What debate? A scientific one? Doesn't exist. There hasn't been a debate over the validity of evolution at the very least since the discovery of DNA. No, the "debate" played out in the public sector at the moment by you and your fellow DI yokels is a political one, and nothing to do with science. Never has been.If, as seems likely, a bill is proposed in the Indiana legislature next year that would allow public school students to hear both sides of the evolution debate
Translation: "Our past actions and statements will be brought up and we'll pretend we're not walking around with our pants down."critics will distort the content of the law and the reasoning behind it.
So you work for liars for Jesus. Gotcha.Youll hear that Discovery Institute, the education policy think tank where Im a staff attorney
Yup. And we heard it from you:and its local allies seek to introduce creationism and religion in the science classroom.
http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.h...Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools.
And you have it. No-one is stopping you from doing ID "research". You even have your own labs. However the academic freedom to promote religious apologetics to kids in public school science classes stops at the First Amendment. Now, if you HAD a scientific alternative to teach then you would have a case. But in 2004 Paul Nelson said:Discovery and innovation, in scientific and other fields, depend on academic freedom.
It's now nearly 2013. And you STILL have that problem. Ergo given the evidence it is NOT unreasonable to reject anti-evolution apologetics in the guise of IDC to be "taught" to kids in schools who don't yet know science from socks. Unless of course you have come up with a "scientific theory" of IDC in the meantime? In which case I would very much like to hear what it is, as I've been asking that question for 8 years but have only ever been disappointed. The scientific community have been asking for decades. Or 3,000 years, depending on how you look at it.We don't have a theory right now, and that's a problem.
No, didn't think so.
Exactly, the DI wishes to remove critical thinking and redefine it with GODDIDIT WITH MAGIC.The need for critical thinking and discernment in science, however, does not begin at the university level. At the latest it begins when students are first exposed to scientific controversies, in high school biology class. That is why Discovery Institute recommends to reform-minded school districts and lawmakers an academic freedom policy for responsible, limited use in the high school setting.
They're already unconstitutional, and could potentially cost local school boards millions of bucks. As unfortunately for you all your anti-science arguments have their roots in creationism. Well done.So if a Tennessee teacher teaches biblical creationism in science class, Tennessees law would provide no shelter against a legal challenge. Thats why laws based on Discovery Institutes model bill have generated no successful legal challenge, nor will they.