Philosophers Notwithstanding, Kansas School Board Redefines Science

[mataj]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/15/science/sciencespecial2/15evol.html?ex=1289710800&en=8222cfc9c70fd951&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Old definition:
"Science is the human activity of seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us."

New definition:
"a systematic method of continuing investigation that uses observation, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena."New definition would be OK, if "theory building" would be changed to "building of empirically testable theories". That would pretty much exclude creationism and other supernatural stuff.

[towski]

Ok. When the Kansas State Board of Education is redefining science, something is very very wrong.

Once again, here is the new map of the world, brought to you by Kansas...

http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2005_11_06_patriotboy_archive.html#113160322791488 857

[mataj]

Ok. When the Kansas State Board of Education is redefining science, something is very very wrong.

Once again, here is the new map of the world, brought to you by Kansas...

http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2005_11_06_patriotboy_archive.html#113160322791488 857
Hmmm... "Kansas science"... that sounds kinda interesting. It might even become a dictionary term one day, like "Yea, biblical creationism is a theory, but only in Kansas science", "Intelliget Design theory is better than evolutionism- according to Kansas science", and so on.

Actually... The whole stunt bears uncanny resemblance to nazi "aryan science".

[NiteGuy]

Hmmm... "Kansas science"... that sounds kinda interesting. It might even become a dictionary term one day, like "Yea, biblical creationism is a theory, but only in Kansas science", "Intelliget Design theory is better than evolutionism- according to Kansas science", and so on.

Actually... The whole stunt bears uncanny resemblance to nazi "aryan science".


Or more like the agricultural "science" in the Soviet Union in the 50's and 60's, wherein wheat and corn crops would be higher this season that last, because the Politburo decreed it so. Yeah, right. That's why they had to import so much of it from us.

[meloakey]

I don't want to side with Christians but how is this definition eliminating or really changing anything. Evolution, the big bang and ect. are all theories and the new definition just says that things have to be tested just like every other theory out there to build on that theory.

"a systematic method of continuing investigation that uses observation, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena."
This is exactly what we are taught in school when dealing with science. And please think, ID would not stand up against testing, measurement, experimentation because all it has is the bible to back it up. The only thing in the new definition is observation which could lead to ID or any other religion.

[heel31ok]

It is funny how many of you are crying about how someone defines science when the " scientific" community has defined this subject,evolution , in the same manner.In such a way as to make it seem the conclusions and research are credible. it all comes down to definitions not truth or even approaching truth because that is not the ultimate goal.In this science truth cannot be known so it is not dealt with or even attempted.The fact that many have the arrogance to say they know the truth makes the evolutionary "science" community angry because they have already declared that real truth cannot be known only thoeretical truth which can come close enough for them.Define your terms so all your claims always correct ,though not true.What a semantic racket we have going here.

[towski]

It is funny how many of you are crying about how someone defines science when the " scientific" community has defined this subject,evolution , in the same manner.In such a way as to make it seem the conclusions and research are credible. it all comes down to definitions not truth or even approaching truth because that is not the ultimate goal.In this science truth cannot be known so it is not dealt with or even attempted.The fact that many have the arrogance to say they know the truth makes the evolutionary "science" community angry because they have already declared that real truth cannot be known only thoeretical truth which can come close enough for them.Define your terms so all your claims always correct ,though not true.What a semantic racket we have going here.

Oh please. You can no more redefine what is and isn't "science" than you can redefine what is and isn't mathematics.

[Sauniere]

Hmmm... "Kansas science"... that sounds kinda interesting. It might even become a dictionary term one day, like "Yea, biblical creationism is a theory, but only in Kansas science", "Intelliget Design theory is better than evolutionism- according to Kansas science", and so on.

Actually... The whole stunt bears uncanny resemblance to nazi "aryan science".

Kansas Science = Oxymoron... [just kiddin']