|
|
||
 |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
|
Evolution, Intelligent
Design |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now That Science Magazine Recognizes That Behe's Theory of Irreducible Complexity Is Science Will They Let Him Respond: The contention that biochemist Michael Behe's intelligent design argument of "irreducible complexity" (IC) is not science was undercut in a recent issue of Science magazine which contains a paper purporting to falsify the theory. Separating mechanisms of origin from faith is unwise, by Peter Johnston: Some would call my position compatibilism. Evolution properly understood is not a comprehensive theory, and remains silent on many facets of the human condition. Why the intelligent design lobby thanks God for Richard Dawkins, by Madeleine Bunting: Anti-religious Darwinists are promulgating a false dichotomy between faith and science that gives succour to creationists. Turning Darwinian Evolution Upside Down, by Kazmer Ujvarosy: The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) simplemindedly promotes the concept of evolution from a simple beginning, and illustrates the process that drives the development of life on Earth with the tree-of-life model. It seeks to explain by the tree's forks and branches the relatedness of all organisms on this planet, both living and extinct. The Evolutionist Campaign to Suppress the Truth, by Kazmer Ujvarosy: The truth is that the evolutionist explanations for cosmic and biological development from a simple beginning do not square with the facts. Only development from a most complex universal common ancestor agrees with the data we have. AAAS says science and religion are compatible, by Matt Donnelly: America's leading scientific organization is urging religious groups to stand up for evolution. Bible-quoting science students on rise, by Duncan Campbell: A growing number of science students on British university campuses are challenging the theory of evolution, saying that Darwin was wrong. ID has a place, just not in science, by Barry Leff: Einstein said "God does not play dice with the universe." The smartest man to ever live believed in Intelligent Design. So do I. Intelligent Design says the world is too complex to have happened randomly. Science losing war over evolution? - Screening airs evolution versus intelligent design debate, by Alvin Powell: This just in from the front lines of the battle between evolution and intelligent design: evolution is losing. That's the assessment of Randy Olson, a Harvard-trained evolutionary biologist turned filmmaker who explored the debate in a new film, "Flock of Dodos: The Evolution - Intelligent Design Circus," which was screened Monday (Feb. 6) at the Harvard Museum of Natural History. Evolution, not intelligent design, is fundamental Catholic teaching, Vatican Observatory director says, by Mark Lombard: Intelligent Design reduces and belittles God's power and might, according to the director of the Vatican Observatory. Science is and should be seen as "completely neutral" on the issue of the theistic or atheistic implications of scientific results, says Father George V. Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory, while noting that "science and religion are totally separate pursuits." Philosophy and Intelligent Design, by Al Kelsch: What is philosophy, after all? I quote here from the great Protestant American Theologian of the last century, Dr. Paul Tillich: "Philosophy asks the question of reality as a whole; it asks the question of the structure of being." It is not a scientific question. It is absurd to assert that Intelligent Design -- in brief, that there is a God behind creation - should not be included in the panoply of possible approaches to the question of the structure of being. Vatican supports science: What if God spoke, and said: "What's this intelligent design stuff? That ain't science!" Would ID proponents keep on talking? "Well, not if you redefine science" ... "There's too many holes in the theory of evolution" ... "Life is too complex for it to be the product of random mutation" ... "This is academic censorship!" Intelligent Design and the Philosophy of Make-Believe, by Quinn Wyndham Price: The ongoing stand-off over the teaching of creationism in public schools is portrayed by some as a battle between superstitious ignorance and scientific enlightenment. So far, from this perspective, the race has gone to the swift and the battle to the strong: in the '80s, defenders of evolution succeeded in outlawing the teaching of "creation science," and in recent months they prevailed again in defeating "intelligent design" in the Kitzmiller vs. Dover decision. Objectivism in the Culture - A Man of Science Crusades Against Intelligent Design, by Ray Girn: Last December, a Pennsylvania Federal District court ruled that the Dover School District cannot teach "intelligent design"--the theory that the complexity of life indicates the existence of a divine "designer"--as a scientific alternative to Darwin's theory of evolution. Watching the case closely was Dr. Keith Lockitch of the Ayn Rand Institute, a man who has dedicated himself to educating people about the nature of the intelligent design movement. How smart is intelligent design?, by Karen Otto: It garners mountains of headlines, has been deemed law-breaking in the United States and will be the focus of a one-day philosophy of religion symposium at King's University College. Intelligent design harkens back to the still-controversial creation-versus-evolution debate and is certain to garner lots of interest, says symposium organizer Samantha Brennan. California School Cuts Intelligent Design from Curriculum, by Steve Jordahl: The alternative to evolution was being taught in a philosophy class. ID advocates take it in stride. The El Tejon school district in Southern California had the best of intentions. Casey Luskin, of the Discovery Institute, says they just didn't do their homework. Class over - Anti-evolution forces lose another round, by Charles C. Haynes: Have Darwin's foes become their own worst enemy? Consider the school board in the El Tejon Unified School District in rural California. On New Year's Day they approved a monthlong course called "Philosophy of Design," a thinly disguised attempt to challenge evolution by promoting intelligent design and creationism. Don't blame science, or evolution, for the problems in the world - We shouldn't be teaching creationism to our school kids, by J. Bolton Maddox: Most of the time, I could not agree more with Pat Buchanan that modern Western society is adrift in a sea of moral typhoons without a compass ["Evolution: A humanistic, intolerant religion all its own," Jan. 12]. I also agree that compass comes from culture, family and religion. Think Again - Charlie Darwin's angels, by Jonathan Rosenblum: For tactical reasons, Darwin's scientific supporters often prefer to minimize the clash between traditional religion and the Darwinian vision of all life developing via trillions of random micro-mutations sifted by natural selection. Many, however, candidly admit that Darwin leaves no room in human affairs for God. Calif. School Scraps 'Intelligent Design' - California School District Agrees to Stop Teaching 'Intelligent Design' Course: Under legal pressure, a rural school district agreed Tuesday to stop offering high school students an elective philosophy course on "intelligent design," an advocacy group said. Intelligent design not science, says Vatican newspaper article, by John Thavis: VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Intelligent design is not science and should not be taught as a scientific theory in schools alongside Darwinian evolution, an article in the Vatican newspaper said. The article said that in pushing intelligent design some groups were improperly seeking miraculous explanations in a way that creates confusion between religious and scientific fields. Science teachers focus on evolution: At Paintsville High School in eastern Kentucky, Jack Ousley follows the state's science core curriculum, not the book of Genesis, when teaching science. The Southern Baptist deacon believes that God created the heavens and the earth, but he also believes in evolution. He says he teaches that things evolve and change over time. Dogmatic Darwinists Strike Again - Americans United for the Separation of Students and Science: Americans United for the Separation of Church and State today sued a school district in El Tejon, California, because they have a philosophy course entitled "Philosophy of design." Even as Philosophy, Intelligent Design Under Fire: I know we've been overly critical of the whole intelligent design incursions into public school science classes, but this latest news has me going contrarian with the anti-religion crowd. Catholics and Evolution - Interview with Cardinal Christoph Schönborn - Are Christian values compatible with Darwinism? A Catholic leader sets out his views on evolution and intelligent design, interview by Tom Heneghan: Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Vienna touched off a storm in July 2005 with an op-ed page article in the New York Times questioning Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and appearing to endorse the concept of intelligent design--the theory that life forms are too complex to have been the product of random mutation. Let philosophy link evolution, creation, by Pedro O. Vega: The recent decision by a U.S. district judge enjoining any school in Dover, York County, from teaching intelligent design illustrates a sad cultural fact. We live in a culture fraught with conflicts and contradictions. Intelligent Design Gains Momentum, Raises Eyebrows on Campuses, by Sarah Price Brown: When Hannah Maxson started an intelligent design club at Cornell University last fall, a handful of science majors showed up for the first meeting. Today, the high-profile club boasts more than 80 members. California high school class pits evolution against religion, by Juliana Barbassa: FRESNO &endash; A rural California high school jumped into the national debate over teaching an alternative to evolution this week, offering the religion-based theory of "intelligent design" in a philosophy course. Less than a month after a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled against teaching the theory as science, a divided school board said Frazier Mountain High School in Lebec could teach the four-week winter session class after making the curriculum more philosophical and less scientific. Could Jones' Ruling Affect Evolution Education?, by Jim Bendewald: Not every evolutionist is ecstatic about the decision Judge John Jones made on December 20, 2005. In a startling article published January 5, 2006, Lloyd Eby, a philosophy professor from George Washington University, stated that the judge overstepped his bounds when he defined "science" in his 139 page ruling. Intelligent Design is Empirically Testable and Makes Predictions, by Jay Richards and Jonathan Witt: Among the many, many errors in Judge John Jones' Dover vs. Kitzmiller opinion is the charge that intelligent design (ID) makes no empirically testable claims (see pp. 66 ff.). Similarly, other ID critics assert that intelligent design makes no testable predictions.1 In fact, intelligent design fulfills both criteria since it makes numerous empirically testable predictions. Critics of Evolution Should First Learn the Subject, by Boris Shpungin: At the core of evolution are three simple observations. First, among sexually reproducing organisms, no offspring is exactly identical to its parents. Second, some traits of the parents are inherited by their offspring. Third, most species naturally produce more offspring than could be supported by the environment. Can anyone honestly dispute those three basic science facts? What's wrong with intelligent design, and with its critics, by Alexander George: This week, a federal judge ruled that intelligent design may not be taught in the science classrooms of Pennsylvania's public schools. I agree with the verdict, but we need to be careful about our reasons for supporting it. Chimps with everything - a ridiculous war, by Cristina Odone: Fundamentalists are boneheaded for championing intelligent design; it doesn't advance Christianity's cause at all. It sounds so innocuous. Of Pandas and People has a whimsical, almost Disneyesque ring to it, a soft-toy tome for children curious about the rich variety of species found in nature. To its critics, though, Pandas, the result of a collaboration between the American authors Percival Davis and Dean H. Kenyon, is the wrong-headed and downright wicked textbook of intelligent design (ID) theory. "Intelligent Design" Is Inherently Religious, by Keith Lockitch: A judge in Dover, PA, has ruled that "it is unconstitutional to teach intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom"--on the grounds that "intelligent design is a religious view." Advocates of "intelligent design" are outraged; the Discovery Institute, the leading organization promoting the theory, calls it an "attempt to censor science education." But "intelligent design" can play no part in a proper science education, because it is an inherently unscientific theory. Silencing Science, by Julia A. Seymour: Critics of intelligent design claim that the theory is not scientific, it is creationism in disguise, that there is no debate or controversy over the "facts of evolution." Most Americans Support the Teaching of Intelligent Design in Public Schools: Scooop.net (www.scooop.net), a next-generation media site based on democratic voting principles and active participation of its members, released the results of its weekly hot topic poll regarding the nation's view on whether the subject of intelligent design should be taught in public schools. Cardinal Schönborn on God and Creation - "It Is the Very Dignity of the Creature to Have Received Everything From Him": Here is a provisional translation of a catechetical lecture given by Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, archbishop of Vienna, last month on creation and evolution. Education panel agrees to reconsider teaching evolution: COLUMBIA, S.C. - An education oversight panel has put off a final recommendation on the state's biology teaching standards at the urging of a state senator who wants alternatives to evolution - including creationism - taught in classrooms. Religion professor says KU hasn't supported him: University of Kansas professor Paul Mirecki, whose planned class on intelligent design was canceled, said he was forced to give up his chairmanship of the religious studies department on Wednesday. 'Design' a staple of some courses: Don Viney can hardly wait for next semester, when he will teach philosophy of religion and discuss intelligent design with his Pittsburg State University students. Despite the hubbub ignited by a now-canceled course on intelligent design at the University of Kansas, similar courses on intelligent design, creationism and evolution have been offered at Kansas and Missouri universities for many years without controversy. Monkey Business - For students who doubt the validity of evolution, college science class can be daunting. What happens when beliefs and schoolwork collide?, by Victoria Bosch: Rich Scott's first few days on the West Chester University campus in suburban Philadelphia were spent worrying -- and not just because he was nervous about getting along with his roommate. A recent graduate of a Christian high school, Scott had grown up with parents, teachers and pastors telling him that God created the earth in six days and that evolution is a myth. Catholic scientists take issue with cardinal's message - A New York Times op-ed by Archbishop Christoph Cardinal Schönborn questioning evolution comes under fire, by Nandagopal R. Menon: William R. Stoeger is a Jesuit and a scientist who is lending his voice to a prickly debate in the Roman Catholic Church. It started when Christoph Schönborn, the archbishop of Vienna, stirred up Catholics and scientists in early July when he wrote an op-ed published in The New York Times reassessing the common belief that Catholic doctrine accepts Darwin's theory of evolution. Dover ruling could be its own genesis - Legal observers say the judge can take one of three paths in the intelligent design case, by Lisa Anderson: In the next few weeks a federal judge in Pennsylvania will rule in the nation's first legal case involving intelligent design, a decision that could influence the way biology is taught in schools across the country. Judge John Jones III, who presided over the six-week bench trial that ended last month in Harrisburg, Pa., may provide the first legal answer to the question at the heart of the most bitter battle in the culture wars over the teaching of evolution: Is intelligent design a religious belief or a scientific theory? Knox College philosophy course tackles intelligent design theory: Professor Martin Roth's philosophy course at Knox College this term, "Intelligent Design," combines evolution and design, in a study of an issue that is both thousands of years old and as current as today's headlines. Roth says he designed the course, which began this week, to "look at intelligent design on three levels: as an argument for the existence of God, as an alternative to evolution in science, and in the context of the current debate over evolution and religion." Science and faith - Science can't rule out intelligent design: A recent letter opposed to the teaching of "intelligent design" in public schools was headlined "Seek science instead of reverting to mythology." As the writer argued, a scientific hypothesis can become accepted theory through the "scientific method" of accumulating supporting data. Intelligent Design could be a bridge between civilizations, by Mustafa Akyol: In a furious New Republic cover story, "The Case Against Intelligent Design," Jerry Coyne joins in this hype and implies that all non-Christians, including Muslims, should be alarmed by this supposedly Christian theory of beginnings that "might offend those of other faiths." Little does he realize that if there is any view on the origin of life that might seriously offend other faiths -- including mine, Islam -- it is the materialist dogma... Creation science debunks evolution, explains Bible, by Greg Miller: The topic of evolution vs. creation today should be a real concern, weighing on the minds of every God-loving Christian. But, sadly, I have found that most Christians and non-Christians alike have fallen victim to the propaganda and lies used in the teaching of evolution. What's Wrong With Intelligent Design as Science?: An intensifying battle over intelligent design (ID) to be taught in science classes has been emerging across the United States, alarming scientists and educators who consider ID as a political ploy to repackage religion under the guise of "alternative science" to undermine the scientific theory of evolution. Policymakers in 24 states are weighing proposals to introduce ID in their public school curricula. Whether ID is a religious belief or a scientific theory is at the heart of the controversy waged in courtrooms and public forums. Why Intelligent Design Flunks Science And Why It Will Also Fail in Court, by Richard L. Cravatts, Ph.D.: "Our creationist detractors charge that evolution is an unproved and unprovable charade," wrote the brilliant paleontologist and Harvard professor, Stephen Jay Gould, "a secular religion masquerading as science." Suit Claims UC Berkeley Evolution Web Site Endorses Religion: A lawsuit filed in California claims that the operators of a University of California, Berkeley Web site that teaches about evolution has crossed the line by endorsing religious views consistent with the theory. 2nd KU class denies status of science to design theory, by Sophia Maines: Intelligent design -- already the planned subject of a controversial Kansas University seminar this spring -- will make its way into a second KU classroom in the fall, this time labeled as a "pseudoscience." God's chance creation, by George Coyne: Cardinal Christoph Schönborn claims random evolution is incompatible with belief in a creator God. Here, in an exclusive rebuttal of that view, the Vatican's chief astronomer says that science reflects God's infinite purpose. Leading Cardinal Redefines Church's View on Evolution: An influential cardinal in the Roman Catholic Church, which has long been regarded as an ally of the theory of evolution, is now suggesting that belief in evolution as accepted by science today may be incompatible with Catholic faith. Design debate arrives in force, by Janaki Kremmer: SYDNEY, Australia -- The U.S. debate over the teaching of "intelligent design" has reached around the world to Australia, where the concept has gotten a foothold despite a highly secular population, one in 10 of which goes regularly to church. The spat began in August when Education Minister Brendan Nelson, a physician, said at the National Press Club in Canberra that he had no objection to parochial schools introducing the subject into philosophy or religious studies classes. Religion professor's e-mail outrages critics, by Sophia Maines: Critics of a Kansas University course on intelligent design say an e-mail written by the professor proves the course is meant to mock religious fundamentalists. 64 Percent Say Religion 'Under Attack' - Creationism Should Be Taught In Science, 56 Percent Say: Sixty-four percent of American people believe religion is "under attack," according to a new poll released by the Anti-Defamation League. The poll found 53 percent of Americans likewise believe that religion as a whole is "losing its influence in American life." Of the 800 adults polled, 47 percent favored organized prayer in public school, 56 percent wanted creationism taught alongside evolution and 64 percent want religious symbols such as the Ten Commandments displayed in public buildings. U. of Kansas religion course seeks to debunk creationism, intelligent design: The University of Kansas is about to start a course in creationism and intelligent design, but supporters of those concepts may not like it. Next semester's course in the religious studies department is titled "Special Topics in Religion: Intelligent Design, Creationism and other Religious Mythologies." The department chairman says "the KU faculty has had enough." Intelligent design built by controversy, not science, by Ron Eachus: The controversy about getting school boards to include "intelligent design" in science classes has been manufactured to create the illusion it is a legitimate, scientifically supported alternative to evolution. It isn't. Intelligent design has replaced creationism as the alternative of choice embraced by those who want to achieve politically what they can't do scientifically: discredit the science of evolution and replace it with their religious beliefs. Science and religion face off - The two really aren't incompatible, by Tom Yulsman: Is evolution compatible with religion? With controversies raging over the teaching of intelligent design in the classroom, people on opposite sides of the debate seem to agree on one thing: The answer is "no." They frame the issue in black-and-white terms, leaving no room for nuance and ambiguity. In doing so, they implacably pit religion and science against each other, harming both. Schools fight teaching of religion as science, by Eileen FitzGerald: At Faith Academy in New Milford, there's no debate about whether to teach students about Charles Darwin and the theory of evolution. It's just not done. The Christian school, starting with pre-kindergarten classes, teaches students that God is the creator of everything. It's leaders are heartened to hear about efforts by parents and some elected officials around the country to bring creationism or a related theory, called creative design, into public schools. 'Intelligent design' isn't science, says Vatican's astronomer: The Vatican's chief astronomer said Friday that "intelligent design" isn't science and doesn't belong in science classrooms. The Rev. George Coyne, the Jesuit director of the Vatican Observatory, said placing intelligent design theory alongside that of evolution in school programs was "wrong" and was akin to mixing apples with oranges. Darwin exhibit in New York challenges creationists: A monumental exhibit on the life and work of Charles Darwin opens in New York on Saturday with a view to shooting a scholarly broadside at the opponents of teaching evolution in US schools. "Some would say that science ... is under assault in this country," said Ellen Futter, president of the American Museum of Natural History, where the exhibit is running through May 29. Darwin, Intelligent Design, and Science Education: The battle over the teaching of evolution erupted anew last August when President Bush remarked that alongside evolution, schoolchildren should be taught about "intelligent design" (ID), which holds that an unseen but intelligent force is behind the complexity of humanity. The Kansas Board of Education recently voted to require that students learn about intelligent design, and a federal court in Pennsylvania is considering whether discussing the theory in science classes violates the separation of church and state. Participants at an October 21 AEI conference considered the educational and judicial implications of the latest science war. The Flawed Philosophy of Intelligent Design, by James Harrington: The time has come to be blunt. The problem with Intelligent Design is not that it is false; not that the arguments in its favor reduce to smoke and mirrors; and not that it's defenders are disingenuous or even duplicitous. The problem with Intelligent Design is that it is dumb. I would contend that ID is dumb biology; even if it is on to something, what it is on to has no connection and does no meaningful work in biology (or physics). However, and more significantly, ID is dumb philosophy. UI faculty sign on against intelligent design in science, by William Dillon: More than 150 faculty members at the University of Iowa have signed a statement denouncing the use of intelligent design in science. UI is the last of Iowa's three state universities to issue such a statement, joining a combined 250 colleagues at Iowa State University and the University of Northern Iowa in an effort to reject "all attempts to represent Intelligent Design as a scientific endeavor." Panel says intelligent design not scientific, by Jeremy Baron: Drexel English and philosophy professor Stacey Ake is blunt when it comes to the theory of intelligent design. "It is garbage," she said. Ake was joined by Penn professors Michael Weisberg, Rogers Smith and Alan Kors on Monday for a panel discussion on intelligent design -- the theory that an intelligent creator must have guided the development of life -- as part of the Penn American Civil Liberties Union's Rights Week. Some college classes questioning evolution take hold, by Daniel Golden: With a magician's flourish, Thomas Ingebritsen pulled six mousetraps from a shopping bag and handed them out to students in his "God and Science" seminar. At his instruction, they removed one component -- either the spring, hammer or holding bar -- from each mousetrap. They then tested the traps, which all failed to snap. "Is the mousetrap irreducibly complex?" the Iowa State University molecular biologist asked the class. "Yes, definitely," said Jason Mueller, a junior biochemistry major wearing a cross around his neck. Kansas' definition of science sparks debate - Critics worry that new standards could open door wider to creationists, by John Hanna: With Kansas facing international scrutiny over new public-school science standards that challenge evolution, one key change is easy to miss. In the introduction of the 111-page document, a new, longer definition of science replaces one that said, "Science is the human activity of seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us." Religion and science each have their own place: It is unusual for a local election to make national news. When the election in question is for a school board in Pennsylvania, the high profile is doubly curious. Earlier this week, on Tuesday, voters in Dover, Pa., sent a potent message by tossing out all eight incumbents on their school board. The board has been the focus of national attention because of its advocacy of so-called "intelligent design" theory in the district's high school science curriculum. Disclaimer affront to science, faith: The Alabama Board of Education had a chance to take a stand in support of honest science-based study this week. It failed to take it and thus has failed the children of the state who will be taught biology from textbooks that carry a disclaimer describing the very foundation of the science as a "controversial theory." Engaging prior learning on creationism and evolution may benefit college biology students: An educational intervention that included reading books sympathetic to and opposed to "intelligent design" (ID) prompted students in a college introductory biology course to report that they had become more accepting of evolution as an explanation for life, according to a study in the November 2005 issue of BioScience. The intervention, which was studied by Steven D. Verhey of Central Washington University, encouraged students to read parts of an ID-friendly, anti-evolution text, as well as an online refutation of the text and parts of a book presenting evidence for evolution. Board member - 'Intelligent design' wasn't supposed to be taught, By MARTHA RAFFAELE: HARRISBURG, Pa. - A school board member who supported including a reference to "intelligent design" in the district's science curriculum testified Monday that the board only intended for teachers to mention the concept, not teach it. Darwin's Natural Selection Still at Work in Humans, by Ker Than: The evolutionary process that Charles Darwin discovered almost 150 years ago, responsible for transforming dinosaurs into birds and allowing the walking ancestors of whales to take to the seas, is still quietly at work in humans today. Darwin's natural selection is the process by which nature rewards those individuals better adapted to their environments with survival and reproductive success. It works at the level of genes, sections of DNA that encode for proteins serve as the software of life. Presenting ID not teaching religion: In their zeal to preserve "separation of church and state," parents who are suing the Dover Area School District could inadvertently be taking away the very freedom the First Amendment was designed to protect. The First Amendment reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." They claim that it's unconstitutional to teach the theory of intelligent design because it implies the existence of a god (small g). The evidence for intelligent design is scientific fact, not theology. Presenting it does not teach a religion. Declaring atheism to be the only acceptable belief does. 2 Science Groups Say Kansas Can't Use Their Evolution Papers, by JODI WILGOREN: Two leading science organizations have denied the Kansas board of education permission to use their copyrighted materials in the state's proposed new science standards because of the standards' critical approach to evolution. The National Academy of Sciences and the National Science Teachers Association said the much-disputed new standards "will put the students of Kansas at a competitive disadvantage as they take their place in the world." Science groups rebuff Kansas on evolution: Two science organizations are refusing to allow Kansas education officials to use copyrighted materials in new science standards in a dispute over evolution. The National Academy of Sciences and the National Science Teachers Association said the proposed new standards "will put the students of Kansas at a competitive disadvantage as they take their place in the world," the New York Times reported. The Kansas board of education is expected to put the new standards into effect within the next two weeks, but the decision to refuse permission to use the copyright materials could delay their adoption, the Times reported. 'Intelligent Design' scorned, by Darrin Barnett: AUSTRALIA'S scientific community has fired its first broadside in a looming war over a controversial theory of evolution known as intelligent design. The theory proposes that evolution alone cannot explain complex biological processes and that a God-like creator must be behind them. |
|
|
Enrich your life with a science or nature book... Enrich your life with a science or nature magazine...
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
[Homepage] [Newsletter] [Search] [Support the Academy] [Link to Us] [Contact the Academy] [Citing Articles from Our Website] [Privacy Policy & Disclaimer]
Copyright 1998-99, 2000-01, 2002-03, & 2004-05 by The Radical Academy. All Rights Reserved.
This Page Was Updated On