Valentine Pontifex

Some material on Rep. Graves

His position on Church/State

Article on the earlier disclaimer controversy in OK

hezekiah jones

Dumb question maybe, but is that Section 3 just boilerplate that goes along with every OK House Bill? Because, especially in this context, that's got to be the stupidest thing I've ever seen. (Well, in the last 20 minutes at least.)

hezekiah jones

Some material on Rep. Graves

LOL

Monkey

My propesed disclamer for the bible.

This piece fo Christian mythology discusses creationism, a controversial theory which some very confused literalists present as scientific explanation for the origin of living things, such as plants and humans. No one was present when life first appeared on earth. Therefore, any statement about life’s origins should be considered as theory, not fact. The word creation may refer to a theory without any real substance. Creation describes changes that occur within a species, for example, white moths may change within it's kind into gray moths. This process is microevolution which can be observed and described as fact. Creation may also refer to a world wide global flood, for which there is no evidence. This process, called the catastrophism has never been observed and should be considered a theory. Creation also refers to the unproven belief that ordered, directed forces produced a world of well designed living things, like lizards with useless eyeballs, flightless birds and pandas with adapted radial sesamoids, instead of thumbs. There are many unanswered questions about the origin of life which are not mentioned in your mythology, including: Why does the fossil record show a clear change in earths biota over time, from simple organisms, to more complex? Why do humans and Chimpanzees have the same junk DNA? Why do creationists have no idea what a transitional fossil would look like, except that it's wrong when presented with one? How did you and all living things come to possess such a complete and complex set of instructions, like the code for vitamin C, yet not use this code? Study hard and keep an open mind. Someday you may contribute to the theories of how living things appeared on earth. But don't hold your breath.

scombrid

They should just go ahead and insert chick tracts.

As for the actual disclaimer, science teachers should use that as a start for their evolution units.

Just dealing with these falacious statements regarding the evolution they could probably teach the theory better than if they followed the text book. The problem here though is probably that most high school science teachers are unqualified for such a task.

Shadowy Man

Well, I guess we should put warning labels on textbooks that talk about physics, astronomy, chemistry, medicine and engineering. After all, they are filled with theories too.

Paul

Well actualy if you had kept your eyes open Monkey you may of seen passed the cloud of evolution and seen that the Moth experiment was not really a very well done experiment.
Actually if you just go and read The Scientist, May 1999 all will be clear. Also the book Of Moths and Men. Which is being reviewed here on Amazon by Publishers Weekly


Journalist Hooper offers an engaging account of H.B.D. Kettlewell's famous field experiments on the peppered moth, which were widely known as "Darwin's missing evidence," proof of natural selection in action until 1998, that is, when biologist Michael Majerus showed Kettlewell's findings to be falsified and wrong. Hooper peers into the lives of Kettlewell and his mentor and eventual adversary, the imperious and brilliant E.B. Ford, revealing the human factors that don't get written into the research papers "recriminations, intrigue, jealousy, back-stabbing and shattered dreams." Ford, a Darwinian zealot hell-bent on proving natural selection, serves as a foil for the broader questions raised here about dogmatism in science. Natural selection had the dubious distinction of being as widely accepted as it was short on evidence, and the moth experiments were greeted as a pivotal victory; indeed, despite evidence to the contrary, many scientists today still embrace Kettlewell's findings, in part because denying them opens the door to "the bogeyman of creationism." As Hooper writes, the peppered moths provided "a damned good story, a narrative so satisfying, so seductive, that no one can bear to let it go. But a story alone is no substitute for truth." Hooper's lively history also traces the extinction of old-school natural history, embodied by Kettlewell, who was very much left behind with the synthesis of Darwinism and Mendelian genetics, and who died a suicide.
Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information, Inc.

Paul

You tell me? And maybe also tell me why Humans are more geneticly similar to Hamsters then Apes. (BTW humans as far as I know according to "The theory" evolved from Apes and not Chimps)

Now that just depends on how you think that huge coil fields formed and how such a large amounts of sediments apeared.
You could say that it took millions of years but it also could of taked a short time cause by a world wide flood.

RufusAtticus

Paul before you can tell someone to open their eyes you need to make an effort to open your one. If you'd actually read Kettlewell's and Majerus's work you'd be suprised how well it confirms evolution. Instead you rely on a popular book written by a journalist. That does not make for a well supported argument.

RufusAtticus

Descent + modification from a common ancestor.

After you tell us why you stopped beating your wife. Humans are most closly related to chimps & bonobobs, that is what the genetic, morphological, and fossil evidence reveals.

Humans and Chimps are apes. Humans and Chimps are descended from a common ancestor that was also an ape.

How does a flood form coal?