Share this
Twitter
Myspace
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Slashdot
Furl
Yahoo
Technorati
Newsvine
Facebook
Export PDF
Print
E-mail
Tags
BY BOB HOLT
NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM
New Jersey has a set of curriculum standards that require what should be taught in New Jersey schools. Evolution is listed among the science classes; creationism is not.
At a town hall meeting in Manalapan, Governor Chris Christie said he shouldn’t be involved in making the decision about whether or not to teach creationism.
According to NJ.com, the governor said, “I think it’s really a dangerous area for a governor who stands up from the top of the state to say you should teach this, you shouldn’t teach that.”
In Jersey City, the Wall Street Journal reports that Christie again said it should be a “local decision” whether creationism should be taught along with regular classes approved by the state. He said that evolution was being taught because a consensus had been reached, while that had not been the case regarding creationism. While creationism is not currently being taught, both theories are allowed to be discussed in New Jersey classrooms.
Christie, who graduated from Livingston High School in 1983, would not say whether he believes in creationism. “That’s not of your business, that’s my personal view — none of your business,” he said, according to CBS New York.
The Week reported in February that results of a survey conducted by two researchers at Penn State showed that many biology teachers endorse creationism.
Merely 28 percent of 926 teachers surveyed took a pro-evolution viewpoint, while 13 percent openly supported creationism — the belief that God created Earth and humans. Nearly 60 percent took no position on evolution.
God and evolution are not mutually exclusive. This kind of nonsense idealogue drivel is what fuels terrorists.
YES I SAID IT.
Students are allowed to ask "HOW does gravity occur?", but never "DOES gravity occur?".
Evolution is a fact. The process by which it occured is a theory.
Creationism cannot be taught in science classes because it is not a scientific theory, it is a religious concept. If the principals of science are applied, Creationism falls apart instantly.
Creationism purports that animals, insects, reptiles, plants and human beings arrived on the earth 6500 years ago "abruptly and fully formed". This is preposterous nonsense. Thousands of fossils, which are tens of thousands of years old, have been found.
If we are to teach Creation Theory in science classes, we might as well teach the Stork Theory of human reproduction since both of these theories have equal scientific validity.
In this class: a) is evolution taught as fact, theory, or both fact and theory? b) do you have the academic freedom to critique evolution? [students should be asked anonymously]
The same two questions could be asked of their instructors.
The article, "Valley of the Whales", in August 2010 issue of National Geographic, is a good example of an evolutionary article. It's typical of readings given to students studying evolution.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/print/2010/08/whale-evolution/mueller-text
Teachers should be encouraged to distribute such articles and three different colored markers to each student, then ask them to mark the verified facts with one color, the opinions with another and the suppositions with another. Students should be taught to weigh the factual evidence, evaluate statements and recognize the writer's purpose and point of view.
Evolutionists say, "We continually revise our theories and welcome critical examination and evaluation." They may revise aspects of their theories, but because evolution is so incredibly malleable, no amount of contrary evidence will convince them otherwise. But how much contrary evidence must accumulate before a theory is discarded?
Today evolution survives, not so much as a theory of science, but as a philosophical necessity. Good science is always tentative and self-correcting, but this never really happens in the case of evolution. Regardless of the scientific data, the idea of evolution as a valid concept is not open to debate. Students are allowed to ask "HOW did evolution occur?", but never "DID evolution occur?".
Which is a more objective question: "What were the ape-like creatures that led to man?" or " Did man evolve from ape-like creatures?"
The following suggested Origins of Life policy, is a realistic, practical and legal way for local and state school boards to achieve a win-win with regard to evolution teaching. Even the ACLU, the NCSE, and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State should find the policy acceptable:
"As no theory in science is immune from critical examination and evaluation, and recognizing that evolutionary theory is the only approved theory of origins that can be taught in the [province/state] science curriculum: whenever evolutionary theory is taught, students and teachers are encouraged to discuss the scientific information that _supports_ and _questions_ evolution and its underlying assumptions, in order to promote the development of critical thinking skills. This discussion would include only the scientific evidence/information _for_ and _against_ evolutionary theory, as it seeks to explain the origin of the universe and the diversity of life on our planet."
If science is a search for truth, no scientific theory should be allowed to freeze into dogma, immune from critical examination and evaluation.
Teaching Evolution-- Is There a Better Way?
http://www.creationmoments.com/content/teaching-evolution-there-better-way
Teaching Origins in Public Schools
http://mall.turnpike.net/C/cs/teach.htm