School district in MI votes tomorrow night whether or not to allow ID

[Gigantopithecus]

I'm originally from Michigan and care about what happens in my home state. I also make a living studying evolutionary biology. I sent the following letter to the school district's board of ed.:

Dear Members of the Gull Lake Independent School District Board of Education,

First, I would like to thank you for the time you spend reading not only this email, but considering the decision whether or not to continue allow ID to be taught in your school district.

Second, in case you're wondering why anyone outside of Gull Lake should care about your decision, I want you to know that I am from Michigan, attended public schools in Michigan, and recently graduated from the University of Michigan. I am proud of my home state, and its educational system from kindergarten up. As I continue to pursue my education, I have come to learn how important a good education, including science education, is in today's world.

I urge you to decide against continuing to allow ID to be taught in your school district. Science, by definition, is concerned only with the natural world. It is concerned only with that which can be empirically observed and measured. Thus, it allows one to make predictions about the natural world that can then be objectively tested. This is how science has operated throughout the world since its beginnings in the 16th Century.

ID is simply not science. It assumes the actions of a supernatural higher power which can be neither empirically observed nor measured. It makes no predictions, it can not be tested.

The modern synthesis of evolutionary biology makes no claims about anyone's faith, anyone's God, anyone's morals. It simply allows us to observe the natural world and make predictions from our observations. Combating antibiotic resistant bacteria and HIV, as well as pest management and species conservation are just a few of the important issues where knowledge of evolution is useful. ID simply does not help us defeat modern plagues or save endangered species. Students who learn ID do not help make the world a better place - nor do they find employment in research labs.

I eagerly await your decision to not only do the right thing, but also to not violate no less than three Supreme Court rulings.

Best,
Zach Throckmorton

I'll be sure to post the results of this latest battle between progress and the dark ages.

If you care about science education in this country, check out the National Center for Science Education. It most likely has links that will show you how to get involved on the local level.

 

[dmcowen674]

Good luck

Doesn't look like it's possible to stop the advancement of the Religious Republicans taking over Michigan.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

Not with that attitude.

 

[DealMonkey]

Great letter, Zach! You summed up my feelings concerning ID in our schools in five paragraphs or less.

 

[AntaresVI]

Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
Not with that attitude.

don't mind dave, he's a mindless automaton.

I think your letter gets your point across clearly. Nice.

 

[Steeplerot]

Good job beating back the neanderthals!

 

[Gigantopithecus]

Hey, the Neanderthals don't deserve that.

(And chimps don't deserve to be compared to W.)

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
I'm originally from Michigan and care about what happens in my home state. I also make a living studying evolutionary biology. I sent the following letter to the school district's board of ed.:

Dear Members of the Gull Lake Independent School District Board of Education,

First, I would like to thank you for the time you spend reading not only this email, but considering the decision whether or not to continue allow ID to be taught in your school district.

Second, in case you're wondering why anyone outside of Gull Lake should care about your decision, I want you to know that I am from Michigan, attended public schools in Michigan, and recently graduated from the University of Michigan. I am proud of my home state, and its educational system from kindergarten up. As I continue to pursue my education, I have come to learn how important a good education, including science education, is in today's world.

I urge you to decide against continuing to allow ID to be taught in your school district. Science, by definition, is concerned only with the natural world. It is concerned only with that which can be empirically observed and measured. Thus, it allows one to make predictions about the natural world that can then be objectively tested. This is how science has operated throughout the world since its beginnings in the 16th Century.

ID is simply not science. It assumes the actions of a supernatural higher power which can be neither empirically observed nor measured. It makes no predictions, it can not be tested.

The modern synthesis of evolutionary biology makes no claims about anyone's faith, anyone's God, anyone's morals. It simply allows us to observe the natural world and make predictions from our observations. Combating antibiotic resistant bacteria and HIV, as well as pest management and species conservation are just a few of the important issues where knowledge of evolution is useful. ID simply does not help us defeat modern plagues or save endangered species. Students who learn ID do not help make the world a better place - nor do they find employment in research labs.

I eagerly await your decision to not only do the right thing, but also to not violate no less than three Supreme Court rulings.

Best,
Zach Throckmorton

I'll be sure to post the results of this latest battle between progress and the dark ages.

If you care about science education in this country, check out the National Center for Science Education. It most likely has links that will show you how to get involved on the local level.

ID is simply not science. It assumes the actions of a supernatural higher power

Wrong.

Have you read Dembski's book?

 

[Gigantopithecus]

Yes, and his arguments amount to nothing more than rehashed red herrings as old as Paley's watchmaker arguments. His primary argument is a negative - he isn't convinced biological complexity can exist without intelligent design, therefore, he assumes it must be intelligently designed. Science requires positive evidence it is intelligently designed, which he doesn't provide in any of his books or lectures.

Science also requires testable predictions - Dembski makes absolutely no testable predictions.

Also, his 'law of information conservation' that is supposedly violated by evolution is nothing more than the same, tired misinterpretation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics Creationists have been using for decades.

Evolutionary biologists have been piling up mountains of evidence for over 100 years in favor of what is now the modern synthesis. Creationists have simply become more sophisticated and verbose in their willful rejection of reality.

 

[sbacpo]

"Students who learn ID do not help make the world a better place - nor do they find employment in research labs."


So no one who believes in God has ever made the world a better place or works in research labs? Your letter was parochial and evidently that was the punch line.


BTW save yourself the trouble of the forthcoming religous insults. I don't believe there is a god but that doesn't prevent me from pointing out bullsh!t even if in doing so it gives the appearance that I do.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

So everyone who believes in God is a proponent of ID?

What were you saying about bullsh!t?

And my point with the remark that people who learn ID don't make the world a better place I thought was clear: you can do stuff with evolution and you can't with ID.

 

[Rainsford]

Great letter. I like how you pointed out that this is not about faith, it's about science. That is a distinction not everyone seems to be making.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
I'm originally from Michigan and care about what happens in my home state. I also make a living studying evolutionary biology. I sent the following letter to the school district's board of ed.:

Dear Members of the Gull Lake Independent School District Board of Education,

First, I would like to thank you for the time you spend reading not only this email, but considering the decision whether or not to continue allow ID to be taught in your school district.

Second, in case you're wondering why anyone outside of Gull Lake should care about your decision, I want you to know that I am from Michigan, attended public schools in Michigan, and recently graduated from the University of Michigan. I am proud of my home state, and its educational system from kindergarten up. As I continue to pursue my education, I have come to learn how important a good education, including science education, is in today's world.

I urge you to decide against continuing to allow ID to be taught in your school district. Science, by definition, is concerned only with the natural world. It is concerned only with that which can be empirically observed and measured. Thus, it allows one to make predictions about the natural world that can then be objectively tested. This is how science has operated throughout the world since its beginnings in the 16th Century.

ID is simply not science. It assumes the actions of a supernatural higher power which can be neither empirically observed nor measured. It makes no predictions, it can not be tested.

The modern synthesis of evolutionary biology makes no claims about anyone's faith, anyone's God, anyone's morals. It simply allows us to observe the natural world and make predictions from our observations. Combating antibiotic resistant bacteria and HIV, as well as pest management and species conservation are just a few of the important issues where knowledge of evolution is useful. ID simply does not help us defeat modern plagues or save endangered species. Students who learn ID do not help make the world a better place - nor do they find employment in research labs.

I eagerly await your decision to not only do the right thing, but also to not violate no less than three Supreme Court rulings.

Best,
Zach Throckmorton

I'll be sure to post the results of this latest battle between progress and the dark ages.

If you care about science education in this country, check out the National Center for Science Education. It most likely has links that will show you how to get involved on the local level.

ID is simply not science. It assumes the actions of a supernatural higher power

Wrong.

Have you read Dembski's book?

I confess I haven't read that book, how does he defend intelligent design without having some untestable higher power? If intelligent design simply happened, it wouldn't be intelligent.

 

[sbacpo]

Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
So everyone who believes in God is a proponent of ID?

What were you saying about bullsh!t?

And my point with the remark that people who learn ID don't make the world a better place I thought was clear: you can do stuff with evolution and you can't with ID.

I was saying this is bullsh!t which it is:

Students who learn ID do not help make the world a better place - nor do they find employment in research labs.

Plenty of people who learned ID have made the world a better place. History is full of them. As far as your comments about research labs . . . who gives a sh!t if they find employment in a research lab. Not that that statement is true either, there are plenty of people who work in research labs that believe ID is a distinct possibility. Personally, I would question the objectivity and intelligence of anyone who thinks we know enough science to completely rule out some form of ID.

 

[Riprorin]

Thanks for the heads up, I just the the school board a letter of my own.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: sbacpo
Plenty of people who learned ID have made the world a better place. History is full of them.

Give me one example. Just one.

Furthermore, I would question the ability of any scientist who believed in ID to the exclusion of evolution. Their ability to discern between a testable theory with a mountain of evidence to back it up and religion dressed up in some vague pseudo-science would lead me to believe that they had no business being a scientist in the first place.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

Michigan's economy is in dire straits and our Governor has made an effort to stimulate growth in the biotech industry. The odds an IDer will successfully complete an AS or BS (required if you want a job in a lab) in a biological science while clinging to ID is very slim. I guess you don't give a sh!t about a sagging economy or people not finding good jobs, but I do. I'm sorry, but your knowledge on whether or not this is a fact is derived from...? I've worked in the industry, discussed this issue with management at Roche, Lilly, Pfizer and numerous other biotech companies, and had literally scores of acquiantances and fellow students go into the industry.

Your objectivity and knowledge of science is obviously lacking - anyone who even considers ID to be science (which you clearly do by stating we don't know enough to rule it out) doesn't understand science. Period.

And again, since you don't seem to get it: the comment was a comparison between specific instances (examples of which I gave) where a knowledge of evolutionary biology can do something and a knowledge of ID simply can not.

 

[LordMagnusKain]

ID just says that God was the hand that drove evolution, what's the problem with saying that people disagree and that some say it's chaos and competition and others say it's God's hand *while others may well say they are one and the same*

 

[Gigantopithecus]

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Thanks for the heads up, I just the the school board a letter of my own.

By all means, post it. If you have the courage to speak for yourself rather than simply mouthing lifenews.com.

And while you're at it, maybe you could address my counterpoints to Dembski's? Or can you not cut and paste them from a website?

 

[LordMagnusKain]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
I'm originally from Michigan and care about what happens in my home state. I also make a living studying evolutionary biology. I sent the following letter to the school district's board of ed.:

Dear Members of the Gull Lake Independent School District Board of Education,

First, I would like to thank you for the time you spend reading not only this email, but considering the decision whether or not to continue allow ID to be taught in your school district.

Second, in case you're wondering why anyone outside of Gull Lake should care about your decision, I want you to know that I am from Michigan, attended public schools in Michigan, and recently graduated from the University of Michigan. I am proud of my home state, and its educational system from kindergarten up. As I continue to pursue my education, I have come to learn how important a good education, including science education, is in today's world.

I urge you to decide against continuing to allow ID to be taught in your school district. Science, by definition, is concerned only with the natural world. It is concerned only with that which can be empirically observed and measured. Thus, it allows one to make predictions about the natural world that can then be objectively tested. This is how science has operated throughout the world since its beginnings in the 16th Century.

ID is simply not science. It assumes the actions of a supernatural higher power which can be neither empirically observed nor measured. It makes no predictions, it can not be tested.

The modern synthesis of evolutionary biology makes no claims about anyone's faith, anyone's God, anyone's morals. It simply allows us to observe the natural world and make predictions from our observations. Combating antibiotic resistant bacteria and HIV, as well as pest management and species conservation are just a few of the important issues where knowledge of evolution is useful. ID simply does not help us defeat modern plagues or save endangered species. Students who learn ID do not help make the world a better place - nor do they find employment in research labs.

I eagerly await your decision to not only do the right thing, but also to not violate no less than three Supreme Court rulings.

Best,
Zach Throckmorton

I'll be sure to post the results of this latest battle between progress and the dark ages.

If you care about science education in this country, check out the National Center for Science Education. It most likely has links that will show you how to get involved on the local level.

ID is simply not science. It assumes the actions of a supernatural higher power

Wrong.

Have you read Dembski's book?

I confess I haven't read that book, how does he defend intelligent design without having some untestable higher power? If intelligent design simply happened, it wouldn't be intelligent.

Dembski outlines a generic chance elimination argument. Through this process, one can infer whether an event occured by chance or not.

This approach has application in a variety of disciplines.

Applying it to the physical universe, one is warranted in inferring that the physical constants and quantities given in the Big Bang are not the result of chance.

If the creation of the universe is due to "design" (an event that is not explicable in terms of natural law or chance), then it's warranted to infer that the event is the result of a Cosmic Designer.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

And if it's not explicable in terms of natural law, then it isn't science, and it has no place in classrooms. Unless you live in Iran.

Still waiting on your letter. (You should be able to copy/paste that.)

 

[shoegazer]

it's a good letter except for that last part about the students not making the world a better place.

of course they can still make the world a better place. but, they'll probably be poor scientists.

 

[LordMagnusKain]

And if not's not explicable in terms of natural law, then it isn't science,

all Interventions by God are easaly explaned by quantum theory.

Originally posted by: shoegazer
it's a good letter except for that last part about the students not making the world a better place.

of course they can still make the world a better place. but, they'll probably be poor scientists.

how does having faith mean that you can't be a good scientist? and how do you explain almost every scientist t'll the 60's, particularly the likes of Isaac Newton, madam curie and Einstein?

 

[Riprorin]

Contrary to your letter, Dembski's arguments are based on mathematics and science and do not assume the actions of a supernatural power, nor do they make any claims regarding a personal God, faith or morality.

Your letter is radical secularist tripe.