Re: ID in Ohio, proposed changes to curriculum

From: george murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Sat Mar 09 2002 - 16:53:06 EST

  • Next message: Michael Roberts: "Creationists in the UK"

    "R. Joel Duff" wrote:

    > ....................
    >
    > Current draft indicator. Grade 10, Life Sciences #22, page 66. Know
    > historical scientific developments occurred in evolutionary thought (e.g.,
    > Darwin, Mendel, Lamarck).
    >
    > Modified indicator. Know historical scientific developments that occurred in
    > evolutionary thought, including alternative theories that have been
    > considered (e.g., Paley, Darwin, Lamarck, Mendel, Behe).

            It is highly misleading to include Paley and Behe here. Paley's
    "theory" is a philosophical/religious claim and Behe's "theory" is an argument
    that Darwinian theory can't explain certain things. That may be correct but he
    has not to my knowledge proposed a better scientific theory. "God did it" is
    true but it isn't natural science.

            A petition opposing inclusion of ID in Ohio science standards can be
    found at http://www.petitiononline.com/idno/petition.html. I would encourage
    especially residents of Ohio and science educators to sign it, but it is open to
    everyone.

    Shalom,

    George

    George L. Murphy
    http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
    "The Science-Theology Interface"



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 09 2002 - 16:51:42 EST