Slashdot Mirror
Louisiana, Intelligent Design, and Science Classes
rollcall writes "The Livingston, Louisiana public school district is considering introducing intelligent design into its science curriculum. During the board's meeting Thursday, several board members expressed an interest in the teaching of creationism. 'Benton said that under provisions of the Science Education Act enacted last year by the Louisiana Legislature, schools can present what she termed "critical thinking and creationism" in science classes. Board Member David Tate quickly responded: "We let them teach evolution to our children, but I think all of us sitting up here on this School Board believe in creationism. Why can't we get someone with religious beliefs to teach creationism?" Fellow board member Clint Mitchell responded, "I agree...you don't have to be afraid to point out some of the fallacies with the theory of evolution. Teachers should have the freedom to look at creationism and find a way to get it into the classroom."'"
I also live in Louisiana and this comes as no surprise. This is a VERY religious state. Every 100 yards you see a church, no lie! Louisiana is all about big churches, big trucks / SUVs, low IQs, and butchering the English language.
Both of them are not like the other.
The entire curriculum will consist of Genesis. The answer to every question is "it was God's will," or "The Lord works in mysterious ways." Any injection of the scientific method into the discussion, pointing out the glaring contradictions in the class text, or other dissent will result in a trip to the pastor... I mean principal's office, where the student will be thrown into water to see if they float. "Creationism 101" should take about 15 minutes of one class period.
Technically speaking, historical evolution isn't science either, it's theoretical history. We don't teach ancient Egypt in science class, why evolution? What part of believing that men came from apes in the past is required to understand how mutations, genetics, and natural selection work in the present day? The history of the earth was supposedly engineered from what we know in the present, so why bother with the history part at all? Why is the origin of the planet such a big deal?
Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
Since you mention it, where's the intermediate insect wing in the fossil record?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Your mixing up micro and macro evolution. Micro-evolution is changes within a species. This is widely believed as fact. Macro-evolution is one species changing into another species. This has never been witnessed or reproduced. It is not backed by the fossil record.
* If we started finding fossils that suddenly changed from one type of animal to another in a single generation - macro-evolution - never observed
* fossils where the exact same collection of species are stagnant all the way back to the beginning of time - observed in fossil record; modern day creatures: sharks, alligators, coelacanth, etc.
* identical complex features suddenly appeared in many species separated by a wide distance simultaneously - observed in Cambrian explosion
* able to reproduce selective breeding or specification in the lab - micro-evolution
* no bacteria ever developed resistance to antibiotics - micro-evolution
* genetic tests on existing fossils hadn't shown genetic drift tempered by survivability in an environment - micro-evolution
This is the whole point of ID: is it easier to believe that a single intelligent being (or a few, in polytheistic models) has 'always existed' or that a bunch of material has 'always existed' and given rise, without any outside interference, to intelligent life? Personally I find the former much more believable; especially since that is what virtually *EVERY* religion before the advent of modern science claimed. Why would our ancestors have all, en mass, made up this idea that someone created them?
William George