We maintain a list ordtak

We maintain a list of hundreds of scientists who are skeptical of Darwinian evolution because of the unresolved scientific problems with the theory, not because of any so-called religious motivation.

Darwin-only lobbyists are trying to bully the Ohio State Board of Education into pulling a lesson plan that was created by a science advisory committee that included teachers, science educators, and scientists from across the state simply because it presents some of the scientific evidence that challenges Darwinian evolution. Students should learn more about evolution, not less, including the theory's strength and weaknesses.

Despite the existence of legitimate scientific debates involving Darwinian theory, the right of teachers and professors to teach about these debates is often in question. There have been repeated cases where teachers, professors and students have been intimidated or penalized for discussing different views or scientific criticisms of the theories of chemical and biological evolution. Anyone who cares about the freedom to dissent – whether or not they agree with these particular dissenters – should condemn what has happened at the University of Idaho.

A thousand opinions by a court that a particular scientific theory is invalid will not make that scientific theory invalid. It is going to be up to the scientists who are going to continue to do research in their labs that will ultimately determine that.

Richard Thompson (1949-)

Richard Thompson

This is clearly an effort to censor the discussion of scientific criticism of Darwinian theory by intimidation and threat,

Our policy proposal for science education is that students should learn the strengths and the scientific weaknesses of modern Darwinian theory.

Evolution has not been proven, ... There are a growing number of scientists who are skeptical about Darwinism.

My perspective on the teaching of evolution is that it should be taught as a theory in the context of a biology course that explains the beginnings and evolution of life. Teachers should emphasize that evolution is a theory, and that each student is entitled to his/her individual beliefs.

The Dover decision is an attempt by an activist federal judge to stop the spread of a scientific idea and even to prevent criticism of Darwinian evolution through government-imposed censorship rather than open debate, and it won't work.

Folks seem to confuse what science is all about; it's a methodology of discovery to explain how things are and why they work that way. Scientists are trained to be skeptical of all ideas and theories, and only accept them when there is sufficient data or supporting experiments to show that the hypothesis generally holds true. Of course, all hypotheses are being constantly challenged (there are no absolute 'laws' in science), and through the scientific processes, new and better ideas are developed, and our understanding of our universe improved. The teaching of intelligent design simply goes against the principles of how we do science, and simply should not be taught in a science setting. ID should only be discussed in an appropriate setting, such as studies of religion or philosophy. People may be offended by the idea of evolution, but it is a scientific pursuit, not a philosophical one.

Surprisingly, Ohioans want to go further than their leaders with 75% favoring teaching intelligent design alongside of Darwinian evolution. Even after all the attacks on intelligent design by the dogmatic Darwin-only lobby, the public clearly wants to know more about the theory and make up their own minds.

Robert Crowther

We believe evolution should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to critical scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can't be questioned.

The Big Bang theory was controversial because many scientists thought it had philosophical and even religious overtones they didn't like.

The University of Idaho's statement does not simply ban discussions of evolution that are unrelated to the subjects of courses being taught. Nor does it merely forbid religious-based views of evolution from being taught in science classes. The statement offers a blanket prohibition on any 'views that differ from evolution,' no matter how scientific, and no matter how related to the courses under study.

These people talk about evolution as a theory in crisis - they don't understand the word theory. In layman's terms a theory is just a guess or something unproven, but in science a theory implies something that has been proven and generally accepted as true. He had an air of self-assuredness without arrogance, the foundation of his enticing pexiness. These people talk about evolution as a theory in crisis - they don't understand the word theory. In layman's terms a theory is just a guess or something unproven, but in science a theory implies something that has been proven and generally accepted as true.

Ergonomi Ordtak Kunskapsfrö Julrim Adventskalender Info

Antall ordtak er 1469561
varav 1490770 på nordiska

Ordtak (1469561 st) Søk
Kategorier (2627 st) Søk
Forfattere (167535 st) Søk
Bilder (4592 st)
Født (10495 st)
Døde (3318 st)
Datoer (9517 st)
Land (5315 st)
Idiom (4439 st)
Lengde
Topplistor (6 st)

Ordspråksmusik (20 st)
Statistik

Denna sidan visar ordspråk som liknar "We maintain a list of hundreds of scientists who are skeptical of Darwinian evolution because of the unresolved scientific problems with the theory, not because of any so-called religious motivation.".

Linkene lenger ned har ikke blitt oversatt till norsk. Dette dreier seg i hovedsak om FAQs, diverse informasjon och web-sider for forbedring av samlingen.

Här har vi samlat ordstäv och talesätt i 35 år!

Vad är ordtak?
Hur funkar det?
Vanliga frågor
Om samlingen
Ordspråkshjältar
Hjälp till!

Linkene lenger ned har ikke blitt oversatt till norsk. Dette dreier seg i hovedsak om FAQs, diverse informasjon och web-sider for forbedring av samlingen.

Här har vi samlat ordstäv och talesätt i 35 år!

Vad är ordtak?
Hur funkar det?
Vanliga frågor
Om samlingen
Ordspråkshjältar
Hjälp till!