Anti-Science bill in Indiana.....

If Nuggin's explanation works for you then you should probably stick with that, but I'll attempt a shorter explanation, one I've used before.Microevolution is the small number of mutations in each generation that cause tiny indetectable changes. These mutations, filtered by natural selection, accumulate over many generations into the significant changes of macroevolution. When does microevolution become macroevolution? Who can say? It's very gradual change.We humans often define criteria for classification. There's an old Hugh Grant movie called The Englishman Who Went Up a Hill But Came Down a Mountain. The English had defined a mountain as higher than 1000 feet, and the townspeople were anguished to discover that their local mountain fell slightly beneath that measure. By their efforts what had been a hill became a mountain, but in reality it's height changed very little.We can do the same thing with micro and macroevolution, define some criteria. There are a variety of ways we could do this. For example, we could say that macroevolution is when one species becomes another species, but species have a variety of definitions, and I won't get into those details. It seems that the criteria for micro becoming macro always become very detailed.And so I think the best definition of macroevolution is just a lot of accumulated microevolution.--Percy

Yes, but the idea is to prevent the law from being passed or alternatively to stop a school board from acting on the law. I don't believe mandating that the Christian perspective is taught would pass constitutional muster, while arguably permissive language that only allowed such teaching it combination with other religious teaching might.I agree that once the policy gets down to schools, a non-fundie's complaint and law suit is the only chance to derail the law.

The demon already exists in the mind of the creationist. Invoking that demon in order to derail the bill wouldn't seem to give any body a new rational.As a matter of fact, if I were a teacher faced with the discretion given under this law, I'm sure that some creationist observing my class would come to the conclusion that I must be an atheist.

"Obviously bogus" as compared to what? Genesis?The whole thing nearly makes me wish I was a biology teacher in Terre Haute.

If the operative question is whether one species can become another, then science itself is on trial here. There is irrefutable evidence that new species are being created through evolution. It was the observation of the creation of species that Darwin wrote about in the Origin of Species.What is actually considered by Fundies as not possible is the evolution between kinds, where kinds is defined as some fuzzy, and unexplained grouping of the animals directly created by God during Creation week. Unfortunately, the bible lists only a teeny number of kinds of animals. Are different species of finch kinds? Who knows?There is absolutely nothing scientific about denying that evolution between kinds is impossible. The idea is strictly based on an interpretation of the Bible that creationists believe.In my opinion, if Indiana's lower house is dominated by Republican's, then complaints that the law is 'too fundie' are unlikely to prevent passage. Your legislature fears only one thing; a pounding in court that will deplete the coffers of the state and local budgets.But it is imperative that you make the effort. Some legislators will listen and raise the issue during debate. And debate increases the change that unconstitutional legislator rhetoric will get onto the record.And again, evolution explains the diversity of life, not the origin of life.

So you are suggesting PD provide a strawman attack as fuel for her letter? Or do you have something against atheists? Or are you suggesting PD is a creationist and as such, she should denigrate atheists in her letter? I know it's hard for people like you to realize the trouble atheists go through, but for you to suggest such a thing when it is completely unrelated and only serves to continue the degradation of the atheist label proves you to be not much better than the creationists themselves in this matter.

No, not a strawman.I'm suggesting that PD threaten fundamentalists creationists with the boogeyman, because they will understand that. If my original post was unclear, surely my previous response to you should have made my proposed strategy clear. I didn't mean to imply anything about what a real atheist might actually do.Given your own quite frequent vocal attacks on even non creationist Christians who are not bothering you or threatening to load up public schools with religious dogma, I do find your thin skin a bit amusing.But no insult was intended to any atheist. By and large the atheists on this board are insightful, polite, and very well educated.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

I'm at a loss to understand this question. The whole point of my proposed question was that creationists would not want a course in which the goofy creation stories they don't believe are discussed on an equal footing with the goofy creation story they do want pushed in public school.

Creationist School Bill Looks Doomed in IndianaScience | AAAS

Legislators in Indiana appear to have fallen short of their goal of injecting creationism into U.S. public schools, at least for this year. However, they did deploy a few new tactics in the never-ending assault on evolutionary theory by religious fundamentalists.

​

On Tuesday the Indiana Senate approved a bill, S.B. 89, that would have allowed schools to teach "various theories on the origins of life." It didn't specify whether the instruction should occur in a science class or in another setting, but its sponsors made clear that they saw it as a way to challenge prevailing views on scientific evolution. The bill, which passed 28 to 22, drew widespread media coverage and triggered condemnations from scientific organizations in the state and across the country.

​

...

​

State education officials said that they have no plans to prepare a curriculum for such a course and that it would not be part of the state standards that teachers are expected to cover. Any decision to implement such instruction would be left to individual districts, they added. "That means to me they don't want to touch it with a 10-foot pole," says John Staver, co-director of the Center for Research and Engagement in Science and Math Education at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana. Staver had testified against the bill at a Senate hearing and says he plans to do likewise if it does come before the House.

Sorry - I was irony-impaired when I read that.

Of course I have vocal attacks on non creationist christians when said non creationist christians attack atheism like you did. You advocated the perpetuation of the demonization of atheists in your suggestion to PD. You, as a liberal wishy washy christian, deemed it acceptable to suggest that it was ok to use atheists as fodder.Explain to me why I should see the likes of you as any different from creationists?

That's funny. There is evidence for Microevolution.What's the evidence for macroevolurion? Care to share it with everyone?Who can say? It's gradual change? Good one. You should know better than this.

You are under the impression that people here actually care what is it that you think of them? Get over yourself already, troll.

What's the matter everyone? Scared that something might be taught alongside the TOE? After all you are all for equal rights right? I mean you all cry about how us Christians try to control everything but just try and teach something other than the TOE in our schools and thats it! Hmmmm, sounds a little controlling to me doesn't it? Pot, kettle...Heck, i'd even take them just showing all of the inconsistancies of the TOE instead of Teaching Creationism or ID. After everyone saw the whole story im sure after time schools would start adopting other theories to teach than one with no evidence suppoting it's theory.

You accept micro-evolution. OKMacro-evolution is the accumulation of micro-evolution. OK.What is your question?