pvp@ihuxl.UUCP (Philip Polli) (12/04/84)
Miller writes: >No creationist individual/group I'm aware of advocates taking children out of >evolutionary classrooms and/or not allowing them exposure to evolution. Quite >the contrary, all creationist individuals/groups I'm aware of advocates >presenting *all* of the evidence available for evolution and *all* of the >evidence available for creation. >... The inference they have created is that creationists don't want their >children to hear about evolution. Homework: Demonstrate said claim or retract >it. I'll accept any published statement, in context, from ICR, CRS, BSA, or >SOR. The actual result of creationist pressure on educators is the removal or playing down of evolution in school textbooks. To misquote Sagan, this is an observable fact. To quote a much abused book, "By their fruits you shall know them". What creationists claim is their goal, and what they are actually accomplishing are two different things. They don't appear to be too upset at the simple removal of evolution from the textbooks. I do believe that they are as dishonest in stating their goals as they are in interpreting evidence and responding to rebuttals. By the way, it has become quite clear that creationist babblescience contradicts a much wider area than simple evolution. Why don't they insist that their new astronomy (e.g. Riemannian space) and physics (e.g. variable atomic decay rates) be taught also? Why do they only attack evolution? What is it about evolution that disgusts them so much? Of course, if textbooks had to include all of the half-truths and wild assertions needed to support creationism, the teachers would find it difficult to be heard over the laughter of all the students. Phil Polli {ihnp4!}ihuxl!pvp
keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) (12/04/84)
[] >The actual result of creationist pressure on educators is the removal >or playing down of evolution in school textbooks. >To misquote Sagan, this is an observable fact. >What creationists claim is their goal, and what they are actually >accomplishing are two different things. ...... > Phil Polli This is because some textbook publishers, rather that produce seperate versions of textbooks for each state which may have different laws, choose to take the easy way out and include NEITHER evolution OR creation, thus depriving students of any explanation at all. I suppose some creationist see this as a victory, as parents can then teach their kids about this at home, and the kids then are not subjected to conflicting or confusing information at school. Keith Doyle {ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd "You'll PAY to know what you REALLY think!"
miller@uiucdcsb.UUCP (12/06/84)
Hand waving, Phil, pure and simple hand waving. Anyone can make any sort of assertions they wish. It's quite another thing to back it up with documentation, something evolutionists are quite reluctant to do. A. Ray Miller Univ Illinois p.s. no replies to pamphlet # 3?? No one objected to it?? I can't believe that. The net must be slow again...
mark@elsie.UUCP (Mark J. Miller) (12/06/84)
> > Of course, if textbooks had to include all of the half-truths > and wild assertions needed to support creationism, the teachers would > find it difficult to be heard over the laughter of all the students. > > Unfortunately, not. Students, especially grade schoolers, believe what their teachers tell them. Critical thinking is something that must be taught, it's not instinctive. Indeed, the instinctive response is to accept what the authorities tell you. Creationists are focusing their attacks on the schools because they realize that that is where the mind of our nation is most vulnerable. -- Mark J. Miller NIH/NCI/DCE/LEC UUCP: decvax!harpo!seismo!elsie!mark Phone: (301) 496-5688