Slashdot Mirror
Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional
An anonymous reader writes "MSNBC reports that a judge in Atlanta, GA has ruled that a sticker placed on all textbooks in Cobb County stating that 'Evolution is a theory, not a fact,' is unconstitutional, and ordered that all stickers be removed."
I'm not defending either side here...but how exactly does one call this a "creationist textbook sticker?" I've heard many evolutionists declare evolution as only theory and not fact as well...
Since putting the sticker violated rules (2) and (3), it was deemed to be unconstitutional.
"When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail." - Abraham Maslow (1908-1970)
can be found here.
"When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail." - Abraham Maslow (1908-1970)
A quote I've seen attributed to Asimov:
'The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not "Eureka!" but "That's funny..."'
Intelligent design/creationism are not falsifiable and do not belong in a science class. They belong in a class studying mythology and fairy tales.
Nerd: Derogatory term typically directed at anybody with a lower Slashdot ID than you.
A minority of people in this country understand the Calculus. They should be the ones who decide what everyone's kids learn in school. So, yes, exactly: a minority should decide what the majority's kids learn in schools everyone's taxes fund. That's because the minority is often smarter.
All's true that is mistrusted
Actually, you're wrong. Atheism is not the lack of religion, it is the lack of belief in god(s). An atheist can still be religious (as in the case of some Buddhists). What atheism is, is a belief that one can have, whether you have religious beliefs or not.
Do a web search on irreducible complexity.
The idea of irreducible complexity is scientifically valid: if you could find a structure which could not have evolved, that's proof that evolution is wrong. That's why evolution is a scientific theory: it proposes tests which it could fail.
Creationists (like the grandparent post) cite certain examples: the eye (there are an awful lot of pieces, and it's hard to see how a less-complex eye could exist to evolve into an eye without first being selected against); the bacterial flagellum (another rather complex piece from which it's hard to imagine the immediate evolutionary precursor).
The examples strike me as extremely strained. There are very few of them repeated over and over. They always apply to soft tissues, so the fossil record is poor. Every time we look at hard tissues, the evolutionary trace is clear.
Despite the complexity of these systems, it still seems that with enough effort we will eventually uncover how they did evolve, perhaps once we have sequenced the genomes of creatures along the evolutionary path. It certainly seems premature to throw out a very successful theory on the basis of this evidence.
But the evidence is there, waiting for you to explain it. Don't dismiss the challenger; know his argument and refute it.
The idea that the Earth travels around the Sun is just part of the theory of Planetary Motion. Electrons are just part of Atomic Theory. If they don't exist, your computer doesn't work. Gravity is just a theory.
American Heritage Dictionary
theory n.
1. A set of statements or principals 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.
This is what scientists mean by a theory. Nothing in science is a fact. As more observations are made, theories can change, or new ones are developed.
Evolution Theory is accepted as the best explaination of what has been observed from any number of discipines. The sticker is incorrect in the usage of the word theory and should not be placed in the textbooks.
Should physics textbooks carry a sticker that gravity is just a theory also?
You're obviously not clear on ANY of the definitions, so I will be helpful and provide some, with examples.
Fact: Something that you observe to be true.
fact #1: when you drop a hammer, it falls to the ground
fact #2: a genetic sequence can change sufficiently to form a new species. Speciation has been observed more than once in the laboratory and in the wild, so this is a fact. Since we call this process 'evolution', that means evolution is a fact. Keep reading for more explanation of this.
Theory: An explanation of an observation
Theory #1: The theory of gravity is understood as a curvature in space, which explains why the hammer falls.
Theory #2: The Theory of Evolution through Natural Selection explains how a population's genome can change over time.
Law: Not really related to any of the other definitions. It's just a mathematical relationship between two values.
Law #1: If you double the distance from a source of light, the brightness falls off proportionally to the square of the distance.
Law #2: (expressed as a formula) F=ma. Force equals mass times acceleration.
Please note that Evolution is a fact, and the theory is called the Theory of Evolution through Natural Selection. There are other theories of evolution, which have been disproved. A famous one is the theory of evolution through acquired characteristics, also known as Lamarkian evolution. It posited that species evolve by acquiring and retaining useful characteristics through use. Therefore, a giraffe would have longer necks if the previous generations stretched their necks to reach high leaves. This was the main theory that Darwin and others showed to be false.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
> As far as I know, no one has actually observed macroevolution.
Then I'm afraid, to be blunt, that you are essentially ignorant of a vast area of research.
Check out http://talkorigins.org. Let's see how open your mind truly is.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.