The Australian Education Union (AEU) speaks out against SRI :

http://www.aeuvic.asn.au/972896.html

Dan

Evidence is something that can be supported by independent analysis.

it is something that experts can present in a court of law.

It is data that has been collected studied and reviewed.

It is not "Just looking at stuff"

Where is the world wide flood layer of debris laid down during a world wide flood ?

Geologists have found a similar layer in many areas round the world for the KT meteor impact and extinction event.

If you propose a theory you need evidence to back it up you ( creationist/ flood supporters ) have none. You have wild stories not evidence and not even a theory in scientific terms.

Dug,
I don’t know what you mean by ‘independent’. Most people work within some organisational framework, and all people carry their own biases or prejudices.

When you keep repeating ‘creationists have no evidence’ I know you are not properly following or comprehending what I’m saying. Perhaps you confuse evidence with conclusions.

Of course, evidence can be viewed, analysed, and presented. What I am saying is that we all have the same evidence. We all live in the same world. We are all looking at the same ‘stuff’. Creationists have all the same evidence available to them that you do. They may arrive at different conclusions to you. Creationists point to the sedimentary rock that is found all over the world as a likely result of the action of water.

And when you believe that animals and plants can morph into things of a totally different kind via a mysterious process that no one has ever seen ( i.e. “Of course no one observed reptiles evolving into birds” - says McReal, Saturday, 14 May 2011 1:38:19 PM) don’t accuse me of wild, fanciful stories.

Ok, Ammonite, you have made your point. I aplologise. I will be more careful in future in the way I compose my comments. No offence intended. I'm glad you're a good person, but would suggest you might take a little more care before rushing to condemn others. There's many a slip twixt cup and lip.

"I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him". There are obviously better ways to introduce instruction in discipline, ethics, morals and acceptable behavioural norms and mores to our youth than through religious instruction, and such alternative approaches need to be examined more intensively. Various well-structured contemporary books and stories or plays may be utilised to serve the required purpose, and with far less controversy. I feel certain this approach would also be more acceptable to a majority of teachers, as well as fitting in more effectively within the overall curriculum. It is of course paramount that we ensure that our students demonstrate respect for others, irrespective of social or cultural differences, and show understanding for all with any disability.

The subjects of evolution and creationism should appropriately belong within the science curriculum.

As we are a multicultural society within an increasingly multicultural world it would be appropriate for all schools to include cultural studies as a formal part of the curriculum, starting in Primary and being developed further through subsequent years, including as a component of all language studies.

We have a responsibility to provide our youth not only with the best possible instruction in the sciences and humanities, but also to ensure they have a sound appreciation of the world's rich cultural heritage.

Though religious instruction may be appropriate as an option in various church schools, there appears to be no place for it in our state non-denominational schools, and the use of outside instructors and organisations to provide such instruction should therefore be phased out of these schools at an early date.

Uh Oh - another Creationist is asserting that Evolution can't be true, because no human observed it happening in the past, nor can evolutionists observe it happening today.

On that basis, Noah's Flood never happened, because no modern man has observed the flood in the past, and the more recent scriptural reports are mere hearsay and myth.

But even worse is that the Creationists tell lies - as they so often do - that we cannot observe evolution today.

Bacteria reproduce very quickly, and natural selection can select new varieties of bacteria breeding anti-biotic resistance. What explanation can the "evolutionist denier" offer to account for the novel appearance of these resistant bacteria ?.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91a7ZPZQUfk

Ogg,
You haven’t quite followed the logic of what I said. I never said that evolution never happened because no one has seen it happening. I’m simply challenging the notion that it has been seen. It hasn’t been.

You are correct in saying that both evolution (dinosaurs to birds, goo-to-you) and Noah’s flood have in common the fact that no present person has witnessed them. The difference is that some at some point did witness the latter sufficiently to record it in history (a grand deluge appears in various forms in the history of many cultures).

But generally, you are approaching an understanding of what I am saying. Like any possible explanation of history of how we got here: creation, evolution, or any other possible explanation – no one saw them. No one is going to repeat them. But I’m happy that you are willing to treat them both on the same level or compare them on a similar philosophical plane.