg , vegetable version)
  Posted 3 days ago with 3 member flags
A theory of proof of a God
  Posted 10 days ago with 2 member flags
Eden: The Double Sided Coin
  Posted 4 days ago with 2 member flags
We are all connected with nature and The Universe IMO
  Posted 3 days ago with 2 member flags