Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

@farmerman,

Quote:

iM TELLIN YA THAT PIGS ARE FLYING AND THE APOCALYPSE IS HEATING UP.

Rubbish. It's code for not being in the Monster Raving Atheist Party. The voters understand it if you don't. They know what comes with the MRAP. More rap music.

You're looking under stones again. And you have to go all the way to Alabama.

Who is Charles Johnson?

0 Replies

LOUISIANA UPDATE

Quote:

School Board might OK teaching creationism
(By VIC COUVILLION, The Baton Rouge Advocate, July 24, 2010)

LIVINGSTON — The Livingston Parish School Board will begin exploring the possibility of incorporating the teaching of “creationism” in the public school system’s science classes.

During the board’s meeting Thursday, several board members expressed an interest in the teaching of creationism, an alternative to the study of the theory of evolution, in Livingston Parish public school classrooms.

The discussion came up during a report on the pupil progression plan for the 2010-11 school year, delivered by Jan Benton, director of curriculum.

Benton said that under provisions of the Science Education Act enacted last year by the Louisiana Legislature, schools can present what she termed “critical thinking and creationism” in science classes.

Board Member David Tate quickly responded: “We let them teach evolution to our children, but I think all of us sitting up here on this School Board believe in creationism. Why can’t we get someone with religious beliefs to teach creationism?”

Fellow board member Clint Mitchell responded, “I agree -- you don’t have to be afraid to point out some of the fallacies with the theory of evolution. Teachers should have the freedom to look at creationism and find a way to get it into the classroom.”

Board President Keith Martin, while reminding the members that a decision had been made in the past not to teach creationism, suggested that now might be the time to re-examine the issue.

Martin said that one problem with the teaching of creationism versus evolution is that, “You don’t want two different teachers teaching two different things.”

Martin, noting that discipline of young people is constantly becoming more of a challenge for parents and teachers, agreed: “Maybe it’s time that we look at this.”

When Martin suggested that the board appoint a committee to study the possibility of introducing creationism into the classroom, his opinion met with general, if unofficial approval.

“We shouldn’t just jump into this thing, but we do need to look at it,” Martin said. “The American Civil Liberties Union and even some of our principals would not be pleased with us, but we shouldn’t worry about the ACLU. It’s more important that we do the correct thing for the children we educate.”

2 Replies

@wandeljw,

Perhaps I might remind viewers of my post yesterday (No 4,293,674) which anti-IDers have ignored, as usual.

Quote:

Albert Camus wrote-

Quote:
Beginning to think is beginning to be undermined.

and

Quote:
A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But,on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger.

And Laurence Sterne wrote--

Quote:
Sweet pliability of man's spirit, that can at once surrender itself
to illusions, which cheat expectation and sorrow of their weary moments!

Perhaps the people of Maine have inklings of such things.

None of those ideas are anything new. They are well known. It isn't just Camus and Sterne who have offered the world those ideas. They are common currency among intellectuals. Sartre has a character praying, pleading, at the altar rails to be given faith.

The main reason why anti-IDers don't take them seriously, is that they don't think in the manner Camus was writing about. They think talking about critical thinking is actually critical thinking. And it isn't. It's nothing but a form of snobbery. Anybody who really gets their thinking cap on knows the dangers of thinking and especially thinking materialistically. It does undermine the self. It does give a sense of unfamiliarity. It is alienating. And bad reasons for avoiding those is better than good reasons for embracing them. And especially so for classrooms full of kids who are not going to be scientists. Not all scientists can handle these issues so what chance for the others who represent 99% of the population.

Sterne's remark, so beautifully expressed, even applies to the illusion that talking about science or critical thinking is equivalent to having a scientific sensibility and being a critical thinker. And who doesn't want to cheat expectation and sorrow of their weary moments. That's what sport does and the illusion of the moving picture. And all escapism.

So maybe it isn't just the people of Maine who have an inkling of such things.

Education has a far more important task than simply teaching facts.

Too much emphasis on facts has been proved on many occasions to be too much for our sweet anti-Iders. They either go straight to Ignore or take the indirect route of responding to internationally renowned writers with badly written and intemperate quotes from "here today-gone tomorrow" articles written by people we have never heard of. Facts are not on their agenda. It is only selected facts.

They won't even answer the question about how to handle psychological phenomena with scientific instruments and a classroom is psychological before anything else.

And they can bore the arse off an elephant.

1 Reply

@spendius,

You may approach the subject with certain subtle reverence but your intentions are no different than those who would propose creation as a fact of science. The idea that creation or the idea of intelligent design has a place in the science lab, its obscene. I am an agnostic and I maintain a healthy regard for the idea that we see the signs of an engineered universe but not one full term or even a day of any child's education would I propose it as a fact to be considered. It is a philosophical exchange not to be spoken of as proven but mused on with consideration. When god is a subject of debate why should his creation be treated as a fact?

1 Reply

@xris,

I've never said that the idea of creation or of intelligent design has a place in the science lab.

If you attended to wande's quote you would have noticed this crucial point--

Quote:

You don’t want two different teachers teaching two different things.

So what do you propose if they "don't want" that.

And how many times do people need to be told that linking evolution to science is a devious trick as if people who don't want evolution taught also don't want science taught? Complete rubbish.

This thread is about teaching evolution. It isn't about teaching science. I know some science you not only would not want taught but you wouldn't even want to know about it yourself.

And elected people are saying what they "don't want" on behalf of the people who elected them.

What is your reason for singling out evolution from the vast body of scientific knowledge for special attention? Has it anything to do with beating up on Christian morality?

1 Reply

@wandeljw,

wandeljw wrote:

LOUISIANA UPDATE

Quote:
School Board might OK teaching creationism
(By VIC COUVILLION, The Baton Rouge Advocate, July 24, 2010)

Board Member David Tate quickly responded: “We let them teach evolution to our children, but I think all of us sitting up here on this School Board believe in creationism. Why can’t we get someone with religious beliefs to teach creationism?”

Because it's against the law, duh. What a bunch of wankers.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Quote:

Moron vs. Moron in Alabama Governor Race
By CHARLES JOHNSON
Except — Byrne actually is a moron too, just like the “True Republicans.” And he’s outraged that his moron credentials were questioned.

I don't blame him. If someone questioned my moron credentials I'd be outraged too.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

Quote:

“We let them teach evolution to our children, but I think all of us sitting up here on this School Board believe in creationism. Why can’t we get someone with religious beliefs to teach creationism?”

In Louisiana, the concept of "current affairs" in school, stops at about Reconstruction.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Well fm- they probably don't rate "reconstruction camps" like you do. What's the difference between a "reconstruction camp" and a "re-education camp".

I might remind new viewers here that fm once expressed a wish to see all us recalcitrants on a course in a re-education camp.

A state with a Latin Quarter that makes it into a Dylan song can be expected, using scientific predictability as a guide, to be against that sort of thing.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Two teachers reaching two differing opinions. No that should not be the case. Religion should never be taught as a certainty. If I had my way religion would be excluded from education all together. Science is never about certainties only informing. Evolution is no different, its open to scrutiny but you cant deny any child the opportunity to consider the arguments. Parents cant decide on a school curriculum, thats just obscuring the reasoning. I cant ever think of any science that I would have opposed my children being taught . Dogmatic bigotry cant be permitted for any reason. Whats next? the idea of virgin birth being taught as scientific certainty? That the devil has access to your soul? Why is it religion has the ability to be taught without the rights of atheist parents being considered or for their approval. Would you consider the parents, if the majority in a small community requested devil worship?

1 Reply

@xris,

I asked you some questions. I didn't ask you to go off on a silly and cliched rant. I'm talking about actual classrooms not some generalised notion. As soon as the Freshwater case arose the anti-IDers were soon on the same track without ever dreaming that atheists have their headbangers too.

Obviously you can't think of any science you would object to your children being taught. You've been protected from such things.

If you knew your European literature you would know that the Devil is the personification of science and of secret knowledge. Faust traded his soul for it which is why we are called Faustians. Prometheus was handed a terrible destiny for stealing fire from the gods. So your last question is simply daft. You live in a society of Devil worshippers.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

Most christians suffer from myopia; they can't see anything outside their beliefs.

Their laws comes from the bible; they can't see their own hypocrisy.

1 Reply

I just heard on TV that there were 51 churches built in the square mile of the City of London cheek by jowl with the financial district that gave Capitalism to the world. St Paul's cathedral being the most famous. No Christians--no Capitalism. That's why Marxists are after the Church. Evolution is just a puny wedge.

And the TV coverage of the Tour de France showed us ariel pictures of the church in every village, town and city it passed through with the name of the church displayed on the screen.

Incidentally-the TV production crew alone consisted of 8,000 people.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Most cultures with religion have beautiful churches most often funded from royalty or merchants. What I found interesting in Greece are the many small churches in most towns and villages - some that accommodate only a few people.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

How can anything be "beautiful" that is in the business of scamming off the poor with superstitious bullshit---- you silly twat?

Quote:

Incidentally-the TV production crew alone consisted of 8,000 people.

And I'll bet that every anti-IDer watching the screen in his living room thinks he knows what's going on and that his ideas of what he is seeing are the last word in intellectual thinking and oracular wisdom despite all the 8,000 earning more than he does.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

I send you off to do a google search on a word of which you are unfamiliar.

You poor deluded bunny. You used the word incorrectly and you want us to believe it was a master plan ? Your ignorance tells us you are a fraud. Scientist my arse...google that

Quote:

I do understand that your showing us dino DNA again.

Your life cant revolve around being wrong. You have to get over it, man up and go on with life.

Quote:

Ive explained why such predictions would be unreasonable if the environment would change significantly (AND WE HAVE NO IDEAS WHAT SUCH CHANGES WILL ENTAIL). Dave Raup had a statistical analysis of speciation moving forward but even he stated that such predictions were only made by exam,ining species that had al;ready evolved.

So this is a theory that produces no predictions. Only analyses the past. It cant be reproduced in the lab. It cant be demonstrated within a human life span. But to you it is worth taking us back to gladiatorial games and the good 'ol Roman times before Christianity. You are a dickhead.

Quote:

I dont expect you to fully comprehend these little nuances

Never mind little nuances, I dont expect you to understand the glaringly obvious.

What will the world be like if we take away religion from people?

What will the world be like if we take away science from people? The world will have one less plastic developed.

Quote:

You are a good example of the problems we need to address in teaching evolution in schools.

You are a good example of why evolution could not exist, despite my belief that it does. How on earth does someone like you evolve ? What happened to killing off the weak and stupid ?

Quote:

you could develop your ideas without conflicting with our school system in the US

Would that be the fractured school system that has so many heads it makes the hydra look headless ? The rest of the world doesnt have your problem. There is nothing wrong with teaching religion in schools so long as it doesnt contradict science taught in science classes.

So Gomer the Turd, what will the world be like without religion ? What will it be like without science ?

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

It is you who is not rational fm. Where have I said that I want to bring the Bible into science classes? I don't think Io has either.

He is not well. Rationality is a quality of science, not Gomerism.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Their laws comes from the bible; they can't see their own hypocrisy.

Exactly how are they hypocrits ?

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Spendi said this just two posts before.

Quote:

Obviously you can't think of any science you would object to your children being taught. You've been protected from such things.

If you knew your European literature you would know that the Devil is the personification of science and of secret knowledge. Faust traded his soul for it which is why we are called Faustians. Prometheus was handed a terrible destiny for stealing fire from the gods. So your last question is simply daft. You live in a society of Devil worshippers.

If he doesnt wish religion (or whatever this one is about) Taught in schools to supplant simple science, then he should learn to recall his own posts. I can go back for years and find similar allusionary crap.

After all, spendi was the one who coined the term for me"Anti-id" (Implying that he is "PRO ID". Is he so far in the arms of Dr Alzheimer's discovery
?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

I read a lot of Spendi, and you too, because there is knowledge to be gained and I dont care if opposing views or interesting points of view provide it. Spendi is worried for the world if science takes over. Having the contest is good for everyone. If science wins, I shudder at the Frankenstein aspects unleashed. If popular TV wins, I shun the Gladiatorial Games that will be recommensed. If religion wins, I shrink from the bloody purges unleashed.

Let the fight continue, I will support whoever looks like losing.

1 Reply

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know