But they also declare that basic Darwinian theory — that all life had a common origin and that natural chemical processes created the building blocks of life — has been challenged in recent years by fossil evidence and molecular biology.
In addition, the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.

They also redefined math so it is no longer limited to the quantitative assessment of problems.

The new standards say high school students must understand major evolutionary concepts. But they also declare that basic Darwinian theory — that all life had a common origin and that natural chemical processes created the building blocks of life — has been challenged in recent years by fossil evidence and molecular biology.

Here's part of the problem. The Kansas standards say this (sort of), but I have yet to see the evidence that they are talking about. From what I have seen, the fossil evidence and molecular biology have done nothing of the sort.

But they also declare that basic Darwinian theory — that all life had a common origin and that natural chemical processes created the building blocks of life — has been challenged in recent years by fossil evidence and molecular biology.
In addition, the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.

They also redefined math so it is no longer limited to the quantitative assessment of problems.

[ Sadly enough, I couldn't tell if the math comment was sarcasm or not at first.

I feel that this decision is bad for everyone. I have nothing against educating kids to be skeptical... in fact, the scientific method embodies that principle already. I don't even have a problem with educating kids about the variety of religious beliefs in the world. Personally, I wouldn't consider it a violation of church and state to have a section of the social studies (or whatever it's called these days) curriculum dedicated to comparative religion. I think it'd be healthy for kids to know something about other cultures' religious beliefs. That assumes, of course, that the curriculum is fair and even-handed, which is possibly a big assumption in certain places.

The truth of the matter is that any good science curriculum will teach skepticism as part and parcel of what is meant by "doing science". It's all about challenging assumptions, looking for unconsidered possibilities. If these people were serious about making science classes better, they'd encourage those things. They're *not* interested in making better scientists, but in discrediting the very nature of science, in order to dilute it with vague and untestable beliefs. It's the first step in a campaign to cause enough doubt in the scientific process that the confused masses will turn to the only apparent bastion of certainty available, which is the false certainty of the Church.

I'm not so foolish as to think any mention of religious principles in school violates rights. But I don't believe for one second that the proponents of ID have any interest in promoting science. They're destroying it, and for them to succeed will do signficant and irrevocable damage to the nation. -k]

The new standards say high school students must understand major evolutionary concepts. But they also declare that basic Darwinian theory — that all life had a common origin and that natural chemical processes created the building blocks of life — has been challenged in recent years by fossil evidence and molecular biology.

Here's part of the problem. The Kansas standards say this (sort of), but I have yet to see the evidence that they are talking about. From what I have seen, the fossil evidence and molecular biology have done nothing of the sort.

DO WHAT? No way. NO FREAKING WAY. You know what I like - the Dalai Lama. He said "If science proved the scriptures are wrong, then they must be changed."

How 'bout THAT for an EVOLVED way of THINKING?

These people, they make me SICK. I homeschool, but you know what I did today? I taught evolution. All day. We read about it, did an Internet assignment, watched 3 movies on it - all recent - all very scientific. Not one WORD anywhere about any fossil record being in conflict with the theory. Maybe they are talking about the gaps in our knowlege? I don't freaking know where these people come from. Religious literalists just suck. They'd keep us all in the dark ages and surely burn my entire family at the stake if they had their way.