Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HttF5HVYtlQ

You're the noises off stimulus.

spendi, Even your youtube post doesn't address the subject of this thread.

If you have nothing to say, why do you continue to make a fool of yourself?

Irreducible Density

Arguing with fundamentalists: Will it go 'round in circles? Yes, it will.

We are the subject of this thread. Our attitudes to most subjects betray us. What is ignored most of all. Especially pointedly. What is pounced on with enthusiastic eagerness also. My video was merely a far, far wittier version of your ROTFLMAO repetitions. Any objection to it applies to all those and all other personal comments about me. I'm just better at it. I try harder. I respect A2K. You don't. You don't try at all.

Why does somebody pounce on a statement that because some carefully selected nutcase has said that he's anti-evolution and wants to teach creationism in physics, for which, incidentally, a case might be made, then it follows that everybody who is anti-evolution in schools wants to teach creationism in science classes. Why would anybody pounce on such drivel. I refer you to Setanta's post on the matter which I mentioned earlier.

I know why--they have a bee in their bonnet about the Church. And we know why they have it, and how they got it and about when it took place.

Tell me ci. what proportion of jobs the 50 million kids are going into will two or three garbled lessons about evolution be any use for. It's already admitted that most science teachers are not up to the job. I think almost all teachers are not up to the job. You know what they say about peanuts. When the dads of most of the kids are earning more than the teachers how can you expect the kids to respect them? Our poshest schools are for kids who have dads who nobody earns more than. Hence the respect for the teachers has to be based on intellectual excellence. And there's no way to get that with the number of teachers required and the peanuts they are paid.

If you had any interest in education you would be campaigning for higher wages for teachers. You've been paying bankers billions while they were fleecing you and you don't know how to stop them doing it again. And again. The Appliance of Science that has gone beyond the comprehension of the average person one of which is said to be born every minute.

According to Ivan Illich you have been paying doctors and pharmacists big money while they were giving you sub-lethal illnesses. And your investment in the young not only trails in last but you have hocked it up to the tune of a few trillion whatever one of them is. And China is holding the i.o.u.s Nice eh?

And all you can do is itch and squirm about this irrelevant subject. Showing them how to find edible roots might be more useful if some of the predictions I've seen come true.

"Say goodbye to cheap energy" was a headline here the other night. And I bet you never even thought it is cheap. Basically, getting every column added up, not Ignoring any, it's free. And gold is at another high.

Even your questions are stupid! You asked,

Your ability to use common sense doesn't exist; it's because you don't understand how our educational system works to help our children select a career field that is of interest to them. Science is only one area that is divided into many fields, and many career fields requires some knowledge of science.

Your reading has left you deaf and dumb; you haven't learned basic concepts of what makes the world tick.

On one hand he is railing against teaching evolution to kids because he feels "They cant handle it" and then on the other , he is similarly railing that we may be ill preparing our kids for career skills.

Take one side and stick with it spendi, your ping pong debates are best handled bey yourself. I may have to start a thread in which spendi can take a point and argue with himself . How would that be? Apparently he also accused Wandel of "trolling" his own thread. Whats the Yiddish word for schmegeggie?

Now that's pretty damned funny . . .

I never said anything about the kids not being able to handle the subject. Where did you scrape that pile of straw up from? They don't give XXX ratings to certain things because the kids can't handle it.

And, as far as I know, most employers think the schools are not preparing kids properly for the workforce. They announce it often enough here and the Sunday Times has long campaigned about the matter employing an ex-Chief Inspector of Schools.

You have no valid inconsistency to invent your fairy tale on.

wande often posts quotes which say that people who are against teaching evolution want creationism in science classes and using Setanta's Law of Straw Mans it is nonsense. Illogical. And surely posting illogical nonsense time after time is trolling.

Many people are against teaching evolution who have no intention of teaching creationism anywhere.

You do understand don't you?

Foyskeencheeze.

spendi, In your neck of the woods, you're so isolated as to make it insignificant. In our area, high tech companies are hiring, and most engineers earn over six figure salaries. They study "science" and "engineering." Your area probably needs somebody to teach the children how to bend their elbows at the local pub for their future endeavors.

Now that would be a proper education ci. You should write to your Secretary of State for Education about that.

spendi, Why should I write to the state's Secretary of Education? Our children are finished with their public education, and our older son lives in Austin, Texas.

In order to improve American education. If that is not a matter of importance to you what are you doing on this thread?

From the National Center for the Science Education:


Tennessee antievolution bill passes the House
April 7th, 2011 Tennessee anti-evolution 2011

Tennessee's House Bill 368 passed the House of Representatives on a 70-23 vote on April 7, 2011. "The debate ranged over the scientific method, 'intellectual bullies,' hair spray and 'Inherit the Wind,'" reported the Chattanooga Times Free Press (April 7, 2011).

The bill, if enacted, would require state and local educational authorities to "assist teachers to find effective ways to present the science curriculum as it addresses scientific controversies" and permit teachers to "help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught." The only examples provided of "controversial" theories are "biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning." The sponsor of HB 368, Bill Dunn (R-District 16), claimed that the teaching of "intelligent design" would not be protected by the bill. Its chief lobbyist, David Fowler of the Family Action Council of Tennessee, claimed otherwise in the Chattanoogan (February 21, 2011).

The Tennessean (in its editorial of March 29, 2011), the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee have all expressed their opposition to HB 368, with the Tennessee Science Teachers Association — representing the supposed beneficiaries of the bill — characterizing it as "unnecessary, anti-scientific, and very likely unconstitutional." The TSTA's Becky Ashe, who is also the executive director of curriculum and instruction for Knox County Schools, told the Knoxville Metro Pulse (April 6, 2011) that in her decade of service there, no teacher has been disciplined for mentioning alternative beliefs to evolution in the classroom. She added that the science standards already emphasize critical thinking, making the bill completely unnecessary.

The Senate version of the bill, SB 893, was discussed, but not voted on, by the Senate Education Committee on March 30, 2011; according to the Metro Pulse, a committee vote is not expected until April 20, 2011.

Which doesn't exclude other examples which were not provided for reasons unspecified.

"Scientific strengths and weaknesses?"

Have they pointed out any weaknesses yet? LOL

spendi, You really don't understand the difference between "education," and the "latest challenges to the teaching of evolution?"

Many of the controversy surrounding the topic of this thread has to do with the christians who are hell bent to teach creationism in science courses in our schools. That's a different issue about "education," or the subject of this thread - which you evidently don't understand.

Many of those trying to push creationism in our public schools are being sued, and losing in our courts. "That's the issue."

They are trying to destroy our children's education by including a religious issue that has no evidence or fact to support it.

If we are going into philosophy, what do we know that is not only observable by its effects ? You were no doubt thinking of evolution when you said we only know it from its effects .

That argument is too complicated not to have been created by Creationists .

Only a religious nutter would say the Bible is literal .

Which serum did you have in mind ?



As vampires are rumoured to drink whole blood, perhaps you didnt mean serum but it is just a mistake on your part ? You know a person not out to falsely impress others would have said blood....

Yes, but fundamentalist science worshippers need to be told about other areas of human endeavour, like psychology and theology . Perhaps one day they will realise, though probably not .

That is correct, and can you please show me where I have said that we have "proved" evolution. The theory of evolution bounds with evidence so that it is a theory and a fact, yet it is never "proven". Gravity is even more diffuse because we have really no preferred mechanism for gravitation. In evolution we have natural selection

And , by your own terminology, we have the above legislation passing the House committee in Tenn. If you think this legislation is NOT sponsored by religious "nutters" then I have some swampland Id like you to buy . The "strengths and weaknesses of evolution that they speak of , have to do with PROVING the age of the earth is 4.48 BY or EVDIDENCING that men derived from common ancestors with chimps