Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.

Lesson Plans


Fw: Message not deliverable

[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
Lawrence A. Parker/OCCTI (occti)
Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:32:23 -0400


----- Original Message -----
From: Administrator <administrator>
To: Lawrence A. Parker/OCCTI <occti>
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 5:12 AM
Subject: Message not deliverable

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Lawrence A. Parker/OCCTI <occti>
> To: OPEN <open>; <wduncan>
> Sent: Friday, August 13, 1999 8:37 AM
> Subject: creationism vs. evolutionism
>
>
> > > > Didn't Kansas just OK teaching creationism and not mentioning
> evolution?
> > >
> > > Yes, Sorry to admit it but our state school board is in the dark ages.
> > What
> > > they really did was say each district can do with the issue as they
> > please.
> > > That's not leadership, but that's what happens anyway. We spend lots
of
> > hours (I
> > > did) writing standards. And then we go back to our classrooms and do
> our
> > own
> > > thing anyway.
> >
> > Apart from my opinion that the teaching of creationism should be left to
> the
> > church and that a teaching of creationism to the exclusion of
evolutionary
> > theory in the schools shudders of church control of public schools
> > (parochial schools are, of course, another matter), perhaps teachers
> should,
> > so far as they are able, teach or present both. They are both, after
all,
> > only theories, and both most likely have as many adherents who claim
that
> > theirs is the 'truth'. Scientific stellar theory, for example, can only
> > account for the creation of the universe back to within something like
> > 1/200th of second AFTER the 'beginning'. What happened before that they
> do
> > not at this time know, but at least they can present evidence and data
for
> > everything up to that point.
> >
> > So, present both as theories, then examine them according to the same
> agreed
> > upon standards/criteria - evidence, consistency, integrity,
> reasonableness,
> > rationality, etc.
> >
> > To make clear my own position, although I was raised Methodist and am in
> > fact married to an ecumenical church organist, I am religiously an
atheist
> > and philosophically an agnostic. By this I mean that religious belief
is
> > just that - a belief. It depends on how you answer the question, "Do
you
> > *believe* that there is a God or gods?" This is not a question of
> knowledge
> > ("Do you *know* that there is a God or gods?"). Philosophically, I
admit
> a
> > lack of knowledge in either direction. Gnosticism was an early form of
> > religious belief based on an experience by the individual of God's
> presence,
> > upon which someone based their belief in the implied 'fact'. I have
never
> > experienced anything which would lead me to believe that there is a
> 'supreme
> > being or beings'. Thus, I am A-gnostic.
> >
> > Interestingly, as science has delved deeper and deeper into the fabric
of
> > the universe through quantum studies, it has become clearer and clearer
> that
> > the deeper we look, everything is the same at the most sublime level. A
> > point the Taoist have maintained since the writings of Lao-tse nearly
> 3,500
> > years ago. Everything else is created from this fabric by our
perceiving
> > minds (like waves in an ocean by the effects of wind and gravity) and is
> in
> > a sense, when compared with the nature of the pervasive ocean, illusion.
> > Or, Maya, as the Hindus have referred to it.
> >
> > I leave it to you teachers to consider these things and then do your own
> > thing, but be sure that you are being fair to the children.
> >
> > Larry Parker
> >
> >
>
>
> Received: from hp877.odedodea.edu by ccmail.odedodea.edu (SMTPLINK V2.11)
> ; Fri, 13 Aug 99 09:02:59 EST
> Return-Path: <owner-artsednet.edu>
> Received: from orpheus.Getty.EDU (gateway.pub.getty.edu [192.215.101.254])
by hp877.odedodea.edu with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_14041)/8.7.3) id IAA23695 for
<Carole_Osman_at_~KADE-HS>; Fri, 13 Aug 1999
08:59:54 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: from web1.pub.getty.edu (web1.pub.getty.edu [192.215.101.9])
> by orpheus.Getty.EDU (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA09500;
> Fri, 13 Aug 1999 05:59:37 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: (from majordom@localhost)
> by web1.pub.getty.edu (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) id FAA28450
> for artsednet-outgoing; Fri, 13 Aug 1999 05:55:51 -0700 (PDT)
> X-Authentication-Warning: web1.pub.getty.edu: majordom set sender to
owner-artsednet using -f
> Received: from acorn.net (rover.ascpl.lib.oh.us [199.218.0.2])
> by web1.pub.getty.edu (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA28446
> for <artsednet>; Fri, 13 Aug 1999 05:55:49 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from parker (ppp20.acorn.net [205.133.131.30])
> by acorn.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA22963
> for <artsednet>; Fri, 13 Aug 1999 08:57:16 -0400 (EDT)
> Message-ID: <003e01bee58b$e557bd60$188385cd@parker>
> From: "Lawrence A. Parker/OCCTI" <occti>
> To: <artsednet.edu>
> Subject: Fw: creationism vs. evolutionism
> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 08:58:42 -0400
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Priority: 3
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
> Sender: owner-artsednet.edu
> Precedence: bulk
>
>