Polk County to include Intelligent Design

Published by Bobby Henderson November 30th, 2007 in Intelligent Design and General FSM news.

The Ledger reports that the majority of Polk County, Florida, School Board members support teaching Intelligent Design in addition to evolution in public schools.

It’s unclear if they’re prepared to change the definition of science. Some people are concerned that a supernatural theory will not mesh with the study of the natural world.

Board member Kay Fields said last week she wants intelligent design, which is promoted by some Christian groups, taught in science classes in addition to evolution.

“If it ever comes to the board for a vote, I will vote against the teaching of evolution as part of the science curriculum,” Lofton said. “If (evolution) is taught, I would want to balance it with the fact that we may live in a universe created by a supreme being as well.”

The board’s majority opinion is at odds with many in Florida’s scientific community who strongly support the new, more rigorous science standards, and say intelligent design lacks scientific credibility.

Perhaps Florida’s scientific community has not realized the type of genius arguments they’re up against:

“My tendency would be to have both sides shared with students since neither side can be proven,” [School Board Member] Tim Harris said.

“I don’t have a conflict with intelligent design versus evolution,” [School Board Member] Sellers said. “The two go together.”

“It crosses the line with people who are Christians,” [School Board Member] Lofton said. “Evolution is offensive to a lot of people.”

Pastafarians are concerned that the Polk County School Board is endorsing Intelligent Design, but ignoring our theory, even though it is widely endorsed by the scientific community.

I will wager that the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster can produce more academic endorsements for our theory than Intelligent Design proponents can for theirs.

My guess is that the Polk County School Board is just unaware of Pastafarianism. As a public service, I propose that we contact them, and let them know that there are other supernatural theories just as valid as Intelligent Design, primarily ours.

Contact info:

Those in favor of Intelligent Design:

Kay Fields (District 5)
Kay.Fields@polk-fl.net
863-802-5483

Tim Harris (District 7)
Tim.Harris@polk-fl.net
863-808-0005

Margaret Lofton (District 6, Chairman)
Margaret.Lofton@polk-fl.net
863-294-9076

Hazel Sellers (District 3)
Hazel.Sellers@polk-fl.net
863-533-7714

Lori Cunningham (District 2, Vice-Chairman) - undecided
Lori.Cunningham@polk-fl.net
863-512-1656

Those not in favor of Intelligent Design:

Frank O’Reilly (District 1)
Frank.Oreilly@polk-fl.net
863-647-1390

Brenda Reddout (District 4)
Brenda.Reddout@polk-fl.net
863-324-0127

You can use this link to email all 7 School board members.

Please be respectful - remember we are not criticizing their beliefs, merely pointing out that there is another, just as legitimate, theory that should be included into the curriculum. Please leave a comment and tell us about your conversations with the School Board. Thank you!

The Ledger article can be found here.

*update* 12/11/07 - Their local newspaper published a story about our campaign here.

208 Responses to “Polk County to include Intelligent Design”

1. 41 - December 1st, 2007 at - Cottura 5 Minuti Says:
   
   

   It is truly a strange land that many of you fellow pastafarians live in. How strange it is that in many places it seems to be up to the most unlearned to decide what to teach to others.

2. 42 - December 1st, 2007 at - Cottura 5 Minuti Says:
   
   

   A case of the blind leading the blind and also others that have vision.

3. 43 - December 1st, 2007 at - JMack Says:
   
   

   Here is something I wrote to them last night, reading it this morning did make me realise it sounds kinda similar in areas to Bobby’s original, but ah well we’ll just see if they say anything.

   “Greetings,

   I am writing to you after having read of your determination to bring a variety of viewpoints to your regions students, namely the teaching of intelligent design alongside evolution as part of your science curriculum. While I strongly support the belief that students should be exposed to as many schools of thought as is possible, I am concerned that despite your good intentions you may only teach your students one theory of intelligent design, when in actual fact there are many such theories. I, for example, am a member of a religion that believes that the earth, universe and all else that we see and feel was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM), and that any evidence to the contrary was set in place by Him.

   We have, of course, existed since His creation of everything, but until recently we remained a secretive group. It was our prophet Bobby Henderson who first chose to reveal our presence to the world in his well known open letter to the Kansas School Board. Since becoming pubic Flying Spaghetti Monsterism (or Pastafarianism) has received a number of notable endorsements from the scientific community. However, since all science is manipulated by His Noodly Appendage, their opinions should not be overstated. Evolution itself is only an unproven (and unprovable) scientific theory, so should not be overstated and treated as more than such. As this clearly puts evolution on an equal footing to ID, we would encourage you to consider teaching FSM in your science rooms also, as ours is an equally valid theory.

   You may also be interested to know that pastafarians such as myself do not believe in the conventionally established theory of gravity as perpetuated by science today, the reason for this being that once again science has managed to produce a series of observations with regard to how gravity works, but has failed to explain the cause of the force itself. We instead believe in “intelligent falling”, by which we mean that gravity as it has been observed is instead the result of FSM pushing us down with His Noodly Appendages. While it’s true that we don’t have any empirical evidence to back this theory, we choose to follow the precedent laid down by ID proponents, that to establish a theory we do not any observable or reasoned evidence, only the capability to poke holes in the established theory.

   You should know however that His Noodly Name may only be preached by those wearing His chosen outfit, full pirate regalia. He becomes angry if we don’t. If you decide that you do wish to educate your students about our beliefs we would be more than happy to instruct you on how to go about this.

   While there is much more I would like to say to you about our beliefs and their rightful place in your, nay, the worlds classrooms, I feel it is time to round off, and I can’t think of a better way to do so than with a quote from our prophet himself, extracted from his letter to the Kansas School Board.

   “I think we can all look forward to the time when these three theories are given equal time in our science classrooms across the country, and eventually the world; One third time for Intelligent Design, one third time for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, and one third time for logical conjecture based on overwhelming observable evidence.” - Bobby Henderson

   Kind regards,

   *. ******, concerned Pastafarian.”

   Hope I represented us right, apologies if I missed anything important.

4. 44 - December 1st, 2007 at - Chuck Welch Says:
   
   

   I wouldn’t be so quick to give Frank O’Reilly a Darwin…

   “You’re talking about separation of church and state,” O’Reilly said. “I believe in intelligent design personally, but the court has ruled against it. We cannot break the law if it is set down before us.”

5. 45 - December 1st, 2007 at - Dennis Says:
   
   

   I’m a danish pastafarian (RAmen!), and this hardly ever occour i Denmark (if it actually ever has), but is it a big problem in the states? And don’t the government has anything to say, or is each school independent, and can teach whatever they want?

6. 46 - December 1st, 2007 at - Fusillier Says:
   
   

   I have mailed the good folk at Polk from the UK, figers crossed that good sense will prevail

7. 47 - December 2nd, 2007 at - Surcouf Says:
   
   

   RAmen, fellows.
   I can’t understand how those people can claim (as they usually do) to be patriots. Because what they are doing is precisely the kind of thing that makes us in Europe think Americans are completely stupid

8. 48 - December 2nd, 2007 at - danhead Says:
   
   

   “I would want to balance it with the fact that we may live in a universe created by a supreme being as well.”
   I don’t remember evolution being taught as an explanation for the creation of the universe. Why do these people feel that God is being attacked by the theory of evolution? At no point do I remember my teachers telling me that there is no God because there is evolution. There is nothing that prevents these people from agreeing with it and saying “maybe God created evolution.”

9. 49 - December 2nd, 2007 at - JoJerome Says:
   
   

   Ted Buckland, (posting Dec 1st at 12:57am) asserts that it is just as arrogant for an atheist to say the universe wasn’t created by an omnipotent being as for someone else to say it definitely was.

   I’d debate the “just as” bit, especially in a science classroom, which is the point of this forum. I am with Rene Descartes; that nothing outside of basic mathematical proofs and the existence of one’s own self can be proven with any absolute certainty. But is it ‘just as’ arrogant of me to state the moon isn’t made of green cheese as to state that it is?

   That said, if the Fundies are willing to qualify their god as a theory every time they preach to me then I’d be happy to qualify accepted scientific proofs as theories when I mention them.

10. 50 - December 2nd, 2007 at - JoJerome Says:
    
    

    Actually, let me one-up my own comment.

    Which is more ‘arrogant:’ to say

    1) “I believe [whatever] to be true based on objective observance and standing my belief up to reasonable scrutiny and critical, empirical experimentation” or to say

    2) “I believe [whatever] to be true because God told me so and if God tells you differently, either through divine revelation or through physical evidence, then God is lying to you.”

11. 51 - December 2nd, 2007 at - Satan Says:
    
    

    When will people realize that evolution has stood up to a century of rigorous scientific testing by many and has been consistently proven true, while intelligent design is based upon the beliefs of the individual, can be either true or false, and therefore should not be cast in equal light?

12. 52 - December 2nd, 2007 at - N. Phalanx Says:
    
    

    At least they’re a good looking bunch. It is sad that they deny their Maker and all His Carby-glory. It is only when they pass on to the next world that they will realize the error of their ways. For in death, we are all made equally stupid.

13. 53 - December 2nd, 2007 at - Joshua Says:
    
    

    “Evolution is offensive to a lot of people.”

    So is religion to a lot of intelligent people!

14. 54 - December 2nd, 2007 at - Chris Says:
    
    

    Since when did the definition of science become a democratic process? So, 7 people get to vote on what IS and what IS NOT Science? Unbelievable.

    Intelligent Design/Creationism is based on supernatural beliefs and is not empirically testable or compatible with natural law, which is necessary for it to be called a scientific theory or science.

15. 55 - December 2nd, 2007 at - St John the Blasphemist Says:
    
    

    Once more, without the paragraph tags (FSMdammit!):
    .
    @Ted Buckland
    Go get your dictionary. Do it now. If you don’t have one, then go to dictionary.com & type in the word evolution. Do you see any part in the meanings that mention anything about creation of the universe or even origins of life?
    .
    Just in case you’ve had any trouble, I’ll give you some help:
    .
    Evolution (ěv’ə-lōō’shən, ē’və-) n.
    Biology
    1. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.
    2. The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny.
    .
    There. Does that make sense to you now? Evolution has nothing to do with the origins of the universe, or even the origins of life. Darwin made that blatantly clear when he named his book The Origin of Species.
    .
    I find it incredibly arrogant of you to enter an argument without first understanding the details of the argument.
    .
    St John the Blasphemist
    Saint of Etymologies

16. 56 - December 2nd, 2007 at - Ernest Tubbs Bubbalicious Says:
    
    

    As an intelligent human being, and a person who has cogitated on the subject, I find it inconceivable that Intelligent Design (ID) isn’t also taught in our school’s science curriculum. (you will notice that I can spell - the sure sign of education and “right thinking” or, perhaps, a spell-checker)
    Others may disagree with me, but I suspect that they are simply too afraid to face the fact that there is a greater authority and power in this universe. Perhaps it is their attempt to compensate for how truly minute the the average (non-Christian) human is in the grand design of the universe. Perhaps not. Perhaps they are simply obstinate.
    Either way, I pity you if you feel the need for such self-aggrandizement. I know my place in the Universe, it is kneeling at the feet of the Creator, giving thanks, and begging for forgiveness. For it is only through forgiveness that I can be rid of these spiders that keep coming out of my skin. And the beaver gnawing at my foot. And only HE can save me from being the next victim of the lemur who is fornicating with a Honda Civic over there in the corner! Save me Jeebus! Save me!! Save meeeeeeee…

17. 57 - December 2nd, 2007 at - Surcouf Says:
    
    

    I’m writing from Europe, where almost every scientist believes in evolution, but where many of them also belive in god. Here some first thoughts about what your message, darwinian-macroevolution-denying physician

    I feel you completely misunderstood something. In theory, science could come to the conclusion of god’s existence and prove it (supposing there is one), and that would be accepted.
    What is not accepted in science is explaining something with god: you can’t explain something by something else that is not proven.
    And anyway, in most cases, what was thought unexplainable trough science (and was hence ascribed to god) became explainable some time later.
    To come to evolution, you may find the evidence is not sufficient. But at least, there is some, and it is growing every day. For ID, there is none at all! And it doesn’t shows there is a designer, it is only built on the asumption some things cannot be explained by darwinism, although they can, so their proof doesn’t work.

18. 58 - December 2nd, 2007 at - El Peatieablo Says:
    
    

    @ The Dembskist right above me (unless somebody beats me to a response)
    “something scientific that is unexplainable by any scientific means”
    I hope another Pastafarian knows how to respond to this, because I am at a loss. Wow, just, wow.
    .
    My main point here is just to say that just because somebody keeps telling you that you are wrong doesn’t mean that they are out to get you, it might just mean that you are wrong.

19. 59 - December 3rd, 2007 at - Graffin Says:
    
    

    We should just tell these people that don’t want evolution taught in school that we could mix the theory of ID and evolution together into one class. At the beginning of the course the teacher would just explain how Adam and Eve got to gettin’ it on and then they had kids and their kids had to have incest to procreate and their kids and so on and so until all this inbreeding ended up with the caveman who is a mongoloid retarded inbred version of Adam and Eve. Then go on to real science from there. LOL, might as well since people like these on the board obviously haven’t evolved past the worshipping fire stage. And D.A.M.E.D Physician you’re a coward.

20. 60 - December 3rd, 2007 at - Kendrick Says:
    
    

    I have emailed them with a proposal:

    Dear Polk County School Board Members and whom it may concern,

    I am an American who is concerned about the youth of today. My major is psychology, and I currently study at College of the Canyons in Valencia, California. I have noticed that Polk County is inclined to teaching Intelligent Design in science classes. I think this is a great idea, but it would be very biased if only the Christian Intelligent Design “theory” is taught in science classes; because of this, I am concerned. What about other religions? It would only be fair to teach their “theories” as well. Now, I politely ask that other theories such as Hindu Intelligent Design “theory”, Muslim Intelligent Design “theory”, various Pagan design “theories”, and Pastafarian Intelligent Design “theory”. Teaching the Intelligent Design “theories” of every religion would thwart possible lawsuits for unequal representation and save the school district much money in the long run. One could argue that teaching all of these would cost much money and time as well; this is very true. What I propose to you, is that Intelligent Design “theory” have a presence in society, as it is a great part of American culture, but not be taught in government-funded institutions, such as public schools. This is not true for private institutions, such as Christian schools and other private schools, however. A safer alternative would be to teach the history of Intelligent Design “theory” in a social studies or sociology class, as it is both present in history and society.

    Any replies would be very welcome.

    A concerned American,
    Kendrick ********

Leave a Reply