*shrug* As I've said, I believe that the proper place for academic discussion of Intelligent Design is in the philosophy class, not the science
class.
Great. Now the next step is to examine the 'Teach the Controversy" idea that creationists and their ilk use. Take it away from science and apply
it to geography. Some people were brought up to believe Australia is actually located three feet west of Newfoundland, Canada. Teach the controversy and have
open discussion on the merits of both positions. History. Some people were brought up to believe that America did not imprison citizens of Japanese descent
during the Second World War. Teach the controversy and have open discussion on the merits of both positions.
I bring this up as quoting the candidates is something anyone can do.
Palin on teaching the controversy
Earlier this year, she told the Anchorage Daily News that schools should not fear teaching creationism alongside evolution. "Teach both. You know,
don't be afraid of information.... Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know,
I say this too as a daughter of a science teacher."
The volatile issue of teaching creation science in public schools popped up in the Alaska governor's race this week when Republican Sarah Palin said
she thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution in the state's public classrooms. Palin was answering a question from the moderator when she
said, "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent
of teaching both."
In an interview, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms: "I don't think
there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum." She added that, if elected, she
would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state's required curriculum. "I won't have religion as
a litmus test, or anybody's personal opinion on evolution or creationism," Palin said.
McCain in an interview with the Arizona Star.
"I think that there has to be all points of view presented. But they've got to be thoroughly presented. So to say that you can only teach one
line of thinking … or one belief on how people and the world was created I think there's nothing wrong with teaching different schools of
thought."
No one doubts that science can sometimes be difficult for the layman to grasp, but to be unable to recognize that the 'controversy' in evolution
versus intelligence design is bunkum shows a very deliberately contrived ignorance. As I have demonstrated with my similar examples in the fields of History
and Geography.
Shayne
(Sorry for the lack of quotes, my browser seems to choke at trying to include them.)
class.
Great. Now the next step is to examine the 'Teach the Controversy" idea that creationists and their ilk use. Take it away from science and apply
it to geography. Some people were brought up to believe Australia is actually located three feet west of Newfoundland, Canada. Teach the controversy and have
open discussion on the merits of both positions. History. Some people were brought up to believe that America did not imprison citizens of Japanese descent
during the Second World War. Teach the controversy and have open discussion on the merits of both positions.
I bring this up as quoting the candidates is something anyone can do.
Palin on teaching the controversy
Earlier this year, she told the Anchorage Daily News that schools should not fear teaching creationism alongside evolution. "Teach both. You know,
don't be afraid of information.... Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know,
I say this too as a daughter of a science teacher."
The volatile issue of teaching creation science in public schools popped up in the Alaska governor's race this week when Republican Sarah Palin said
she thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution in the state's public classrooms. Palin was answering a question from the moderator when she
said, "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent
of teaching both."
In an interview, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms: "I don't think
there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum." She added that, if elected, she
would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state's required curriculum. "I won't have religion as
a litmus test, or anybody's personal opinion on evolution or creationism," Palin said.
McCain in an interview with the Arizona Star.
"I think that there has to be all points of view presented. But they've got to be thoroughly presented. So to say that you can only teach one
line of thinking … or one belief on how people and the world was created I think there's nothing wrong with teaching different schools of
thought."
No one doubts that science can sometimes be difficult for the layman to grasp, but to be unable to recognize that the 'controversy' in evolution
versus intelligence design is bunkum shows a very deliberately contrived ignorance. As I have demonstrated with my similar examples in the fields of History
and Geography.
Shayne
(Sorry for the lack of quotes, my browser seems to choke at trying to include them.)