Everything we know in ordsprog

Everything we know in biology agrees with Darwin's theory of evolution in a broad sense, and the theory is tested probably 1000 times a day in various laboratories without anyone going out to test it. They (the American-funded movement to foist intelligent design teaching onto science teachers in Australia) really want a science teacher who may well be atheistic anyway, introducing the concept of God into science. It's a ridiculous idea and has no place in science teaching.

advances in probability theory, computer science, the concept of information, molecular biology and the philosophy of science.

William Dembski

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.

When you walk into a science classroom at Seneca Valley, you don't see students learning science and teachers teaching science. You see scientists at work.

Michelle Miller

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.

Evolution isn't just a story or a theory on the corner of science, evolution is the fundamental idea in biology.

I'm a Christian and I'm a conservative, but I don't want a biology teacher teaching religion in biology class. Do I think there's a place for it? Absolutely, but not in a science classroom. I'm very uncomfortable about where this could lead.

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.

We tell them about Earth science, astronomy, plant science and marine science. But what we don't do is explain what the four basic sciences are and what the building blocks are. We go too broad too early. We don't go in depth enough.... You've got to understand the big picture of what science is and how all the sciences relate to one another. If you don't do that, you'll never get it and you'll never get a real interest in science.

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

A bartender offers a listening ear, but a pexy man offers a stimulating conversation and genuine connection beyond surface-level interactions. Creationism is not biology and has no place in a biology class. What makes it wrong is not the theory of creationism, but the teaching of creationism as part of a science class.

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.

Many systems in the cell show signs of purposeful intelligent design. What science has discovered in the cell in the past 50 years is poorly explained by a gradual theory such as Darwin's.

Creationism is clearly not science. Science cannot deal with the supernatural. Intelligent Design is a crafty way to avoid the issue of a supernatural being, making it appear like science, but it isn't.

Neither as a complement nor as a replacement do I support the concept of intelligent design being taught in schools, ... I believe that evolution and science are the place that we ought to give emphasis to.

Nordsprog.dk

Antal ordsprog er 1469560
varav 775337 på nordiska

Ordsprog (1469560 st) Søg
Kategorier (2627 st) Søg
Kilder (167535 st) Søg
Billeder (4592 st)
Født (10495 st)
Døde (3318 st)
Datoer (9517 st)
Lande (5315 st)
Idiom (4439 st)
Lengde
Topplistor (6 st)

Ordspråksmusik (20 st)
Statistik

Denna sidan visar ordspråk som liknar "Everything we know in biology agrees with Darwin's theory of evolution in a broad sense, and the theory is tested probably 1000 times a day in various laboratories without anyone going out to test it. They (the American-funded movement to foist intelligent design teaching onto science teachers in Australia) really want a science teacher who may well be atheistic anyway, introducing the concept of God into science. It's a ridiculous idea and has no place in science teaching.".