Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Turkey Accused Of Censoring Evolution Books

arroba Email

From Science Insider,

Virtually all books about evolution—along with more than 100 other titles from other fields—have apparently disappeared in recent months from the selection of popular science books for sale by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK), the country’s main science funding agency. The missing books have prompted the latest skirmish in the long-running conflict between the government and parts of the country’s academic community. But TÜBİTAK has denied censoring the books, saying that they are unavailable because of copyright issues.

Click here to continue reading.

Objective seekers of truth and proponents of academic freedom should find this report concerning. When one disagrees with a position or perspective, the right course of action is to present arguments against that point of view, not censor the viewpoint from the public!

So Turkey has caught up to North America. However seductive to censor what is not true in important things its the best idea that in order to insure truth prevailing one must not censor or give power to those who censor. Robert Byers
Does the Lemon Test mean that I'm entitled to financial compensation since the evolution stuff they taught me in school turned out to be hogwash? Per Wikipedia, lemon laws exist to protect consumers in order "to compensate for products that repeatedly fail to meet standards of quality and performance." Sounds about spot on as it concerns evolution. To whom do I bring my complaint so that I can get compensated for having to put up with evolution's failure to meet standards of quality and performance? Anyone want to join a class action lawsuit with me? :) Personally, I don't think evolution passes either the Lemon Test or the Smell Test! Or the Laugh Test. :) Eric Anderson
Related podcast: On this episode of ID the Future, Casey Luskin shows how the film The Revisionaries revises history. Coming soon to PBS, The Revisionaries falsely suggests that intelligent design and creationism were required in the 2009 Texas Science Standards (TEKS) and pushed for by ignorant fundamentalist board members who ignored the advice of all qualified experts. Tune in as Casey exposes this misinformation and reviews the hard facts. http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2013-01-30T17_20_56-08_00 bornagain77
as to: "Luskin is quite right that public schools can teach criticisms of evolutionary theory without violating the First Amendment, as long as the policy passes the Lemon test." And amazingly academic freedom bills still seem to be necessary to insure that teachers will not be persecuted by Darwinists for teaching the evidence, which is abundant, against evolution. bornagain77
Thanks for the correction KN. bornagain77
Cobb County is in Georgia, and was settled in Selman v. Cobb County School District. The Dover case (Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District) was motivated by a statement that the school board required science teachers to read before teaching evolution. Luskin is quite right that public schools can teach criticisms of evolutionary theory without violating the First Amendment, as long as the policy passes the Lemon test. Kantian Naturalist
Funny that Darwinists argued in the Scopes monkey treatment for a balanced treatment of ideas (even Darwin himself argued for that), yet in every trial since then Darwinists have sought to shut down academic freedom. I believe the Dover trial was originally brought about for merely a sticker on a evolutionary book? This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered. Approved by Cobb County Board of Education Thursday, March 28, 2002[1] On the Fundamental Difference Between Darwin-Inspired and Intelligent Design-Inspired Lawsuits - September 2011 Excerpt: Darwin lobby litigation: In every Darwin-inspired case listed above, the Darwin lobby sought to shut down free speech, stopping people from talking about non-evolutionary views, and seeking to restrict freedom of intellectual inquiry. Whereas on the other hand, ID movement litigation: Seeks to expand intellectual inquiry and free speech rights to talk about non-evolutionary views. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/09/on_the_fundamental_difference_050451.html Intelligent Design Supporter Expelled from Civil Liberties Organization - podcast - January 2013 http://intelligentdesign.podomatic.com/entry/2013-01-18T19_01_00-08_00 Though the evidence against neo-Darwinian evolution is overwhelming, anyone who dares question the sufficiency of Darwinism to explain all life on earth in the public school classroom is persecuted, as this following movie/documentary, book, and article, clearly point out: EXPELLED - Starring Ben Stein - Part 1 of 10 - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIZAAh_6OXg Slaughter of Dissidents - Book "If folks liked Ben Stein's movie "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed," they will be blown away by "Slaughter of the Dissidents." - Russ Miller http://www.amazon.com/Slaughter-Dissidents-Dr-Jerry-Bergman/dp/0981873405 Origins - Slaughter of the Dissidents with Dr. Jerry Bergman - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6rzaM_BxBk A lot of people are concerned about the constitutionality of teaching evidence against evolution in public schools because of the first admendment. The following article by Casey Luskin, who has a law degree, reveals that it is entirely constitutional to teach evidence against evolution in public schools: Is It Legally Consistent for Darwin Lobbyists to Oppose Advocating, But Advocate Opposing, Intelligent Design in Public Schools? - August 2010 http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/08/is_it_legally_consistent_for_d037311.html bornagain77
How many countries have a law such that even if conclusive proof emerged tomorrow that God created all life as is, it would still be illegal to teach that fact, and they would be required by law to teach instead a known falsehood for eternity because the falsehood agreed with their a priori philosophical commitments? djockovic
How is anyone supposed to learn how wrong evolution is if they can't read about it!? Mung

Leave a Reply