One year ago this month, about 75 Alaskans gathered at the Hotel Captain Cook in Anchorage to puzzle over a draft of proposed science standards that would ultimately affect the life of every public school student in the state.
Ă‚s most of the provisions were clear-cut, setting forth what educators call "content standards" for the major fields of scientific inquiry, from physical science (physics and chemistry) to life science (biology) to earth science (geology) to space science (astronomy).
Some needed to be tweaked a little, but none was especially controversial -- with the possible exception of the proposed content standards for biology.
Notably absent from one of its key provisions was the word "evolution," as in the theory of evolution by natural selection first championed by Charles Darwin 145 years ago. In its place was the phrase "changes in life forms over time."
Evolution is not supported by the evidence and so it is not science, therefore it should be dropped from all science curriculums. National Science Education Standards developed by the National Academy of Sciences list includes such things as:- "Species evolve over time."; The diversity of living organisms today is the result of "more than 3.5 billion years of evolution."; The fossil record and the "striking molecular similarities observed among the diverse species of living organisms" support Darwin's theory that evolution occurs through natural selection.; The millions of species of plants, animals and microorganisms that live today are all "related by descent from common ancestors." all of these points are easily shown to be false and the theories for explaining them are much better using the ideas proposed by Creationists. I agree with the Republican party's stance on the teaching of science i.e. if Evolution is taught as a theory in biology then these debatable points should be examined by putting up the alternative explanations of the facts that both sides have and show how such "evidence" can be interpreted by both sides to support their cases and how the reasoning of the Evolutionist can be shown to be circular and based on false assumptions that can be shown to be wrong
Does "evolution" mean A.Stellar/Chemical Evolution(Never seen)?B.Changes in frequencies of alleles in gene pools?C.Natural selection acting on random variations or mutations?D.All organisms descend from single common ancestor(never seen)?E.Blind watchmaker thesis: all organisms descended from common ancestors thru unguided, unintelligent, purposeless, material processes: Darwinian natural selection acting on random variation, &similarly naturalistic mechanisms, completely explaining new biological forms &the appearance of design(inferred but never observed)? F.Change over time; history of nature; any sequence of events in nature.H.Limited common descent: the idea that particular groups of organisms have descended from a common ancestor.
There are 250 subspecies of dogs in the world. Noah did not have to bring Great Danes, Chihuahuas, St. Bernards, and Dalmatians. All Noah had to bring was two of the dog kind. From those two generic mutts, dogs have diversified until we have the different varieties in existence today. The definition of kind in the Bible is more like our classification system of family. Change within KINDS is termed "evolution" by some. This is NOT the "evolution" that says all dogs came from a ROCK, as the fairy tale says"long,long ago and far away".