Utterly Meaningless

Don’t forget FSMism.

Wow! A university professor equates ID with creationism and religion. Who’da thunk?

Big news indeed! This certainly deals a death blow to the IDers.

Well, here we go. An atheist director of a university department of religion “creates” a course that denigrates those who believe or think otherwise… ahhh breath the air of intellectual freedom!

Anyway, the provost of this college has already had to come out and apologize and reasure the public that this will be a balanced course and that all views will be “tolerated.” Is that reverse PC or what???

Why are the atheists using Kansas as battleground for re-defining science? I know Daryl, its really the other way around, but wait! Read this survey of trends in the definition of science around the nation.

discov...id=333

Introducing the weaknesses of evolution is the way to go.
~aj

snip from: Parent wins court battle
over evolution
Schools officials blocked proposal that encouraged debate
Posted: October 27, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

**snip only**
As WorldNetDaily reported, Larry Caldwell of Sacramento filed a civil-rights lawsuit in federal court against the Roseville Joint Union High School District and school officials alleging his constitutional rights to free speech, equal protection and religious freedom were violated when he was prevented from introducing a curriculum that includes some of the scientific weaknesses of Darwin’s theory of evolution in biology classes, without including religious content.

Caldwell also sued the Oakland, Calif.-based National Center for Science Education claiming an article by director Eugenie Scott contained numerous factual misstatements and libeled him in an effort to discredit efforts to promote his curriculum.

Judge Damrell ruled school officials who base their refusal on the actual or perceived religious beliefs or affiliations of the citizen proposing the policy run afoul of the protections against religious discrimination in the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and in the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

“The court’s ruling is a vindication of the constitutional right of California citizens to initiate public debate in school board meetings on the question of how we should teach evolution to our children,” Caldwell said.

He asserted the free-debate issue “must be addressed if our children are to acquire the critical thinking skills they will need to compete in the 21st century.” (end of snip)

forgot link:
worldn...=47068

Daryl,
World Net Daily but…

Read this survey of trends in the definition of science around the nation.

So what? The only definition that matters is the one that scientists have to live with. After all, scientists decide (through the process of peer review) what is and is not acceptable science. School Boards can claim that ID is science. They could also claim that the sky is green and the moon is inhabited by little grey-skinned people. Doesn’t make any of it so.

Daryl – I’m just saying you can’t have it both ways. If you want to be consistent, (not necessarily objective, or right) you need to apply the same editorial critieria to the evolutionists and the religion profs that you do to the creationists and the ID’ers.

Just because you agree with their position shouldn’t be sufficient to also agree with their methods.

What’s really interesting about this course in Kansas is what the prof has written about it:

“The fundies want it all taught in a science class, but this will be a nice slap in their big fat face by teaching it as a religious studies class under the category ‘mythology,’” Mirecki wrote.
He signed the note “Doing my part (to upset) the religious right, Evil Dr. P.”

When asked about his reaction to the outrage voiced by conservatives, Mirecki said: “A lot of people are mad about what’s going on in Kansas, and I’m one of them.”

I’m not sure this is the behavior that leads to open discussion and debate of ideas, but his provost has put him on notice that the course had better conform to higher standards of discourse than what he had originally intended.

But what’s new? Just more dogma, hate, censorship, and discrimination from the evolutionary priesthood. And of course, no compelling reason to accept the major claims of the evolutionists.

Mike Gene over at telicthoughts.com has done a great job researching this class and the teacher behind it. If an ID prof did something like this, even outside of science classes, my hunch is that he/she would be fired.

telict...s.com/

And, if you think this is an isolated case, check out this nice summary of recent well-documented cases of intolerance in academia re ID:

post-d...y.html

Finally, a professor at UCSB had this web-site censored by his department chair – you can still get to the actual pages here, verita...n.html but the links to it have been removed. The graphs are a good introduction to the real status of the fossil evidence as well as the real status of the corrupt nature of how evolution is taught in the schools, portrayed in museums, and propped up by censorship and hate by those who have a religious commitment to materialism.