Creationists seek end run around accreditation, page 3

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 06:00 AM

link

We really should avoid the "Creation vs Evolution" debate, and stick to the article, because otherwise I'll get into a full-blown "what happened to all those poor pagans, you know, the majority of humans who have ever lived prior to the writing of the Torah/Bible/Quran and never had the chance to be good monotheists?" argument that just makes God look like a total arse for condemning 95% of all the humans who have ever lived to Hell by freaking default just because he couldn't be bothered to let them know how to get into heaven, so suddenly it appears the Gnostics had it right and that this world was created by an evil god.

So yeah, lets just stick to the article!

GeeGee

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 02:41 PM

link

Originally posted by ChemBreather

So, teaching them they are monkys are better ? No thanks.
I never in my entire life believed that monky business story..
We are Not monkys, period !!

We didn't come from monkeys. Both humans and monkeys evolved from a common ancestor.

The Bible says you came from dirt. Is that really any better?

Also, this is not a good idea. Our society needs standards for Christ's sake. Religion does not belong in a science class.

FreeSpeaker

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 03:43 PM

link

Originally posted by GeeGee
The Bible says you came from dirt. Is that really any better?

Excellent point.

Originally posted by GeeGee
Also, this is not a good idea. Our society needs standards for Christ's sake. Religion does not belong in a science class.

Exactly, without some kind of standard science education, we will only create divisions and prejudices amongst our society. This topic is way to fundamental for society to endure such a split amongst its citizens. A standard in sciences most be upheld.

Hyzera

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 05:27 PM

link

So, teaching them they are monkys are better ? No thanks. I never in my entire life believed that monky business story.. We are Not monkys, period !!

Indeed, we are not monkeys! Kids aren't being taught they are monkeys, apes, chimps, etc.

If you would deny ignorance and read up on human evolution, you would see that the popular theory is that humans and apes had a common ancestor and there was not a direct evolution from ape to man. So, it's not ape --> Human, it's

Ancestor --> Branches into homo xxxx
--> Branches into apes

You guys can be monkeys all you want . Here's a banana for you..

Please, you're making a fool of yourself! And yes, I will accept your banana.

camain

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 05:56 PM

link

This is a state issue. This is an accreditation issue.

Put simply, IF the state so chooses to do this, and it is passed by the states legislature, then the state representatives, as representatives of the population of the state agreed this is whats best for that state. They are following the will of the people. This is democracy in action, and in simple terms what our bill of rights and constitution represent, the will of the people, protection, and freedom.

As far as accreditation it is up to the Employer, as to whether or not these people are qualified to do what they are applying for. The degree doesn't matter, its how you present yourself. If the potential employer doesn't do there job in vetting there recruits, thats there problem.

A fair point, Homeschoolers and kids from religious schools typically score BETTER on standardized testing. There curriculum typically makes them think, which leads to a better understanding, then public schools where there taught to repeat. I'm an agnostic, my kids were in public school making A's. I put them in private christian(because of my wife) and there grades are lower. This is because the curriculum is higher standard. Is this the case with every private school, no. But it kinda makes you wonder who would get a degree in creationism. These would be people that are to devoted to there faith already, and people that are already set to work in a specific field set. There not going to be doctors with that degree, but they could be a social worker, or a teacher in a private christian school.

I see no problem with these degrees being made available, it all comes down to whether or not the person can do the job, not there degree.

Cheers,

Camain

[edit on 25-3-2009 by camain]

Lasheic

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 06:14 PM

link

reply to post by ChemBreather

You're right. We shouldn't be teaching our children that we are descended from monkeys, because it's not true. We are descended from apes. Monkeys and Apes split from a common primate ancestor long before hominids evolved.

So while humans are still primates, and apes, we are not monkeys.

Note, however, that we are not descended from any currently living Ape species. Humans, Orangutans, Chimps, and Gorillas all evolved separately from a common ape ancestor. Chimps and Humans represent the most recent divergence in this line.

Even if you were to try to reject evolution and common ancestry, that would not mute the fact that humans are taxonomically and phylogenetically defined as apes. We have been since Carl Linneas first discovered what an ape actually was and why it applied to us.

[edit on 25-3-2009 by Lasheic]

theindependentjournal

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 06:43 PM

link

reply to post by FreeSpeaker

Evolution isn't a Science either, it is a Faith and doesn't belong in federal funded schools. There is no PROOF of evolution only theory and speculation, it should not be taught as science but as theory.

Accreditation really important to you all or are you all just ignorant on what it is and who has it and who doesn't? I would like to know which ones of you think any Un-accredited Schools diplomas should be disregarded and not accepted...

Anxiously awaiting to see who thinks accreditation is important to the education or degree. Hint to the readers - Before answering this you should Google Harvard, Yale, Princeton and all your top ivy league schools Accreditations...

FreeSpeaker

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 07:13 PM

link

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Evolution isn't a Science either, it is a Faith and doesn't belong in federal funded schools. There is no PROOF of evolution only theory and speculation, it should not be taught as science but as theory.

No proof? Without getting too technical, the australian legless lizard still has remnants of a hipbone and tiny tips of hind legs. This lizard once walked on legs, and has since evolved to function without them. Either that was god's plan for the lizard, or the pressures of survival caused it to evolve into its current form. I would put my money on evolution rather than god's plan.

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Anxiously awaiting to see who thinks accreditation is important to the education or degree. Hint to the readers - Before answering this you should Google Harvard, Yale, Princeton and all your top ivy league schools Accreditations...

Apparently some of these prestigious schools have lost accreditation to some of their programs. Big surprize that GW Bush was given a business degree without earning it. I'm shocked.

So what does this mean other than they got caught not being up to standards and playing favorites? Just google loss of accreditation and you'll see its happening all over the US, at all levels of education.

Your implying then accreditation has no value?

GeeGee

posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 07:26 PM

link

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
reply to post by FreeSpeaker

Evolution isn't a Science either, it is a Faith and doesn't belong in federal funded schools. There is no PROOF of evolution only theory and speculation, it should not be taught as science but as theory.

It is taught as a theory, hence the name "theory of evolution". The TOE addresses the diversity of life on Earth, not its origins. Also, theories in science are ranked above laws. It is not just a "best guess".

Microevolution is a fact that even creationists accept. Do you not believe in speciation, adaptation and optimization?

FreeSpeaker

posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 08:30 AM

link

The Texas Board of Education this week will vote on science standards that critics say seek to cast doubt on the theory of evolution.

The board -- considering amendments passed in January -- will hear from the public on Wednesday. It will then take votes -- an initial one Thursday and the final vote Friday.

"This specific attack on well-established science ignores mountains of evidence and years of research done by experts in a variety of fields," said Steven Newton, project director at the Oakland California-based National Center for Science Education, a proponent of evolution.

Source

Big week for Texas. Can't wait to hear how this turns out. Hopefully science prevails here.

[edit on 27-3-2009 by FreeSpeaker]

FreeSpeaker

posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link

reply to post by FreeSpeaker

This is being looked over again after a January 26,2009 meeting of the Texas State Board of Education elected to get rid of wording which has allowed the standing of evolution to be attacked for 20 years in Texan science lessons.

Link to article

Seems the proponents of creationism are trying anything to get their theology into childrens classrooms.

It follows a much larger test case in 2005 in the town of Dover, Pennsylvania, in which the Discovery Institute argued unsuccessfully for science lessons to include "intelligent design" - the idea that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by an unspecified designer. The trial exposed intelligent design to be creationism by another name.

Source

So even though we know where ID is coming from, they are abusing legal technicalities to futher the push for it, and seemingly gaining ground. I hope the Texas Board of Education doesn't cave in here.

[edit on 27-3-2009 by FreeSpeaker]

FreeSpeaker

posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 08:56 AM
link

Texas board comes down on 2 sides of creationism debate

(CNN) -- Dueling theories of how the universe was created got a split decision Friday night from the Texas Board of Education, which required examination of "all sides of scientific evidence" in new science standards, but rejected language requiring teachers to teach the "strengths and weaknesses" of scientific theories.
The debate pitted proponents of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution against supporters of religion-based theories of intelligent design, or creationism.

"Science loses. Texas loses, and the kids lose because of this," board chairman Don McLeroy, a creationist, told the Dallas Morning News.

A final 13-2 vote approved language that will be printed in textbooks beginning in 2011 and remain there for 10 years, CNN affiliate KPRC-TV in Houston reported:

"In all fields of science, analyze, evaluate, and critique scientific explanations by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental observation and testing, including examining all sides of scientific evidence of those explanations so as to encourage critical thinking by the students."

Earlier, the board rejected two sections written by McLeroy on identical 8-7 votes, the Dallas Morning News said.

One section required teachers to "analyze, review, and critique scientific explanations, including hypotheses and theories, as to their strengths and weaknesses using scientific evidence and information," and the other required high school students to study the "sufficiency or insufficiency" of key principles of evolution.

Opponents were pleased with the board's action on McLeroy's sections, but unsatisfied with the final result.

Source

What was the point of this debate if they failed in the end to resolve the issue one way or another?

Part win for science, but they left language in that still gives creationism/ID a foothold to attack evolution. What a waste of time and tax dollars.

Aermacchi

posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:40 PM
link

Originally posted by GeeGee

The Bible says you came from dirt. Is that really any better?

So what did the common ancestor come from? If you go back far enough you would end get to the primordial soup or Mud Puddle so yeah,, your monkey cam from dirt too

Also, this is not a good idea. Our society needs standards for Christ's sake. Religion does not belong in a science class.

Who said anything about religion? They may only refer to parts of the bible that deals with creation and that's it. Thier are many many facts given in the ancient texts that cannot be accounted for many assertions made about life that Science couldn't have even known were true yet the Bible knew it to be true and they want to use science to reverse engineer many of the facts and creation to better understand if it is a natural process or? etc

Aermacchi

posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link

Originally posted by GeeGee

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
reply to post by FreeSpeaker

Evolution isn't a Science either, it is a Faith and doesn't belong in federal funded schools. There is no PROOF of evolution only theory and speculation, it should not be taught as science but as theory.

It is taught as a theory, hence the name "theory of evolution". The TOE addresses the diversity of life on Earth, not its origins. Also, theories in science are ranked above laws. It is not just a "best guess".

Microevolution is a fact that even creationists accept. Do you not believe in speciation, adaptation and optimization?

Ranked above laws? Please,, DO explain "ranked above" laws

the ranking idea

FreeSpeaker

posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:34 PM
link

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Originally posted by GeeGee

The Bible says you came from dirt. Is that really any better?

So what did the common ancestor come from? If you go back far enough you would end get to the primordial soup or Mud Puddle so yeah,, your monkey cam from dirt too

For some reason after reading this I had to look up primordial soup and in doing so realized that making evolution vs creationism the basis of debate is actualy in error.

Whats really at the center of this debate is Abiogenesis vs creationism.

Wonder how this has been missed all along.

PowerSlave

posted on Apr, 1 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link

reply to post by GeeGee

Our society needs standards for Christ's sake

I found this somewhat amusing.