Search:   Spelling

Also Try Evolution in Paleontology Evolution of Homo sapiens sapiens, our subspecies News -01-13-05 Judge: Remove "Evolution" Stickers from Books (Bloomberg.com) "Georgia's Cobb County school system must immediately remove stickers from science textbooks that say evolution is a 'theory, not a fact,' because a federal judge ruled the disclaimers were unconstitutional." "At least five parents filed a lawsuit challenging the stickers on the grounds that they violated the U.S. Constitution and the Constitution of the state of Georgia. A section of the state's constitution says that 'no money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church, sect, cult, or religious denomination.' " "Cooper also placed a permanent ban on the stickers being disseminated. Cobb County is north of Atlanta." 01-05 -01-18-06 Groups Attempt to Present "Intelligent Design" as Science (USA Today) "The Vatican newspaper has published an article saying 'intelligent design' is not science and that teaching it alongside evolutionary theory in school classrooms only creates confusion." "The author, Fiorenzo Facchini, a professor of evolutionary biology at the University of Bologna, laid out the scientific rationale for Darwin's theory of evolution, saying that in the scientific world, biological evolution 'represents the interpretative key of the history of life on Earth.' " "He lamented that certain American 'creationists' had brought the debate back to the 'dogmatic' 1800s, and said their arguments weren't science but ideology." 01-06 -02-13-07 Kansas Rewrites Science Standards (MSNBC News) "The Kansas state Board of Education on Tuesday repealed science guidelines questioning evolution that had made the state an object of ridicule." "The new guidelines reflect mainstream scientific views of evolution and represent a political defeat for advocates of 'intelligent design,' who had helped write the standards that are being jettisoned." 02-07 -02-20-06 Scientists Rally for Evolution (ABC News) "Many at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest gathering of scientists, spoke out over the weekend against what they called religious pressure in public schools." 02-06 -08-06-05 Bush Remarks on Intelligent Design (Washington Post) "President Bush invigorated proponents of teaching alternatives to evolution in public schools with remarks saying that schoolchildren should be taught about 'intelligent design,' a view of creation that challenges established scientific thinking and promotes the idea that an unseen force is behind the development of humanity." "Bush's comments were 'irresponsible,' said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. He said the president, by suggesting that students hear two viewpoints, 'doesn't understand that one is a religious viewpoint and one is a scientific viewpoint.' " 8-05 -08-19-05 Senator Frist Remarks on Intelligent Design (MSNBC News) "Frist, a Republican from Tennessee, spoke to a Rotary Club meeting Friday and told reporters afterward that students need to be exposed to different ideas, including intelligent design." "The theory of intelligent design says life on earth is too complex to have developed through evolution, implying that a higher power must have had a hand in creation. Nearly all scientists dismiss it as a scientific theory, and critics say it's nothing more than religion masquerading as science." 8-05 -09-24-05 Federal Court to Make a Landmark Ruling on Science (MSNBC News) "The Pennsylvania case 'is probably the most important legal situation of creation and evolution in the last 18 years,' said Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, which opposes challenges to the standard model of evolution." " 'This will be the first legal challenge to intelligent design, and we’ll see whether they have been able to mask the creationist underpinnings and basic orientation of intelligent design,' she said. Regardless who wins, 'it will have quite a significant impact on what happens in American public school education.' ” "This is where things get sticky, because it all boils down to a basic argument over just what is evolution and what is religion." 9-05 -09-28-05 Pennock: "Intelligent Design" Is Not Science (ABC News) "Robert T. Pennock, a professor of science and philosophy at Michigan State University, testified on behalf of families who sued the Dover Area School District. He said supporters of intelligent design don't offer evidence to support their idea.” " 'As scientists go about their business, they follow a method,' Pennock said. 'Intelligent design wants to reject that and so it doesn't really fall within the purview of science.' " 9-05 -10-07-05 Groups Attempt to Present "Intelligent Design" as Science (ABC News) "The [Discovery] think tank is promoting an idea [Intelligent Design] that all of the nation's top biologists say has no scientific basis. But the institute insists there's a raging debate among scientists on both sides of the evolutionary divide." 9-05 -10-07-05 Pennsylvania Voters Oust Intelligent Design Supporters (USA Today) "Voters came down hard Tuesday on school board members who ordered a statement on intelligent design read in biology class, ousting eight Republicans and replacing them with Democrats who want the concept stripped from the science curriculum." "Eight of the nine school board members were up for election Tuesday. They were challenged by a slate of Democrats who argued that science class was not the appropriate forum for teaching intelligent design." 9-05 Editorial: Argument for Intelligent Design (United Church of God - Good News Magazine) "So in the intelligent design theory, since we take it as a given that there is such a thing as intelligence, information is not matter or energy. We say, yes, there is something else in DNA, and that is the intelligence component." 02-06 Essay: Creationism vs Evolution (NCSEWeb.org) "Evolution is the organizing principle of biology and geology, and it needs to be taught if we are to produce new scientists as well as have a scientifically literate society." "Helping students understand that evolution, like all scientific explanations, deals only with proximate, never ultimate cause, allows them to accommodate their religious views to evolution, if they so choose." "Few teachers would have students evaluate the 'scientific' evidence for flat-earthism...versus spherical-earthism 'and let the children decide.' Again, the creationists make an issue of whether evolution occurred, rather than how. The scientific debates concern the latter, not the former." 9-05 Judge's Decision: Intelligent Design Is Not Science (Scientific American) "The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board's ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents." "Both Defendants and many of the leading proponents of ID make a bedrock assumption which is utterly false. Their presupposition is that evolutionary theory is antithetical to a belief in the existence of a supreme being and to religion in general. Repeatedly in this trial, Plaintiffs' scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator." "To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions." 12-05 Judge's Decision: Intelligent Design Is Not Science (Scientific American) "The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board's ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents." "Both Defendants and many of the leading proponents of ID make a bedrock assumption which is utterly false. Their presupposition is that evolutionary theory is antithetical to a belief in the existence of a supreme being and to religion in general. Repeatedly in this trial, Plaintiffs' scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator." "To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions." 12-05 Theistic Evolutionism (NCSEWeb.org) "At the end of the Middle Ages, European tradition held that all of the Earth´s inhabitants had been created by God in one place, the Garden of Eden, soon after the formation of the earth. But as the scientific revolution began to unfold some 400 years ago, naturalists started to catalog fossils according to the layers in which they were found. Soon a very unexpected and troubling pattern emerged.” "The deepest (and oldest) layers showed mostly unfamiliar species, but higher (younger) layers contained fossilized remains that resembled living organisms. If what naturalists found had been consistent with traditional beliefs, fossils found in every layer should not have looked different from those that living species would leave if fossilized. Elephants, tigers, palm trees, and people should have left a record of their presences even in the most deeply buried layers, but they didn´t. Clearly, traditional belief had to be modified to explain the succession of fossil types seen in the fossil record.” "What, then, is the position of the majority of religious Americans about 'creation'? Anglicans, Catholics, most Protestant Christians, and Conservative and Reformed Jews believe that God is the Creator, but that he works through the process of evolution, as revealed through modern science. This position is known as theistic evolutionism, and is widespread among modern theologians. It is a little-known fact that Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, the United Church of Christ and many other denominations do not believe that Creation occurred literally as described in Genesis. In fact, the majority of Christian seminaries do not teach a Biblical literalist creation." 9-05 Papers -11-07-04 Theory of Evolution in Court (CBS News) " 'School officials in suburban Cobb County go to court Monday to defend themselves against a lawsuit accusing the district of promoting religion by requiring that science textbooks warn students evolution is "a theory, not a fact.' " 10-04 -Editorial: Complexity and Intelligent Design (ABC News - Paulos) "The theory of intelligent design, the purportedly more scientific descendant of creation science, rejects Darwin's theory of evolution as being unable to explain the complexity of life. How, ask supporters of intelligent design, can biological phenomena like the clotting of blood have arisen just by chance?" "But the theory of evolution does explain the evolution of complex biological organisms and phenomena, and the above argument from design, which dates from the 18th century, has been decisively refuted. Rehashing the latter explanation and refutation is not my goal, however. Those who reject evolution are usually immune to such arguments anyway." "Rather, my intention here is to develop some loose analogies between these biological issues and related economic ones and to show that these analogies point to a surprising crossing of political lines." 8-05 -Editorial: Evolution of Creationism (Slate) "Essentially, ID [Intelligent Design] proponents are gambling that they can concede evolutionist earth science without conceding evolutionist life science. But they can't. They already acknowledge microevolution—mutation and natural selection within a species. Once you accept conventional fossil dating and four billion years of life, the sequential kinship of species loses its implausibility. You can't fall back on the Bible, you've already admitted it can't always be taken literally. All you're left with is an assortment of gaps in evolutionary theory—how did DNA emerge, what happened between this and that fossil—and the vague default assumption that an 'intelligence' might fill in those gaps." 8-05 Comparison of Skulls (TalkOrigins.org) "As this table shows, although creationists are adamant that none of these [skulls] are transitional and all are either apes or humans, they are not able to tell which are which." "But according to evolutionary thinking, these fossils come from a number of closely related species intermediate between apes and humans. If this is so, we would expect to find that some of them are hard to classify, and we do." 03-06 Creationism - Argument For (Taylor) Provides a religious argument for why the theory of evolution must be discarded in favor of a creationist point of view. 11-99 Creationism - Arguments Against (Foley) Provides arguments against the creationist position that there is a clear dividing line between early human fossils and ape fossils. Also argues against the idea that insufficient physical evidence exists for ancient hominids. Editorial: Intelligent Design - It's Not Even Wrong (AgiWeb.org - Holt) "Science, by definition, is a method of learning about the physical universe by asking questions in a way that they can be answered empirically and verifiably. If a question cannot be framed so that the answer is testable by looking at physical evidence and by allowing other people to repeat and replicate one's test, then it is not science. The term science also refers to the organized body of knowledge that results from scientific study. Intelligent design offers no way to investigate design scientifically. Intelligent design explains complicated phenomena of the natural world by involving a designer. This way of thinking says things behave the way they do because God makes them behave that way. This treads not into science but into the realm of faith." "Creationists and others who denigrate the concept of evolution call it a theory, with a dismissive tone. They say that, as a theory, it is up for debate." "There are actually very few theories in science, including atomic theory, the theory of gravity, the theory of evolution, and the theory of the standard model of particle physics. Without the ability to test the hypotheses of Intelligent Design, it cannot be considered a theory in the scientific sense." 12-05 Editorial: Intelligent Design Is Not Science (Society for Neuroscience) "Recognizing that the theory of Evolution is the fundamental scientific theory or cornerstone that helps us to understand and study the origins and diversity of living organisms, the Society for Neuroscience supports teaching evolution in science classrooms, and opposes the assertion that Intelligent Design Theory (ID) is a valid scientific alternative." "The theory of Evolution serves as the basis for the biological sciences’ understanding of the origins and diversity of all living organisms and is accepted with remarkable consensus in the scientific community. It explains and supports findings in scientific areas ranging from botany to zoology and embryology to neuroscience. Additional support is found within independent scientific sources such as archaeology and molecular biology. Though scientists can differ regarding certain aspects of Evolution, the differences constitute testable hypotheses. Thus, SfN believes that teaching Evolution is an essential component of modern science education. K-12 science education based on anything other than tested and accepted scientific theory is counterproductive to the education of America’s youth." 12-05 Editorial: Intelligent Design Is a Scientific Alternative to Darwin's Theories (CSICOP.org - Dembski) "Intelligent design argues that naturalistic mechanisms, notably the Darwinian mechanism, are in principle incapable of generating complex specified biological systems." Editor's Note: William Dembski is a leading proponent of Intelligent Design so it is appropriate to include his reasoning here. However, he bases his arguments on the notion that complex biological systems cannot be developed through experiments. For some evidence that complex biological systems can be developed through experiments, see Scientific American articles, Awesome Library's current events in science, or biotechnology. 12-05 Editorial: Law of Conservation of Information Is Pseudoscience (CSICOP.org) "Whenever a drop of water freezes into an ice crystal we observe the creation of order by a 'mindless' natural process. We don't need fancy information theory to tell us that. We can see it with our own two eyes. Dembski's law of conservation of information and the rest of Intelligent Design are not just pseudoscience, they are wrong pseudoscience." 12-05 Editorial: Why Evolution Is Science and Intelligent Design Is Not (WhyFiles.org) "Evolution through natural selection boils down to this: Organisms reproduce. Due to genetics, some offspring are better adapted to their environment, and they have more offspring. The genes of these winners become more common in the next generation. As changes accumulate, new species arise through this process of natural selection." "But ever since Darwin, evolution through natural selection has bothered some folks, who deem it a contradiction of the origin story in the Bible's chapter of Genesis." "And that hostility to evolution has now morphed into intelligent design." "Although the theory of evolution through natural selection is not complete, the fact of evolution -- massive changes through time -- is incontestable." 01-06 Essay: Why Historians Have a Stake in the Debate Over Evolution (History News Network) " As any newspaper reader knows, the American public has little regard for the theory of evolution. Despite its nearly universal acceptance among scientists worldwide, both the president of the United States and the Senate majority leader—an MD—favor the teaching of a competing, unscientific (indeed, antiscientific) theory known as 'Intelligent Design' as a counterpoint to evolution in the public schools." 9-05 Essay: Why Historians Have a Stake in the Debate Over Evolution (History News Network) " As any newspaper reader knows, the American public has little regard for the theory of evolution. Despite its nearly universal acceptance among scientists worldwide, both the president of the United States and the Senate majority leader—an MD—favor the teaching of a competing, unscientific (indeed, antiscientific) theory known as 'Intelligent Design' as a counterpoint to evolution in the public schools." 9-05 Evolution - Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science (National Academy Press) Provides a rationale for why evolution must be taught as part of teaching about science and the scientific method, despite controversy. Includes examples on how to approach the topic and presents facts used in teaching about evolution as part of scientific inquiry. 5-00 Evolution Curriculum Conflicts by State (NPR.org) "Policymakers in at least 16 states are currently examining the controversy." 8-05 Evolution Resistance (Christian Science Monitor - Coeyman) Reports on the struggle in some states about whether creationism or evolution should be taught in science classes. 10-00 Evolution as Science (WhyFiles.org) "By endorsing the theory that evolution through natural selection is an unproven theory, the elected board defied 150 years of science. It also raised doubts about a foundation of biology that has been resolved by the mounting evidence that all forms of life are interrelated." "Evolution, the scientific study of the origins and development of life, has roots in geology, paleontology and field biology. It explains, for example, why so many insects but so few dinosaurs are alive today, or why certain flowers can only be pollinated by certain birds. It explains why microbes can become resistant to antibiotics, why cancers become resistant to anti-cancer drugs, and why the bones in a bat wing resemble the bones in your hand." " 'A theory in science is not a hunch or "just a theory" as some say. It is an explanation built on multitudinous confirmed facts and the absence of incompatible facts.' Omitting evolution from biology, Singer pointed out, 'is comparable to leaving the U.S. Constitution out of civics lessons. Evolution is the framework that makes sense of the whole natural world...' " " 'In the past 10 or 20 years, we have developed this completely independent record. Studies of the genome [an organism's genetic code] have in most cases completely confirmed...the relationships deduced from the fossil record.' " 8-05 Horse Evolution (TalkOrigins.org - Hunt) Provides evidence on the evolution of horses. (No pictures are included.) "A Question for Creationists: Creationists who wish to deny the evidence of horse evolution should careful consider this: how else can you explain the sequence of horse fossils? Even if creationists insist on ignoring the transitional fossils (many of which have been found), again, how can the unmistakable sequence of these fossils be explained? Did God create Hyracotherium, then kill off Hyracotherium and create some Hyracotherium-Orohippus intermediates, then kill off the intermediates and create Orohippus, then kill off Orohippus and create Epihippus, then allow Epihippus to 'microevolve' into Duchesnehippus, then kill off Duchesnehippus and create Mesohippus, then create some Mesohippus-Miohippus intermediates, then create Miohippus, then kill off Mesohippus, etc.....each species coincidentally similar to the species that came just before and came just after?" 02-06 Intelligent Design as Science (ActionBioscience.org - Natural History Magazine) "In the final analysis, the biochemical hypothesis of intelligent design fails not because the scientific community is closed to it but rather for the most basic of reasons -- because it is overwhelmingly contradicted by the scientific evidence." 8-05 Intelligent Design as Science (NewYorker.com) "Unlike earlier generations of creationists—the so-called Young Earthers and scientific creationists—proponents of intelligent design do not believe that the universe was created in six days, that Earth is ten thousand years old, or that the fossil record was deposited during Noah’s flood. (Indeed, they shun the label 'creationism' altogether.)" "Though people often picture science as a collection of clever theories, scientists are generally staunch pragmatists: to scientists, a good theory is one that inspires new experiments and provides unexpected insights into familiar phenomena. By this standard, Darwinism is one of the best theories in the history of science: it has produced countless important experiments (let’s re-create a natural species in the lab—yes, that’s been done) and sudden insight into once puzzling patterns (that’s why there are no native land mammals on oceanic islands). In the nearly ten years since the publication of Behe’s book, by contrast, I.D. has inspired no nontrivial experiments and has provided no surprising insights into biology. As the years pass, intelligent design looks less and less like the science it claimed to be and more and more like an extended exercise in polemics." "Biologists aren’t alarmed by intelligent design’s arrival in Dover and elsewhere because they have all sworn allegiance to atheistic materialism, they’re alarmed because intelligent design is junk science." 8-05 Intelligent Design as Science (Wikipedia.org) "Despite ID sometimes being called Intelligent Design Theory, the National Academy of Sciences has said, intelligent design 'and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life' are not science because their claims cannot be tested by experiment and propose no new hypotheses of their own, instead they find gaps within current evolutionary theory and fill them in with speculative beliefs. The scientific community does not recognise ID as a scientific theory and considers it to be creationist pseudoscience." 8-05

Italian, Russian, Greek, Portuguese, Chinese, Japanese, Korean,   Index, New, Search Engines, Dictionary, Bookstore, Licenses, Email Us, About Us, Link to Us, or Privacy Policy.