Re: [asa] The Myth of the Rejected ID Paper

From: Rich Blinne <>
Date: Tue Jul 08 2008 - 08:50:39 EDT

On Jul 7, 2008, at 6:28 PM, Donald F Calbreath wrote:

> The AAAS in 2002 adopted a resolution on October 18, 2002 that said
> "Therefore Be It Resolved, that the lack of scientific warrant for
> so-called "intelligent design theory" makes it improper to include
> as a part of science education;
> Therefore Be Further It Resolved, that AAAS urges citizens across
> the nation to oppose the establishment of policies that would permit
> the teaching of "intelligent design theory" as a part of the science
> curricula of the public schools;
> Therefore Be It Further Resolved, that AAAS calls upon its members
> to assist those engaged in overseeing science education policy to
> understand the nature of science, the content of contemporary
> evolutionary theory and the inappropriateness of "intelligent design
> theory" as subject matter for science education;"
> Since they don't consider ID appropriate, I can only assume that
> they would not publish anything supportive of ID in Science.

> There's a start. No, nothing explicit about publishing (I'd look
> further, but it's dinner time and I'd like to have some time with my
> wife), but when a group says "this is not science", I feel it is
> safe to assume they would not publish any papers supporting the idea
> in their science journals. I suppose we could email the editors and
> ask - that might prove interesting.

That's a complete non sequiter. Note that this deals with secondary
education *in the science class*. For a better idea of what AAAS
stands for as to the relationship of faith and science and why they
hold to the above see the following video:

Rich Blinne
Member ASA

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Jul 8 08:52:07 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jul 08 2008 - 08:52:07 EDT