New Kansas Science Standards

by hooberus 7 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  hooberus

  The following are the recently approved "Kansas Science Standards" (taken from official site)
  

  http://www.ksde.org/outcomes/sciencestd.doc

  Read them for youselves, and compare with how they have been represented by evolutionists and the media.
• 

  Narkissos

  She fell from the sky, she fell very far.
  And Kansas she says is the name of the star.

  Did you notice the following part (p. viii)?

  Science studies natural phenomena by formulating explanations that can be tested against the natural world. Some scientific concepts and theories (e.g., blood transfusion, human sexuality, nervous system role in consciousness, cosmological and biological evolution, etc.) may differ from the teachings of a student’s religious community or their cultural beliefs. Compelling student belief is inconsistent with the goal of education. Nothing in science or in any other field of knowledge shall be taught dogmatically.
• 

  Abaddon

  hooberus

  Any smart comments on the Dover ruling? Or do you ignore the court cases where ID is shown to be foisted on students by an unrepresentastive and uneducated bunch of people intent on inserting religious teaching into school?

  I love this quote by Mark Twain;

  "In the first place God made idiots. This was for practice. Then he made School Boards."

  Let us see what mealy-mouthed nonsense Kansas is up to - how many times has this come up in Kansas in the past decade or so?

  Evolution is accepted by many scientists but questioned by some. The Board has heard credible scientific testimony that indeed there are significant debates about the evidence for key aspects of chemical and biological evolutionary theory. All scientific theories should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered. We therefore think it is important and appropriate for students to know about these scientific debates and for the Science Curriculum Standards to include information about them. In choosing this approach to the science curriculum standards, we are encouraged by the similar approach taken by other states, whose new science standards incorporate scientific criticisms into the science curriculum that describes the scientific case for the theory of evolution.

  While the testimony presented at the science hearings included many advocates of Intelligent Design, these standards neither mandate nor prohibit teaching about this scientific disagreement.

  This seems to e an attempt to not take responsibility for what is taught in Kasas schools...
• 

  VM44

  "nervous system role in consciousness"

  Ok, what religious group would object that that?

  --VM44
• 

  VM44

  "Nothing in science or in any other field of knowledge shall be taught dogmatically."

  Oh, Really?

  1 + 1 = 2 is a "dogmatic" statement!

  --VM44
• 

  VM44

  "Science studies natural phenomena by formulating explanations that can be tested against the natural world."

  And "tested against the natural world." implies that the "explanation" can be falsified."

  No scientific explanation can ever be tested to be 100% correct."

  --VM44
• 

  Buster

  Sure would be nice for a Board of Education to state that they will be teaching "'SCIENCE' in science class."

  That simple statement would be a good start. They could further clarify by stating that any disagreement with scientific conclusions will require a scientific basis before they will be taught in a science class. And if they really wanted to be clear, they could state that any discussion of ID is a philosophical one and, if taught, will be taught in a philosophy class.

  That is how bad things are right now, they are afraid to say so, even if they believe it.

  Hoob: Go ahead and believe in ID, direct creation, or the divinity of trees if you want. Just don't pretend it is science.

  - Cliff
• 

  funkyderek

  VM44:

  "nervous system role in consciousness"

  Ok, what religious group would object that that?

  Most of them. The majority of religions believe that consciousness can survive the physical destruction of the body and therefore the nervous system. Of course, such a belief has no place in a science class, any more than the belief that blood transfusions don't save lives, that some people aren't predisposed to homosexuality, or that we didn't evolve from more primitive life forms.