Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Worldtraveller · 11-16-2005, 08:04 AM

In this thread is an article about Steve Abrams, of the Kansas Board of Education. He and Connie Morris are probably the two main driving forces behind the gutting of the science standards here in Kansas.

On November 15th, the Wichita Eagle was nice enough to let him tell his side of the story.

Nice of him to clarify some details for us. First of all, the headline reads:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Abrams

STEVE ABRAMS: SCIENCE STANDARDS AREN'T ABOUT RELIGION

Contrast this to what he said just a couple of months before when speaking at a church in Lawrence, Kansas:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawrence Journal

...the chairman of the Kansas State Board of Education told the crowd here that it was impossible to believe in the Bible and evolution...

and

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Abrams

"At some point in time, if you compare evolution and the Bible, you have to decide which one you believe,�? Abrams said. “That’s the bottom line.�?

But now it's not about religion?? Or is that just the headline the paper gave it??
Steve's own words start out promising enough (as they usually do):

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Abrams

Evolution. Creation. Intelligent design. Is there any truth or facts that can come out of what has been bandied about in the media recently about the Kansas State Board of Education, which I chair?

Oh good, he going to give us the facts?? And enlighten us with the truth!?!! ...don't hold your breath.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Abrams

Some of my critics claim that I inserted the supernatural into the science classroom. Others claim I inserted creation via the back door. The critics also claim that in the scientific community, there is no controversy about evolution. They then proceed to explain that I ought to understand something about this, because surely I can see that over a period of time, over many generations, a pair of dogs will "evolve."
But that is one of the reasons that we tried to further define evolution. We want to differentiate between the genetic capacity in each species genome that permits it to change with the environment as being different from changing to some other creature. In our science curriculum standards, we called this microevolution and macroevolution -- changes within kinds and changing from one kind to another.

He then goes on to demonstrate that he clearly doesn't have a grasp of the facts, and that his truth, by using the biblical term 'kinds', comes from none other than the buybull.
Further:

Quote:

Evolutionists do not want students to know about or think about scientific criticisms of evolution. Evolutionists are the ones minimizing open scientific inquiry from their explanation of the origin of life. They do not want students to know that peer-reviewed journals, articles and books have scientific criticisms of evolution.
<snip>
Instead of discussing the issues of evolution, noisy critics go into attack mode and do a character assassination of anyone who happens to believe that evolution should actually be subject to critical analysis.

Isn't he, by writing this as a guest editorial, instead of engaging the scientists in earnest debate and learning the subject, doing the very thing he is railing against here?

The good news is that most school districts have said they will continue to teach real science. Of course, to Mr. Abrams, this is not such good news, he characterizes it thus:

Quote:

In spite of the fact that the state board approved science curriculum standards that endorse critical analysis of evolution (supported by unrefuted testimony from many credentialed scientists at the science hearings) and do not include intelligent design, and the fact that scientific polls indicate a large percentage of parents do not want evolution taught as dogma in the science classroom, what is the response from some of the school superintendents around Kansas?

I notice how he seems to place a lot of weight on the fact thatt he school board approved the new standards. Apparently it doesn't seem to matter to Mr. Abrams that they did this in the face of overwhelmening opposition by many of the more prominent scientific organizations in the US (NCIS for instance) and after the independant consulting company hired by the board opposed adopting the new standards.

In other words, Mr. Abrams and the other 5 board members are saying "It's our way, or the highway."

We'll see come the 2006 elections.

Cheers,
Lane

Sensei Meela · 11-16-2005, 09:02 AM

The saddest thing is that this kind of vitriole is lapped-up uncritically by the spoon-fed pew-fillers who empowered the Board, in the first place, and fuels their 'movement.'

Hoosier Daddy · 11-16-2005, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Evolutionists

Good to see Abrams promote critical thinking by poisoning the well with a pejorative term.

g-21-lto · 11-17-2005, 05:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Abrams

Others claim I inserted creation via the back door.

Well, as he's putting it like that himself...bend over, Kansas! :devil3:

Also, what's that about "peer-reviewed journals" publishing "scientific criticisms" of evolution? Maybe a few of Behe or Dembski's pieces?

RBH · 11-17-2005, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by g-21-lto

Well, as he's putting it like that himself...bend over, Kansas! :devil3:

Also, what's that about "peer-reviewed journals" publishing "scientific criticisms" of evolution? Maybe a few of Behe or Dembski's pieces?

I suspect it refers to a combination of the Behe (Protein Science( and Meyer papers together with their infamous bibliography.

RBH

Worldtraveller · 11-17-2005, 12:56 PM

Thanks for that link RBH. Do you suppose D.I. has people employed soley to go through scientific journals for quotemine-able material??

It certainly seems that way. Need to keep an eye on those help wanted ads coming out of Seattle!

Cheers,
Lane

Hoosier Daddy · 11-17-2005, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worldtraveller

Thanks for that link RBH. Do you suppose D.I. has people employed soley to go through scientific journals for quotemine-able material??

It certainly seems that way. Need to keep an eye on those help wanted ads coming out of Seattle!

Cheers,
Lane

I think they are called Senior Fellows.

Jeffahn · 11-17-2005, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worldtraveller

I notice how he seems to place a lot of weight on the fact thatt he school board approved the new standards. Apparently it doesn't seem to matter to Mr. Abrams that they did this in the face of overwhelmening opposition by many of the more prominent scientific organizations in the US (NCIS for instance) and after the independant consulting company hired by the board opposed adopting the new standards.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-16-2005, 09:02 AM	#2
Sensei Meela Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: AZ, u.s.a. Posts: 1,202	The saddest thing is that this kind of vitriole is lapped-up uncritically by the spoon-fed pew-fillers who empowered the Board, in the first place, and fuels their 'movement.'

11-17-2005, 12:56 PM	#6
Worldtraveller Banned Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 7,834	Thanks for that link RBH. Do you suppose D.I. has people employed soley to go through scientific journals for quotemine-able material?? It certainly seems that way. Need to keep an eye on those help wanted ads coming out of Seattle! Cheers, Lane

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.