No School Credit for Creationism

i think everyone should scientiffically look really close at the general and vague comments god made and ask ed moses to write down in the book of genesis speciffically chapter one in its entirety -and chapter two verses 6 -these small verses if put in order -show a being -in a zero gravity environment -making something and describing the actions and causes and effects -on the subject in sequence over time-while hes in space -in dealing with thermo dynamics -gravity and centrifugal and centrifical forces of motion on gravity fields -and how chemical reactions effect solids liquids and gasses -the being -god did things in order -then created everything in order and then made sucessive environments to sustain the next projects one after the other in order -this is signs of creation and this is signs of intelligents -if you dont believe me check the science -ive spent about 5 years on this and this i can say -god speaks the truth scientiffically to -as far as im concerned prove me wrong -p.s. its hard to call god aliar because scientiffically lies are a waste of energy and resources and also jepordise any other future reputation for telling the truth about some things thay you have done-so why risk lying -if you can create a univrse why bother to lie -basically theidea goes this way -god makes a place to do a project -then he starts to form the earth -pay real close attention to the vague general discriptions -eart being void and darkness on the face of the deep -after achemical reaction of gases inspace -you are left with liquids solids and gases besides the vacum of zero greavity space -add gravitational fields of any body of matter-solid liquid or gass -since the larger portions have stronger gravity fields they draw on each other and the larger accumulates the smaller absorbs -so you have a gravity field in a space zero gravity vacum --now add thermo dynamics -the solids carbon deposits sink to the center -then the liquidsare pressed to the exterior -so in the comment the earth was void and darkness was on the face of the deep-this is an accuarte discription by a creator
out in space showing the effects of science and gravity --by his own witness discription
the core being dark carbon the waters being h20 being pressed outward toward the surface contacting space the liquid being condensation or chemical reaction
so the position of the water is correct and it contacts the zero gravity environment of space -the next thing god said was his spirit hovered over the waters -well thats telling us that he was there -witnessing the effects of his own works .

the next thing to pay attention too is -the discription about dark and light and night and day and the first day -try god spinning the planet faster
to produce more g"s and more friction -

at this point the water evaporates into a gass --dry land operating and the precipitaton and cumulous cycle begins .-bsically the discriptions of the world in orbit -night and day and day and night shows turning-add the fact that god says the firmament was created and how would god know or comprehend the waters above and below the firmament.-this is also backed up by the comment god made inn genisis 2-6 -where god explains the herbs hasnt had rain for a a short time been he says something about mists from the ground and the rain being absent .so the plants
would grow -but before this he stated that the sun and moon and stars were created for times and seasons -i would also believe god put this system in place after to maintain the earths orbital speed and spins in correct gravitational sequence -and timming to support life -then god started puting things downin order or if out of order all at once in intelligent design he made the heavens toput the earth into formed the earth then spun it -to fix it then put the stars and the sun and moon there to maintain its positions and movements to support life -first the plants to and trees feed the birds animals fish and insects -then man to manage the place and be fed by these things in series one system built to support another -then he made this guy moses -to write down as a witness to the things god did do in the order he did them -to give as a record of truth to further generations .called the bible -this is science deduction seeing how chemical ellements in certain environments work and change -in a sapce environment -so there should be no more guesss about god creating or existing -the question now is god god or is god an alien -well i figure god is too big and too smart to crash a ship into earth like the rest of the little green men out there ---but i do believe that god says who he is -since he hasnt lied about anything yet-as i figure its a waste of his time and he says he tells the truth and proves it .please forgive me if im wrong -i do not believe i am -and i have tried to prove or disprove gods existance since his forst word in the bible -i havennt done it yet and ive studdied alot of science things that shown god is correct in the vague comments he says .-please excuse my grammor as i have a faulty key board and cant spell or punctuate well -my name is danioel and im not trying to add or take away antything from the bible -im just skeptical about everything and things have to be proven and understood by me -to believe -so far gods doing a god job .have a good day ......bye

That is the worst bit of misrepresentation I have seen from a supposedly creditable news source. Are you sure this isn't the PTL Club, or TBN?

Below is a review of the case drawn from the Court’s Decision. All quotations are from NO. CV 05-06242 SJO (MANx) “ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' "MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PLAINTIFFS' AS-APPLIED CLAIMS" [Docket No. 172]. I take each rejected course in the order found there.

English, Course title: “Christianity and Morality in American Literature” This class was rejected by the University for several reasons- none of which were because it has a Christian bias. The objections included that the textbook, published by A Beka titled “Classics for Christians,” did not cover important writer’s key works, insisted on exclusive interpretations dictated by the textbook, and failed to teach critical reading skills. Further, the text is merely an "anthology of excerpts," which UC does not approve, no matter the content of the excerpts. From the UC Guidelines, "College-preparatory courses are expected to require students to read full-length works."

History, Course title: “Christianity's Influence on America” Text: Bob Jones University ("BJU") titled “United States History for Christian Schools.”

Professor James Given initially rejected this course because it failed to “teach critical thinking and modern historical analytic methods.” He wrote that the textbook, titled “United States History for Christian Schools” published by Bob Jones University ("BJU"), “… instructs that the Bible is the unerring source for analysis of historical events, attributes historical events to divine providence rather than analyzing human action, evaluates historical figures and their contributions based on their religious motivations or lack thereof and contains inadequate treatment of several major ethnic groups, women, and non-Christian religious groups.” University expert witness Professor Gary Nash found that “the text failed to encourage "historical thinking skills and analytical thinking" and failed to cover "major topics, themes, and components of United States history."

Calvary replied that an secondary textbook, “Pilgrims in Their Own Land: 500 Years of Religion in America,” was secular and taught all the materials sought by the University. However, they provided no evidence beyond mere assertion. The History expert employed for the trial by Calvary and the ACSI, Professor Paul Vitz, did “ … not refute Professor Given's and Professor Nash's conclusions that the text fails to teach historical analytic methods. Professor Vitz also does not opine that Defendants unreasonably rejected the course.”

Government, Course title: “Special Providence: Christianity and the American Republic” Textbook: “American Government for Christian Schools” BJU

University Government expert, Professor Mark Petracca concluded that the BJU Government text used “… as the principal text in a United States
Government course will not provide adequate preparation for study at UC." Professor Petracca wrote that this textbook made, “… many factual and empirical assertions that are not generally accepted among political scientists [or] historians and that are nevertheless not substantiated within the text by evidence." Notice that he is not claiming that a book cannot make these assertions, but when they are contradicted by general scholarship they must be supported by evidence.

World Religions (offered for History and elective credit): The proposed textbook, “World Religions” by Dan Halverson is not found on any major catalogs nor is the author known to have any scholarly publications in religion. Calvary failed to respond to the University’s request for correct publication information. Also, Calvary failed to respond to specific deficiencies in their course description. Nor did Calvary respond to the question of how the course treats the study of religion from the standpoint of scholarly inquiry. Professor Sharf, Director of Religious Studies at the University of California, Berkeley found that these problems were reasonable grounds to reject the course. The religion expert retained by Calvary and ACSI, Professor Daniel Guevara, offered no opinion specific to this course, or to the objections raised by the University.

Biology,

The course challenged was not offered by Calvary Chapel Christian School, but rather was taught by Calvary Baptist School. The textbook used was titled Biology: God's LivingCreation (A Beka).

In the initial review, UC Biology Professor Barbara Sawrey found that this textbook, “characterized religious doctrine as scientific evidence, included scientific inaccuracies, failed to encourage critical thinking, and took an "overall un-scientific approach to the subject matter." She wrote that, "judgment was based not on the fact that the textbooks contained religious references and viewpoints, but on [her] conclusion that [the texts] would not adequately teach
students the scientific principles, methods, and knowledge necessary for them to successfully study those subjects at UC." In fact, a number of private Christian schools have also rejected the A Beka book, and an alternate published by BJU because they fail to adequately prepare students to study biology beyond the high school level, and particularly failed to present evolutionary biology in a competent manner.

These concerns are also addressed in the University of California Position Statement on Science Courses: “The texts in question are primarily religious texts; science is secondary. . . . Courses that utilize these texts teach students that their conclusions must conform to the Bible, and that scientific material and methods are secondary. Students who [are] taught to discount the scientific process and the scientific conclusions validated by a wealth of scientific research are not being provided with an understanding of scientific principles expected by the UC faculty.”

Expert witness Professor Donald Kennedy wrote for the University that, “[b]y teaching students to reject scientific evidence and methodology whenever they might be inconsistent with the Bible . . . both texts fail to encourage critical thinking and the skills required for careful scientific analysis." Similarly, University Professor Francisco Ayala found that the texts "reject the methodology generally accepted in science, which relies on observation and experimentation and on the formulation of laws and theories that need to be tested rather than accepted on the basis of the Bible or any other authority."

The plaintiffs, Calvary and ACSI, hired Professor Michael Behe to serve as their Biology expert. Professor Behe is best know for his promotion of creationism in the form of “intelligent design.” He submitted to the Court that the BJU textbook he reviewed did “mention” the standard scientific topics for a biology course. However, it was notable that he did not address “how much detail or depth" the texts gave to this standard content.”

The court wrote, “Therefore, Professor Behe fails to refute one of Professor Kennedy's primary concerns that the nature of science, the theory of evolution, and critical thinking are not taught adequately.

Accordingly, there is no genuine issue of material fact as to this issue. Defendants had a rational basis for rejecting Calvary Baptist's proposed Biology course.”

This latter phrase is found throughout the Court’s Decision, “Accordingly, there is no genuine issue of material fact as to this issue. Defendants had a rational basis for rejecting Calvary's proposed _____ course.”

It is obviously appropriate and true.

i think in this day and age people who follow christs teachings are going to be punished for what they beleave.it's a sad thing these young students are haveing to face,but if they widen thier search they will find christian colleges that are more than happy to have them at thier university.my hope is that test does not discourage them and lead them astray,for this is what the world wants

For those who want to have some actual facts, the ruling may be found at http://missingthepoint.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/acsivuc-ruling.pdf

All courses were rejected for inadequacies of the main textbook.

The English course was rejected for using an anthology of excerpts; this is categorically unacceptable for college-bound students, who should be reading full works.

One history course book "failed to encourage historical thinking skills and analytical thinking" necessary to "understanding history as a discipline as it has been practiced since Herodotus and Thucydides – a never-ending quest to reconstruct the past based on new evidence and informed by new questions posed about the functioning of past societies." A second "does not acknowledge the commonly-accepted framework for scholarly analysis and provides little opportunity for critical thinking," which I'd expect to lead to the same problems as the first. The third course had mostly minor difficulties that might have easily been resolved on submitting clarifying information... starting with verifying the intended textbook EXISTED.

As for the Biology course, the text "characterized religious doctrine as scientific evidence, included scientific inaccuracies, failed to encourage critical thinking, and took an "overall un-scientific approach to the subject matter", and was "teaching students to reject scientific evidence and methodology", which would similarly "fail to encourage critical thinking and the skills required for careful scientific analysis." This is not simply an objection against creationism. As reiterated by Defendants experts and as the plaintiffs failed to provide evidence contrariwise,
"the problem is not ... that the creationist view is taught as an alternative to scientific explanations, but that the nature of science, the theory of evolution, and critical thinking are not taught adequately."

Critical thinking is necessary for telling the academic equivalents of hamburger patties from bull patties, and a skill expected to be well-developed by entry into college. It is reasonable that the results of these courses not be considered in the admissions process.