Talk:National Center for Science Education

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Trivia Removed

I couldn't figure out why the information in the trivia section was at all important, so I removed it. Feel free to put it back if you can justify its inclusion.

[edit] Involvement in the Kitzmiller v. DASD Trial

It seems to me that NCSE's role as consultant to the plaintiffs in the Kitzmiller case of 2005 is notable and worthy of mention. --Wesley R. Elsberry 21:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] National Center for Science Education is not religiously neutral like article states

I cite the following article as evidence: How Religiously Neutral are the Anti-Creationist Organisations? 136.183.146.158 17:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

So, after showing how dishonest everything else is on that website, why do you believe that this should be the one article which isn't? Find someone less doshonest to quote. Guettarda 18:20, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I cite the following from the above article: "The list of ‘Supporters’ of the NCSE (eg. NCSE Reports 16(4), back cover) almost reads like a ‘Who’s Who’ of American atheism—names such as Gould, Eldredge, Jukes, Johanson, Sagan and Dalrymple, for example. Also, a frequent contributor to the NCSE Reports is one Molleen Matsumara, ‘National Program Director’ of NCSE, who is a signatory to Humanist Manifesto 2000." [1] 136.183.146.158 00:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi kenny, hows things ? anyway the article doesn't state that the National Center for Science Education is not religiously neutral but quotes the National Center for Science Education web page which self-describes itself as that. Truthfully only people with an atheist or agnostic worldview can really be religiously neutral as then no one religion can be promoted over the other. Then you can either promote all religions (pluralist) or prefer none (a position that many are now considering for the better given the current appalling behaviour of some religious members). Ttiotsw 05:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The NCSE's members and supporters may or may not be religiously neutral. But that does not mean that the organisation as a corporate person is not. If you look at the core message of Eugenie Scott et al it is not one of atheism, but one of science. The creationist criticism is noted and sourced per Wikipedia norms. To conflate the two is Guilt by association. Paul A. Newman 12:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)