61
   

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

 
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Feb, 2011 07:42 pm
@Ionus,
Quote:
What would be wrong with teaching evolution complete with the things it doesnt explain rather than "here it is, and it not only answers everything to do with all sciences, it is comnplete".

The science of evolution is not taught so authoritarian so as to stifle discussion. Most classes have discussions and reviews of the present topics and then wander into areas of the "Unknowns" to do otherwise would certainly stifling to the students and the teachers. As far as absence of religion being a religion, I dont share your view becaue when viewed in the sense of world history and the development f religions, its an interesting pursuit of how we created gods and God and how we attach our moral codes to some theocratic decree. I just view them from afar. Ima nonparticipant and I dont feel that "Unlearning" my original religious training leaves me any more crippled than if I were to continue following the church.
It just doesnt resonate with me. Its a big "So what"? that seems to mean more to you than me.

Quote:
So for you God created life and evolution theory....the process of evolution did not evolve, it was created.
Your thought process only seems satisfied by invoking extremes I see. Ivedismissed a god as mostly irrelevant. If we are able to detect the pattern of how early life developed and continued on is more like EInsteins statement that"what interests me is whether god had any choice in creation".
Abiogenesis or creation, Ill accept either word. I just tend to lean on a mechanism rather than "poofistry" . Creation is such a lame "I give up" attitude. I think mkost of us got into science cause we want to understand . I dont have any time or credentials in abiogenesis, I know a couple of fellows that are making that as a part of their careers in organic chemistry. I talk with them every few months to see whats new. Thats about how much interest I have in the subject. HOWQEVER, because the paths of the development of life (for example when C12 overtook C13 in the ARchean sediments is an important area for onsolidating rocks that contain H3 and some rare earths. During the Neoarchean , when life developed into its 3 basic forms, the tracks left in the sedimenst are important for the location of sedimentary iron and titanium. I AM TOTALLY and applied scientist, My interest in the theoretical is purely as a hobby, not a career move.

Ionus
 
  0  
Reply Thu 10 Feb, 2011 10:30 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
It was an accurate and complete answer.
It was so brief as to be meaningless. Your idea of completeness is rather lacking.

Quote:
Just because you don't like it or understand it doesn't change it.
A complex problem and you think a two word answer is enough. Rather simplistic dont you think ? I wouldnt change it for the world. It does my side far more good then harm.
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  0  
Reply Thu 10 Feb, 2011 10:42 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
Ivedismissed a god as mostly irrelevant.
You have dismissed God as mostly irrelevant to you. I dont want a world full of clones or clowns.

Quote:
Creation is such a lame "I give up" attitude.
Science is such an "I know everything" attitude when in fact it increasingly has to ask more questions than it solved. Examining every aspect of the function of each stair does not help you go up a staircase, it merely prevents any movement.

Quote:
Quote:
So for you God created life and evolution theory....the process of evolution did not evolve, it was created.
Your thought process only seems satisfied by invoking extremes I see.
Then instead of all the political speak you have so far managed to avoid that followed in that response, perhaps we should accept that evolution has underlying "forces" that existed before life, and that evolved life into existence.

Quote:
Ivedismissed a god as mostly irrelevant.
If you are referring to a personal God like in the Old Testament, then good for you. If you are referring to a purpose and a reason for life apart from walking carbon atoms then you are shallow.
0 Replies
 
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Feb, 2011 10:55 pm
What would be wrong with teaching algebra along with the things it doesn't explain? Students need to know the weakness of such a field just as much! Algebra doesn't have an answer for how to find the area underneath a function. Students should be given the option of learning about dragons as well and let them make up their own minds.

A
R
T
0 Replies
 
tenderfoot
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Feb, 2011 11:55 pm
Ionarse.. quote but I can do nothing about some opacity that is based on how my mind works. Unquote

Oh! we know.
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2011 12:57 am
@tenderfoot,
Quote:
Oh! we know.
Just as well you have a tenderarse, though I wont speculate on how it got that way, I will comment it is your only humanist feature.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2011 04:54 am
@rosborne979,
Quote:
Saving the chief's son from drowning, which gets you appreciation and protection from the chief, which allows you to survive to reproduce.


That's a far-fetched version of Hitler's eugenic programme. Please the chief and he fits you up with a doxie. The doxie isn't consulted. Real misogyny.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2011 05:00 am
@Ionus,
Io asks--" How did life come from pre-biotic chemicals ? "

fm answers

"not part of evolution theory".

There's the circularity. The closed self-referencing system of thought. You have a theory--somebody asks a question about it you can't answer--hey ho--it's not part of the theory. Gee.

0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2011 07:22 am
@Ionus,
Quote:
Unlike you, I dont drink. Clouds the mind. You should try it.


The main point of narcotics is to cloud the mind Io. There is nutrition as well in relation to beer etc. Drinking the harvest.

The unclouded mind, particularly an intelligent one, can be a pretty fearsome entity. The clarity is scary although it can be put on Ignore by various mechanical activities but they tend to be expensive. Constructing an authentic currach from DIY materials for example is an excellent method of avoiding the worst effects of clarity of thought. Pharmaceuticals are also useful, I assume, in that regard.

A toper I know had a major operation during which he was given 6 pints of pure blood. He was profoundly depressed when he woke up. He reported this to the consultant and was immediately asked how often did he go out drinking. When he said it was 7 nights a week on four pints of bitter the consultant said it was normal to be depressed when the alcohol content of the blood was reduced to the extent his had been.

Then there's the BGS. (Beer goggle syndrome). That's a scientific manifestation whereby women look more and more desireable in direct proportion to the number of pints consumed although beyond a certain level of consumption, a point varying with age, Brewer's Droop becomes operational. A fine balance is required therefore.

Then there's the Beer Coat which is an invisible and magical protective layer which prevents injury and pain on promiscuous contact with the pavement or the bottom of the stairs.

Beer Humour is worth having as well. That is when ordinary everyday events and objects reveal their fundamental absurdity resulting in chuckling, laughing, guffawing and uncontrollable tittering all of which, according to the good doctor Rabelais, are extremely beneficial to health.



0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2011 07:31 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
Why do cells band together ? weak forces, strong ionic forces, peptide linkeage, surface chemistry, hydrophilic and double layering (Im sure there are many more--youre point is?


The point is that none of that is an answer to "why". It is pure anthropomorphic teleological drivel dressed up to overawe dummies.

0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2011 07:33 am
@rosborne979,
Quote:
Is anyone else having trouble understanding my answers?


I don't know. I haven't seen any answers from ros.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2011 07:39 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
It just doesnt resonate with me. Its a big "So what"? that seems to mean more to you than me.


The subject is teaching evolution to the next generations. It has nothing to do with little, old you. Nothing.

0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  2  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2011 10:18 am
UPDATE ON FRIVOLOUS LAWSUIT IN PENNSYLVANIA
Quote:
The Discovery Institute is Made an Offer it Can't Refuse
(Press Release, Christian Newswire, February 11, 2011)

The Discovery Institute of Seattle wants Tom Ritter to drop his lawsuit against The Blue Mountain School District of central Pennsylvania over the teaching of evolution.

Ritter alleges that the teaching of evolution is merely Atheism in disguise. The Discovery Institute is worried he will lose the suit.

It is worth noting The Discovery Institute LOST the infamous case of Kitzmiller v Dover School District, handed down in 2005 in the same federal court district as The Blue Mt. School District case.

Ritter also says he is not impressed for other reasons:

First, and most importantly, Ritter says there will be NO public schools in just a few years. To learn the details, see the website, predatorypricing.org

Second, Ritter does not plan to lose the lawsuit. The Blue Mountain School District has a legal problem: The Kitzmiller case outlawed the teaching of any form of Intelligent Design. Since there are logically only two explanations for the existence of life, any school teaching evolution must therefore teach blind evolution. Since The Blue Mt. SD teaches evolution, Ritter says it must teach Atheism.

(The major monotheistic religions of the world all ascribe to God's remarkably similar characteristics, among them, the ability to create. Thus no Creator = no God)

But it is illegal to teach Atheism in the public schools.

Third, at 63, Ritter says he is no longer afraid of powerful institutions, be they The Blue Mountain School District, the entire public (government) school system or the Discovery Institute.

So Tom Ritter offers The Discovery Institute the following compromise:

If The Institute will get him 10 (ten) sets of parents from different schools districts in Pennsylvania east of Harrisburg to protest the public schools, HE WILL DROP HIS LAWSUIT.

That should be easy enough for the Institute to do since they are a powerful organization

And again, see the website: predatorypricing.org, updated very recently, for the details.

Tom Ritter taught physics and chemistry in the public schools for over a decade, and hundreds of his former students will vouch that he was a great teacher.

He also calls himself a reluctant Christian, meaning he needs a personal Savior, but does not like a lot of what most of the modern Church does.


I should add that the above "press release" was issued by Tom Ritter's website.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2011 12:20 pm
@wandeljw,
Mr Ritter is more or less on the same page as myself.
0 Replies
 
tenderfoot
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Feb, 2011 11:46 pm
Don't think so Spendiosus ... You would slide off bull **** ... you have a hard enough job hanging onto the page you have.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Feb, 2011 04:34 am
@wandeljw,
Wonderful comic relief there, Boss . . .
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Feb, 2011 05:25 am
The above two posts are in the way of being batsqueaks. They don't take issue with Mr Ritter's statements. They simply assert that they are "bullshit" and "comic relief" which are both infantile and can be applied to anything including themselves.

One has to hope that the kids are not encouraged to adopt such methods of debate but it's a forlorn hope when they witness adults engaging in it. It represents the end of communication and opens the door to who can shout them longest and loudest or support them with force. As such they are consistent with evolution theory and invalidate debate and A2K itself.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Feb, 2011 05:32 am
The above two posts are in the way of being batsqueaks. They don't take issue with Mr Ritter's statements. They simply assert that it is "bullshit" and "comic relief" which are both infantile and can be applied to anything including themselves.

One has to hope that the kids are not encouraged to adopt such methods of debate but it's a forlorn hope when they witness adults engaging in it. It represents the end of communication and opens the door to who can shout them longest and loudest or support them with force. As such they are consistent with evolution theory and invalidate debate and A2K itself.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Feb, 2011 05:34 am
@spendius,
It constantly baffles me that tenderfoot and Setanta can make such unmitigated fools of themselves and seem to be intending continuing doing so for the rest of their lives.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Feb, 2011 06:45 am
@Setanta,
The Constitutions of most states have the provisos built in regarding the duty of public education for our kids. While private schools do fill a great purpose, most pof the mainstream parochial schools will still teach science as science and not "mix it up" with dogma of the religion.

In Pa, we subsideize these charter schools and ask the parents of parochai students to pay tuition AND their taxes that support theor lcal public schools.

Ritter sounds like he wants to return to a simpler day when all things scientific were just a demonstration of Gods will.
Lesse, we are 30th in the world re: our kids abilities in math and science. If we adopt Ritters pre Wilsonian views, we will probably sink to 60th place.

 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 07/29/2025 at 01:26:13