Evolution versus Creationism ... goes to trial

[kiwitt]

Lets see if the courts can determine this one ...

Evolution Fight Set for Trial
By Josh Getlin, Times Staff Writer

DOVER, Pa. -- In the beginning, members of the Dover Area School Board wrangled over what should be required in their high school biology curriculum.

Some were adamant that science teachers should stick with the widely taught theory of evolution and random selection. Others said teaching the theory of intelligent design should also be required, saying certain elements of life, like cell structure, are best explained by an intelligent cause.

The debate had strong religious overtones.

"Nearly 2,000 years ago someone died on a cross for us," said board member William Buckingham, who urged his colleagues to include intelligent design in ninth grade science classes. "Shouldn't we have the courage to stand up for him?"

On Monday, a trial will begin over the board's decision last year ordering that students be taught about intelligent design and flaws in Charles Darwin's teachings.

Several parents, fearing the intrusion of religion into public schooling, filed a lawsuit to block the policy, backed by American Civil Liberties Union attorneys.

Activists on both sides believe stakes are high in the case, which has divided this small rural town 100 miles west of Philadelphia.

The proceedings in a Harrisburg federal court will be the first legal challenge to the mandatory teaching of intelligent design, which is championed by a growing number of Christian fundamentalists. And the verdict, to be rendered by U.S. Judge John E. Jones, could have a profound impact on America's cultural wars over religion and its role in public life.

Witnesses are expected to debate whether the theory is scientifically valid, or a Trojan Horse designed to subvert the theories of Charles Darwin.

"We're fighting for the First Amendment, the separation of church and state and the integrity of schools," said Philadelphia attorney Eric Rothschild, who is teaming up with a battery of Pennsylvania ACLU lawyers to argue the case. "This trial should decide whether a school board can impose its religious views on other students."

The statement on intelligent design approved by the board was read to ninth grade science students in January and will be read again this year. It reads in part:

"Because Darwin's theory is a theory, it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered. The theory is not a fact. Gaps in theory exist for which there is no evidence. . . . Intelligent design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin. . . . With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind."

Several days after the Dover school board's 6-3 vote approving the intelligent design resolution, the three dissenting members resigned in protest.

In November, two opposing slates will vie for seven open seats on the Dover school board: one backing the teaching of intelligent design, the other strongly opposed.

School board members and their allies also believe that freedoms are at stake. They have blasted the ACLU for seeking a "gag order" on what teachers can say.

"This issue is bubbling under the surface all over the country, but the Dover board had the courage of their convictions," said Richard Thompson, counsel for the Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center. The center promotes and defends the religious freedoms of Christians, he said, and is handling the case pro bono.

If all this sounds eerily reminiscent of another case on evolution, it is.

Eighty years ago the Scopes trial in Dayton, Tenn., tested the legality of a state law banning the teaching of evolution. That case, immortalized in the movie "Inherit the Wind," featured an epic courtroom confrontation between attorney Clarence Darrow, who argued against the law, and former Democratic presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan, who defended the statute. Although teacher John Scopes was convicted of violating the law, the state Supreme Court later overturned the verdict.

As in Dayton, Dover's local politics have been roiled.

The pages of local newspapers have been filled with letters pro and con. And the national media have increasingly focused on the case. But there is one notable voice missing from the fray. The Discovery Institute, an influential Seattle-based organization that backs intelligent design, is not supporting the Dover school board.

LINK

The result will be eagerly awaited.

[Papewaio]

Gah!, this is the information age. If they want to stick their heads in the sands and then trade their lands in a thousand years for some beads and blankets let them!

[kiwitt]

I with you Cube.

My philosophy is that if science can't prove aspects of "Evolution Theory", it's because it hasn't been discovered yet. It does not mean it is wrong.

[Papewaio]

Other scientific theories:

Gravity, Newtons Laws of Motion, Photoelectric effect, gravitational lensing, electromagnetic theory etc

[Soulforged]

This things keep showing up again and again. Wasn't there, a time ago, a trial on this behalf in some town? For God's sake (irony), how is that this kind of stupidity keeps on showing up in the 21th century?

[Reverend Joe]

Cue the angry rightwing nutjobs, and the bleeding heart liberals, and thus begins the same crap all over again...

Because noone cares about the nature of man, or how we work on the inside, or any of the interesting philosophical questions that plague us. No, we all prefer to live in ignorance. And how shall we fill the empty spaces? With more tripe about deevolution and unintellegent design.

I'm sick of this.

[Papewaio]

"Because Darwin's theory is a theory, it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered. The theory is not a fact. Gaps in theory exist for which there is no evidence. . . . Intelligent design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin. . . . With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind."

"Because Darwin's theory is a theory,

Kind of the statement of the obvious. It might be nice if someone actually informed the board that science has gone a bit beyond Darwins initial theory, but hey I have heard textbooks cost a lot and being a hundred years behind only means no flight, radio or tv, what the heck what is a bit of science and technological advancement between friends... just don't mention this to the American Indians as we weren't so nice about their lack of education.

it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered.

Yes, that is the whole idea of science not to rest on your laurels but keep at it.

The theory is not a fact.

And a cat is not a dog... so what? Oh a theory is not a fact!!!!!, well good! Theories in science are based on facts not hallucinations or security blankets.

Gaps in theory exist for which there is no evidence

Was this before or after Cricks and Co and DNA? The gaps are there but some theories have gaps so large they aren't even termed science:

. . . . Intelligent design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin

Differences of opinion are fine in science. But don't think it is a democracy. Intelligent design has all the intellectual strength vs Evolution of a moth meeting a Kenworth barreling down the road. Intelligent Design is not a scientific theory and as such should be taught in comparative religon class.

With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind."

Thats good. The students should be taught to respect any scientific theory and not to pick on those proven wrong.

[Soulforged]

What I don't understand is why they want this on school? Why don't go to the church? This will not fill any gaps, just will make a perfect illusion...

[Ice]

Guys, you must understand, I lived in Western Pennsylavania for a long time. While living there I visited my cousins in centeral PA (near Harrisburg) quite often. It is a very different story from the rest of the country. These people have been using the same morals and traditions for generations upon generations. To force them to change like this is like pissing on their tradation. Although I do not completely agree with either side, I understand where the tradionalists are coming from.

[Lazul]

Electricity is the work of satan and the earth is flat!

...


well, the USA sure is a intresting nation.

[Ignoramus]

The evolutionist scientists themselves know they have no evidence for evolution, they just persuade gullible people, because the average person has no idea whether they are right and wrong, and because people these days are becoming anti-Christian, they go with anything that disagrees with Christianity. And if they haven't discovered solid evidence, why are their theories, many of which have been proved wrong, still taught in schools?

[The_Emperor]

Science itself works on the foundation that you remain objective and evaluate the facts before comming to a conclusion.

Evolution came about after extensive study of various species around the world by Darwin and many other scientists after him. The fossil record also backs up the theory of evolution by tracing the development of species through the ages... Early species of Birds for example started out looking more like dinosaurs with a few feathers and gradually their features changed to become closer to what we see today.

The problem I have with "intelligent design" is it didn't come about after unbiased scientific analysis of the facts. It came from people determined to prove that their religion is scientifically true... They knew what their goal already was beforehand and so selected fact to support that pre-determined goal.

I was always told that a scientist comes to conclusions after analysis of the facts avaliable, not having facts selectively taken to fit a pre-drawn conclusion.

[Adrian II]

What I don't understand is why they want this on school? Why don't go to the church?

In many cases intelligent design is just religion by another name. Look at what one Board member says about it:

Nearly 2,000 years ago someone died on a cross for us," said board member William Buckingham, who urged his colleagues to include intelligent design in ninth grade science classes. "Shouldn't we have the courage to stand up for him?"

One myth is called upon to support another one. This is what this struggle is all about. It is about the nature of American society: is it religious or secular? It is not about Darwin or evolution, it is not about science at all, but about power. That much I understand from all the things I have read about this debate in the United States. Intelligent design originated with Christian groups who understood that their version of the earth's history would never make it into a science book.

In the same vein, other Americans are now rewriting the history of their Constitution and the Founding Fathers to make them fit the notion that the country is Christian, not secular. Again this is not about history, it is about political power and ideology.

[Idaho]

I think you are all mean bullies. Why can't the state pay for children to be taught that unfounded fairy stories are as legitimate as any other description of the world?

[Ice]

Who cares? Honestly? School is for teaching real things. Church is for religion. The world will not collapse if they are not allowed to preach their ignorant reactionary dogma to impressionable children who's parents may or may not want that. Nothing stopping them from doing it at home, or at church.

They obviously care, and with that attitude is most likely why they hate evolutionists. In many places there, school and religion are interwoven. If they want to keep it that way fine, just send your kids to a different school if you really care that much.

[Ice]

Bullcrap. There's ample evidence for evolution. You're confusing several theories and bunching them into one, without a shred of reason to back up your claim.

It is also just a theory. Just like the thoery of creationism. I have studied evolution, not a great detail, but pretty well in depth. There are still gaps in which they have no idea how life arose. They have an idea, but they are not sure at all.

[yesdachi]

There are a heck of a lot of private schools out there and if people want their kids to learn religion in school, a private school is the place for them .

Side note #1 if they decide to teach a religious creation theory like the Christian Intelligent design, what happens when a Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Mormon, etc. moves to the town? Do they teach that religions creation theory as well, or only the theory of the majority? Evolution applies to all where creationism changes depending on the religion. The advocates of teaching intelligent design have such a small view of the world. These religious crackpots are the US’s version of the Muslim type extremists except the ones in PA would rather raise barns than a wars.

Side note #2 I recently saw an Amish guy with a cell phone.

[Rodion Romanovich]

It is also just a theory. Just like the thoery of creationism. I have studied evolution, not a great detail, but pretty well in depth. There are still gaps in which they have no idea how life arose. They have an idea, but they are not sure at all.

Being quite good at the evolution theory myself, I can say a few things to clear misconceptions in this thread up:
1. Darwin's theory is faulty in many ways if you use it as a model for describing reality. It's not because he was a bad scientist, but because he only discovered the basic principles of it, and never made an attempt of creating a full model of it. Therefore, it's only of interest to scientists, not for laymen. The modern science, knowing this principle and having proved it both theoretically and statistically, is making better efforts at making a complete model based on this principle.
2. With the modern evolution model, there are no contraarguments which prove any of the parts to be wrong. Unlike the popular misconceptions of the 19th century fascists, scientists realize that it's nearly impossible for a man to predict which genes are "the strongest" in the long run, and scientists also realize the importance of genetical variety.
3. The Christian creationist theory in the popular catholic form has met strong contraarguments and has been, largely, counterproved.
4. Compare point 2 and 3, it's an important difference. We might not have fully proved the evolution model, not the creationism theory either. But at least we've counterproved the creationist theory but not the evolution model. A more methafor based interpretation of the creationism theory results in a view that isn't contradicting reality, for example the Bible knew that most other animals came before humans, and that earth was created before animals etc. I'd say the popular fundamentalistic creationist theory is counterproved, but not the creationist theory that's written in the bible, if you read it as you're supposed to. And the evolution model we have today is nearly correct.

[Ice]

All good points. I guess what it comes down to is what you put ur faith in: religion,science, or a mix of both?

[BDC]

Haha that's hilarious. People will be burning witches next.

[Steppe Merc]

"Nearly 2,000 years ago someone died on a cross for us," said board member William Buckingham, who urged his colleagues to include intelligent design in ninth grade science classes. "Shouldn't we have the courage to stand up for him?"

Let's hope that the judges are intelligent enough to relize what BS intelligent design is. It is a purely religous matter, and should be confined to religous studies, or classes dealing with the customs of different religons. Not science.

[Geoffrey S]

As to whether evolution is real or not, it's a theory: nothing is a definite fact, just as any other scientific theory. The holes are being filled in all the time. Believing in God is fine by me; just don't try to wrap belief up in pseudo-scientific nonsense and claim it's scientific.

[Zharakov]

I beieve in Evolution.

I believe that God wanted us to evolve from Monkeys. It makes sence to me.

[Adrian II]

I beieve in Evolution.

I believe that God wanted us to evolve from Monkeys. It makes sence to me.

Couldn't he speed it up a bit?..

[Xiahou]

Look at the Miller Experiment. Proof that life can arise from nothing under the right circumstances.

It was certainly not.

Bullcrap. There's ample evidence for evolution. You're confusing several theories and bunching them into one, without a shred of reason to back up your claim.

The irony is precious in that statement.

The world will not collapse if they are not allowed to preach their ignorant reactionary dogma to impressionable children who's parents may or may not want that. Nothing stopping them from doing it at home, or at church.

Nor will it collapse if they are allowed either. I really don't care what they choose to teach in their own, local schools. It speaks very poorly of the ACLU that they are on the plaintiffs side of this, imo.

[Steppe Merc]

Nor will it collapse if they are allowed either. I really don't care what they choose to teach in their own, local schools. It speaks very poorly of the ACLU that they are on the plaintiffs side of this, imo.

Well the world will certaintly get no better if kids are taught old fashioned, supersititous ideas in school like this.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

I have a solution: make science an elective rather than a required course. It's not like it's important unless you want to become a physicist anyway. Plus, I could use the credits for somthing constructive, like Psych-Soc.

[Goofball]

It speaks very poorly of the ACLU that they are on the plaintiffs side of this, imo.

Please explain.

Here we have a group trying not just to preach their religious dogma at people who don't adhere to it, but they are actually going so far as to try to have their dogma declared scientific fact and taught in science classes in public schools.

Science classes, for crying out loud...



If they are allowed to do this, it will be a clear example of "establishment of religion" by the government.

Why should the ACLU be in favor of this?

Please, enlighten me...

[Kaiser of Arabia]

Please explain.

Here we have a group trying not just to preach their religious dogma at people who don't adhere to it, but they are actually going so far as to try to have their dogma declared scientific fact and taught in science classes in public schools.

Science classes, for crying out loud...



If they are allowed to do this, it will be a clear example of "establishment of religion" by the government.

Why should the ACLU be in favor of this?

Please, enlighten me...

Evolutionists sucesfully got their anti-religious dogma declared scientific fact and taught in science classes. We all know Evolution is just an accepted theory, it's not a proven fact.

Have you ever seen anything evolve?

[Kanamori]

Have you ever seen anything evolve?

The most documented case is the peppered moth.

Why should the ACLU be in favor of this?

Because they support Constitutional ideas that are a stretch, at best, sometimes.