Jim, there is a very simple argument that while I don't agree with, is almost impossible for science to argue with.
Faith. Hard line religions tell us that the scientific evidence you claim is fact was placed there by god to tell the good people from the infidels. Now, I haven't read much of the papers behind ID, but what little I have read doesn't deal with the actual creation of the universe, or the earth. Or even of the religious stories in the bible. Just that a creator, made certain determinations as to what types of living things there would be, and how they would interact with the other ones. All I'm saying, is what if, what if God created Earth, set everything up the way he did, and while he was playing around for what to us would seem like to us a few million years, was to him a few days. The truth is that the bible doesn't really talk about this stuff. If you are teaching ID in the biology class, then it should deal with the creation of the earth, just of life. Same with Evolution, which also doesn't deal with the creation of the earth, or of life for that matter, only the changes of life after it was created. -----Original Message----- From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 6:02 PM To: CF-Community Subject: RE: Bush wants religion taught in the science classroom 4) ID provides no observable predictions. This means that it's nearly impossible to use ID as a foundational topic for further learning in science. This isn't a major issue from the perspective of whether it's "good science" or not but it plays a major role in teaching. A good, solid understanding of evolution immediately gives a student a leg up in many aspects of science. 5) ID is not supported by the scientific community as a viable theory. When creating curricula it's generally a good idea to pay attention to that area's professional community. In this case however we're seeing more attention paid to politicians and other lay people. In general considering ID from a purely scientific, unbiased viewpoint how could you reasonably place it on even ground with Evolution? ID is, in its current formulation, perhaps a decade old. Evolutionary theory has been challenged and tested for well over 100 years. Why should this upstart, poorly formulated, poorly documented, unwilling to change theory be given equal footing? If science class is to make any sense the what's taught in it must adhere to the (admittedly arbitrary) boundaries set forth. > I'm not sure why that doesn't have a place in school. I'm not saying I > agree > with the theory, I'm just saying that when the majority of the Country > thinks it is fact, preventing the schools system from teaching it does a > disservice to the students. Whoa - stop right there. NOBODY is "preventing" the schools from teaching it. The stakes here are on approved science curriculum: what gets tested for on standardized tests. Schools can teach it if they like. The problem is that most schools are choosing not to teach it. The scientific community doesn't support it as a valid, documented theory yet. All of the trials and cases on this topic have either been to 1) downgrade the status of Evolutionary theory in the classroom or 2) force the addition of ID. Jim Davis ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167718 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
