Powered by
Movable Type 3.2
Design by
Danny Carlton

Made with NoteTab

May 16, 2005

Kansas debate on religion of Evolution

From the Washington Post:

The Kansas school board's hearings on evolution weren't limited to how the theory should be taught in public schools. The board is considering redefining science itself.

Advocates of "intelligent design" are pushing the board to reject a definition limiting science to natural explanations for what's observed in the world.

Instead, they want to define it as "a systematic method of continuing investigation," without specifying what kind of answer is being sought. The definition would appear in the introduction to the state's science standards.

The proposed definition has outraged many scientists, who are frustrated that students could be discussing supernatural explanations for natural phenomena in their science classes.

"It's a completely unscientific way of looking at the world," said Keith Miller, a Kansas State University geologist.

Interesting that no one has ever seen the so-called “Big Bang" yet it's treated as fact. No one has ever observed Evolution, yet it is treated as fact. It seems the problem is that their definitions aren't applied evenly. Unobservable, irreproducible and unfalsifiable theories are shoved forth as facts as long as they conform to whatever is the currently dogma of the religion of Evolution. “Trust us, it's true. Now shut up and quit thinking!!”

From the Christian Post:

The debate began last Thursday with criticisms against evolution. Twenty-three witnesses from local and worldwide establishments testified before the three-member subcommittee in support of a proposal to introduce more criticism of evolution into science classrooms. The proposal would also allow the teaching of alternative theories.

Most of the witnesses believe in intelligent design, one of the leading alternative theories to evolution that says that the complexity and organization of life are evidence of an intelligent creator.

Attorney John Calvert, co-founder of the Intelligent Design Network and representative for the critics of evolution, stated after three days of testimony, “We’re not asking for [intelligent design] to be taught, only permitted. If you outlaw it, you’re endorsing an ideology.”

The majority of mainstream scientists and state educators favor maintaining the current science standards, which require the teaching of evolution as a key element of science education and a theory with strong scientific backing.

Most zealots from the religion of Evolution refused to attend the hearings, fearing the exposure of their fraud in an open debate with critics of the seriously flawed theory.

Posted by Danny Carlton at May 16, 2005 08:07 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Security verification

Type the characters you see in the image above.