Freethought & Rationalism Archive

RufusAtticus · 01-10-2003, 04:14 PM

Okay, I heard about this throught the evolistga listserv.

Well it looks like IDist are now trying to screw with West Virginia curriculum. There was a school board meeting last night and no scientists were present to defend biology curriculum.

http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/WVPage.htm

http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/wvletter.htm

If you're from West Viriginia or know someone who is, especially if you are (or that person is) a biologist or other scientist, you should consider getting involved in this.

Principia · 01-10-2003, 04:33 PM

A good place to start is to contact faculty members of any academic institution located in WV. Here is the West Viriginia Academy of Sciences, with a promising resolution against creationism.

FYI: WV was one of the states that failed the state-by-state evalution of evolution standards. It will be a shame for them to undergo the public humiliation that Kansas went through.

Albion · 01-10-2003, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Intelligent Design network, inc., is a national organization focused on the objective conduct and teaching of origins science - origins science that is conducted and taught without philosophic, religious or naturalistic bias or assumption.

Um - isn't there a bit of an inherent contradiction here? Focusing on origins that are taught without bias, but calling itself "Intelligent Design Network"? Bit of a bias against anything other than the philosophical and religious bias and assumption that an intellignet designer must be involved. These people must think that West Virginians are really stupid.

Principia · 01-10-2003, 05:03 PM

Quote:

These people must think that West Virginians are really stupid.

The problem imo is that the WV science standards were (are) already a mass of confusion to begin with (remember they flunked the evals). Naturally, IDnet is just jumping at the opportunity to confuse the matter even more. The IDnet "corrections" are designed to harp on minutiae that sidetrack the true focus of a science education, which is to teach science and not philsophical/religious concerns. I love this particular section in their edits:

Quote:

Implementing Recommendation. In conclusion we believe the Policy should be revised so that children are not introduced to origins science until they attain an age and maturity sufficient to fully comprehend the scientific bases for explanations and the philosophic implications of those explanations. When they are introduced to the subject, perhaps at the 10th grade level, they should be given all the material facts relevant to the issue of where do we come from? This will then equip them to make informed decisions about matters that may have a major impact on their lives.

This conclusion of theirs pretty much contradicts the rest of their document, which goes about suggesting how to teach origins science.

I think a good "teach the controversy" compromise here would be to request that ID be included in the standards, with the explicit goal of showing why it is not science. The benefits are tangible: we teach the children how to debunk pseudoscience.

Monkey · 01-10-2003, 09:19 PM

Quote:

...teaching of origins science - origins science that is conducted and taught without philosophic, religious or naturalistic bias or assumption.

The bias is two fold. They try to remove the naturalistic methodology that IS science aswell. Isn't science about explaining phenomenon so far as natualism can explain it?

Albion · 01-10-2003, 09:55 PM

Tenth-grade level??? Isn't that 16 years old, give or take? These people want kids to not be taught any astronomy, geology, or biology until they're 16? That is truly frightening. Quite apart from which, how many science-free years of "evolution is the work of the devil" indoctrination at church and Sunday school do they think children need before they get the message?

A group promoting intelligent design is not, by its very nature, bias free itself. Threfore, presenting itself as bias free is a lie from the very start. It's then concentrating on certain emotive branches of science while pushing its mantra that they're taught with a naturalistic bias without paying much attention to the facts that (a) all science is taught - and conducted - that way, not just those branches, and (b) the naturalistic bias of science isn't the same as atheist-humanist materialism. That whole document reads like a Phillip Johnson book; start off appearing to be open-minded and move into attack mode so gradually that you hope people won't notice you've stopped being open minded.

tgamble · 01-11-2003, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Albion
Tenth-grade level??? Isn't that 16 years old, give or take? These people want kids to not be taught any astronomy, geology, or biology until they're 16?

Just not the parts that contradict their fairy tales I suppose.

I doubt the ID loonies would have objections to teaching how the heart works or the different systems in the body.

Geology and astronomy is gonna be more difficult, unless these ID loonies aren't YECs. At least then they won't object ot dating methods and standard geology as well as star formation, and measureing distence etc. I don't know much about either but just how much (honest and accurate) geology could you teach without a YEC bitching about it? Not much I bet.

At least with the creation "science" bills, their position was clear. With the ID nuts they can't agree on anything except that evolution is godless and evil and shouldn't be taught without offering counter "facts" like no transitional fossils, no new information etc. etc. etc.

happyboy · 01-12-2003, 07:09 AM

oh, fuck......

i live in west virginia, and while i agree, west virginian schools were FAR from academically stimulating, we do NOT need this kind of idiocy brought into an already eff'ed up school system!

happyboy

Bubba · 01-12-2003, 05:09 PM

I'd be happy as a non scientist to become more active here in Ohio. You West Virginians have my sympathy.

Bubba

beyelzu · 01-13-2003, 02:45 AM

the part i find particularly irritating is the claim to be an alternative to evolution theory. like creation theory. id just isnt science. but some theist will work hard trying to get it including knowing it supports theism. anything to get around the separation of church and state.

01-10-2003, 04:14 PM	#1
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	West Virgina: The Next ID BattleGround Okay, I heard about this throught the evolistga listserv. Well it looks like IDist are now trying to screw with West Virginia curriculum. There was a school board meeting last night and no scientists were present to defend biology curriculum. http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/WVPage.htm http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/wvletter.htm If you're from West Viriginia or know someone who is, especially if you are (or that person is) a biologist or other scientist, you should consider getting involved in this.

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

01-10-2003, 04:33 PM	#2
Principia Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: anywhere Posts: 1,976	A good place to start is to contact faculty members of any academic institution located in WV. Here is the West Viriginia Academy of Sciences, with a promising resolution against creationism. FYI: WV was one of the states that failed the state-by-state evalution of evolution standards. It will be a shame for them to undergo the public humiliation that Kansas went through.

01-10-2003, 09:55 PM	#6
Albion Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: US east coast. And www.theroyalforums.com Posts: 2,829	Tenth-grade level??? Isn't that 16 years old, give or take? These people want kids to not be taught any astronomy, geology, or biology until they're 16? That is truly frightening. Quite apart from which, how many science-free years of "evolution is the work of the devil" indoctrination at church and Sunday school do they think children need before they get the message? A group promoting intelligent design is not, by its very nature, bias free itself. Threfore, presenting itself as bias free is a lie from the very start. It's then concentrating on certain emotive branches of science while pushing its mantra that they're taught with a naturalistic bias without paying much attention to the facts that (a) all science is taught - and conducted - that way, not just those branches, and (b) the naturalistic bias of science isn't the same as atheist-humanist materialism. That whole document reads like a Phillip Johnson book; start off appearing to be open-minded and move into attack mode so gradually that you hope people won't notice you've stopped being open minded.

01-12-2003, 07:09 AM	#8
happyboy Regular Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: on the border between here and there, WV Posts: 373	oh, fuck...... i live in west virginia, and while i agree, west virginian schools were FAR from academically stimulating, we do NOT need this kind of idiocy brought into an already eff'ed up school system! happyboy

01-12-2003, 05:09 PM	#9
Bubba Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Orient, OH USA Posts: 1,501	I'd be happy as a non scientist to become more active here in Ohio. You West Virginians have my sympathy. Bubba

01-13-2003, 02:45 AM	#10
beyelzu Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: the peach state ga I am a metaphysical naturalist Posts: 2,869	the part i find particularly irritating is the claim to be an alternative to evolution theory. like creation theory. id just isnt science. but some theist will work hard trying to get it including knowing it supports theism. anything to get around the separation of church and state.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.