Top home-school texts dismiss Darwin, evolution

reply to post by Donny 4 million


Something existing for a long time doesn't magically mean it's fact. Why should creationism be taught as history? There is no evidence it happened. We still need evidence in history classes, just to determine what to teach. And yes, creationism has to be taught as religion, as it is inherently religious in nature, and was not discovered by secular means.

Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution is a scientific theory, just as gravity is a theory.

You don't seem to understand what the word "theory" means in a scientific context. Which has been explained to you before, and yet you still keep misusing that word. A scientific theory has evidence backing it up. It is also advanced enough to be able to predict the outcomes of experiments and phenomena. You seem to think it means the same as "hypothesis", which it most certainly doesn't.

Deny ignorance - use a dictionary

reply to post by Astyanax


"On the contrary, that is exactly why they cannot be trusted with it. They will choose their children's interests (or their own, in the case of creationists and suchlike) over those of society. Governments exist precisely to prevent things like that from happening--for the good of all. "

'Over himself, the individual is sovereign,' said John Stuart Mill. I agree wholeheartedly, but the definition of 'self' does not include one's children.



So it would seem you take a anti -abortion issue to argue evolution?
Most of the folks you are trying to clobber think that it is not right to kill their children.
Yet you seem to back an ideology that actually promotes it.
How can you have it both ways?
Did you not say" Governments exist precisely to prevent things like that from happening."

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Donny 4 million

 

Evolution cannot be an elective because most of biology and the other physical sciences require you to know it in order to understand other material. If you were to teach biology without evolution you might as well only use texts from 200 years ago, since everything since evolution has played a major part in everything since then. Also, there is no factual evidence to support creationism. This is because it requires the existence of a deity or some other cosmic force, which is impossible to prove in anyway. Thus, it is impossible to get scientific evidence for creationism.

When I was in high school biology was an elective.
So then shouldn't electronics and quantum theory be taught right along side?
We won't get many mechanical or aeronautical engineers out of evolution.

I think there is a problem in what I was saying about teaching Creationism.
I left out the word (about).
Creation and the Hebrew teaching of it, have been around for over 2,000 years.
It should be taught about. As history if nothing else.It is history. Right or wrong.

reply to post by Maslo

Then you have two options:

1. Teach your children both less than perfect curriculum and, in private, your personal opinion, as we did during communist dictatorship. Let the children decide, and the truth will find its way, I am sure.

2. Revolution. To replace the government is perfectly justified, when the government does not fulfill its purpose as it should.

Or how about refusing to be manipulated into giving up our rights in the first place? How about humanity actually retains their rights for once?

reply to post by Donny 4 million


Let me guess - you didn't choose to study biology Evolution should definitely be taught because without it all of biology is lost.

It should be taught in religious studies, definitely not in a science class.

reply to post by Astyanax

Originally posted by Astyanax

Originally posted by harvib

Originally posted by Astyanax
America's school system is, for a country so advanced and powerful (and one which spends so much per child on its schools) a disgrace.

Some say this is by design. An institution designed to ensure that children are made to be ideal employees.

A conspiracy theorist would say so, perhaps. I think most people have a firmer grip on reality than that.

Maybe we should explore whether my statement is truth or delusion before we make snap judgments.

Do you believe Americans, in general, are receiving an education that allows them to be self sufficient? To survive without having to rely on Government or corporations, again in general?

That is a problem to be addressed by constitutional safeguards and the exercise of democracy, not at the level of education policy. You are raising a phantom; again, this is the sort of threat a conspiracy theorist might dream up, but which is highly unlikely in real life.

Those "constitutional safeguards" have long since been disregarded. As for a Government becoming corrupted as being highly unlikely maybe we should take the same approach as above.

Has there not been and is there not now several if not a majority of Governments both presently and within our own recent past that have become corrupt and begun to act against the best interest of its' citizens?

Much worse things would have to happen to a country before the abuses you're talking about ever came to pass; the damage to freedom and human rights would already have been done.

Could the abuses I am talking about already be happening. Do you believe the major corporations in America have a substantial influence on policy. Do you believe that their influence significantly out weighs the individual influence even when individuals organize to oppose corporate legislation?

'Over himself, the individual is sovereign,' said John Stuart Mill. I agree wholeheartedly, but the definition of 'self' does not include one's children.

Does the definition of self include a child? Is a child "himself"?

and parents do not have every right to raise them as they see fit.

Can you clarify this statement? If I am reading this in context you believe parents do not have the right to educate children the way they see fit yet believe the Government to hold full rights to educate the child? When and where was this right give given to Government.

reply to post by davesidious

I think filling the heads of children with abject nonsense is very dangerous to the child in particular, and society in general. Surely we want intelligent kids with all the facts, not just drones wandering around regurgitating the nonsense spoon-fed by their religious parents.

Then you must certainly be against the curriculum taught in public schools? Especially history class?

The way I see it, it's their HOME, their SCHOOL, they can do/teach anything they want.

The kids may be a bit out of touch when they graduate but other than that,
...WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL?

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Uuh! How long has creationism been around? Is it not still ever present?
Answer for over 2,000 years. And still ever present.
Is that a fact?
Yes

Yes the Christian story of creation has been around for about 2,000 years. No argument from me about that one.

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Should that fact just be dismissed in education?
No

It should be taught in religious education classes as it is religion.

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Should it be taught as history?
Yes

I'm not really sure where it would fit in a history class. Could you give an example?

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Does it have to be taught as religion?
Take your pick.

Erm no i won't take my pick thanks. It is religion, it's written in a religious book that is supposed to be the word of god. It has no facts to back it up as a scientific theory or historical account.

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
When a THEORY becomes a universal fact.
I will then write it as the FACT of evolution. It is my choice is it not?.
And why is it so important to you?
Try sticking to the topic.

I am sticking to the topic, you are of the opinion that because evolution is a theory that it should not be taught as fact. I am addressing your ignorance in regards to how the word theory is used in a scientific context.

You see a theory is just a framework, and that framework is filled in with lots of facts. That is what always gets me when someone says evolution is not a fact. Evolution links together tons and tons of facts and like all good theories we can make predictions based upon evolution and see if those predictions are bourne out. This has been explained to you several times and yet you either ignore or don't understand it.

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
When I was in high school biology was an elective.
So then shouldn't electronics and quantum theory be taught right along side?
We won't get many mechanical or aeronautical engineers out of evolution.

Quantum theory is a little advanced for most kids in high school, they need to know the fundamentals of physics before jumping ahead to that stuff. You are correct we won't get engineers of any kind from evolution, but we will get other things. For example we will get biologists who use the theory of evolution to predict changes in bacteria. This can give us a more accurate germ model that can help to save lives.

We will get biologists who, using the theory of evolution can identify genetic advantages within certain plants and use these genes to develop drought resistant crops. They will also be able to predict what other adaptations will be helpful and alter the plants for those.

Also i have to point out the contradiction where you seem fine about accepting quantum theory but not evolutionary theory. Both are theories so why do you single out evolution as the one we shouldn't accept and teach? Why does the word theory suddenly become different to fact only when it has the word evolution in front of it?

Originally posted by Donny 4 million
I think there is a problem in what I was saying about teaching Creationism.
I left out the word (about).
Creation and the Hebrew teaching of it, have been around for over 2,000 years.
It should be taught about. As history if nothing else.It is history. Right or wrong.

It depends what you mean by history

If you mean it existed in history, then yes i agree it existed as something that was taught. However if you want to argue that one then we should also be teaching the babylonian creation story, and the norse one, and the egyptian one and, well you get the point here right?

If you mean that it should be taught as a genuine account of what happened in the past then no, absolutely not because it has no evidence to support it. Indeed all of the evidence is to the contrary.

[edit on 10-3-2010 by ImaginaryReality1984]

reply to post by Alxandro


Because those kids have had their education wasted, and by the time they want to go to college (to not study biology), they need years of further education to undo the mess their parents inflicted on them.

Child abuse.

reply to post by Donny 4 million


Quantum mechanics and electronics are advanced concepts. For most students, classical physics will be sufficient as it does do a good job of explaining the majority of the physical world. Evolution on the other hand is an absolutely crucial part of biology and one needs to understand it if they are to learn the basics of biology.

reply to post by davesidious

Because those kids have had their education wasted, and by the time they want to go to college (to not study biology), they need years of further education to undo the mess their parents inflicted on them. Child abuse.

Is it child abuse to teach a false history? Or are you only offended when falsehoods are taught by the parents but not when they are taught by Government forced education?

reply to post by harvib


Don't equate false historical facts (which I am also against) with creationism. False historical facts can be easily rectified, and don't plunge a student into the depths of distrusting the scientific method. It would be more accurate to equate teaching all false historical facts to a child, as that is essentially what creationism is to biology (and to science).

It's easy to fix a few historical facts. It's difficult to fix an entire science education.

Originally posted by Maslo

I do have an issue with it, because i dont believe that being from a different culture should have any effect on what a child learns during their compulsory education. As long as he lives in some country, he will have to know what scientists of this country consider true and important for the children to know.
Culture of an individual is of no importance whatsoever if this individual breaks a law, and compulsory education according to states curriculum is (or should be) a law.

Do you really think that these kids will go through life only knowing of creationism? They will choose one day what they want to believe, and for the vast majority of them and everyone else either way will not affect their lives one bit.

Due to their parent's culture and beliefs these kids get a much better education than the vast majority of all other kids, they will score higher on the SAT, ACT, they will out score the masses on every standardized testing process, more of them will go to college with a higher GPA and they will have more success in the work force. At what point does creationism slow them up? I can over look the creationism part just for the fact that they have parents willing to devote a lot of time and effort with them, and I really do not care what the motivator is as long as a motivator is there.

I think you all should invest this hate energy towards the parents who put no effort in their children, that percentage is so large it affects society as a whole, and that my friend is what I find criminal.

If his cultural background would have any significant effect on his education, then it is like being discriminated for the child.

But in this case it has zero affect...

Only when this different culture establishes its own state, then they would have the right to make any laws they want, including their own independent educational system and standards.

Well America already has and it is called Catholic private schools and homeschooling based on creationism, and they are not against the law, so you must be the minority and should accept them for what they are.

reply to post by davesidious

Don't equate false historical facts (which I am also against) with creationism.

I haven't equated anything with creationism. This debate, to me, has nothing to do with creationism. For me, this debate is another example of how easy it is to get people to consent to giving up their rights.

False historical facts can be easily rectified,

It could be argued that false historical facts cannot be so easily rectified. False historical facts have been used to coerce people into believing they are the superior race. They have been used to convince a populace into supporting acts of genocide. They have been used to convince a populace that they do not have the ability to be self sufficient and need oligarchs to run every facet of their lives. etc, etc, etc...

reply to post by harvib

Or how about refusing to be manipulated into giving up our rights in the first place? How about humanity actually retains their rights for once?

Hm.. what rights? I told you clearly that if the government messes up with the curriculum, it needs to be replaced swiftly.

You dont have any right to not teach your homeschooled child evolution because it is an independent opinion of the scientists, not the government.

If evolution would be some government conspiracy and scientists really would not believe in it, you would have right to do something about it. But thats not the case.

As long as scientists agree that evolution is true, and government does not interfere (only enforce what scientists say through compulsory education), you have no right to exclude it from your childs education.

Originally posted by davesidious

Don't equate false historical facts (which I am also against) with creationism. False historical facts can be easily rectified, and don't plunge a student into the depths of distrusting the scientific method. It would be more accurate to equate teaching all false historical facts to a child, as that is essentially what creationism is to biology (and to science).

It's easy to fix a few historical facts. It's difficult to fix an entire science education.

I'm still trying to figureout just what it is you are debating here. May I ask what you do for a living and whether knowing evolution affects your life in anyway?

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Donny 4 million

 

Quantum mechanics and electronics are advanced concepts. For most students, classical physics will be sufficient as it does do a good job of explaining the majority of the physical world. Evolution on the other hand is an absolutely crucial part of biology and one needs to understand it if they are to learn the basics of biology.

This is nonsense. I had a complete and useable Top Secret clearance in electronic warfare by the time I was 18 years old. Way simpler than calculus or trig.
I had the ability to direct a nuclear missile to it's target..
Biological evolution was no way involved.
Your argument holds no water and can only exist to ram your ideology down others throats.
Actually others kids throats. Kids that you know nothing about.

reply to post by Donny 4 million


That's because electronics isn't in the field of biology. Although today many different fields incorporate lessons learned from evolution. One example would be genetic algorithms used in computer programming. As time goes on the importance and application of evolution grows, until soon it will be almost impossible to get a decent job without knowing at least the basics of evolution.

reply to post by Maslo

Hm.. what rights? I told you clearly that if the government messes up with the curriculum, it needs to be replaced swiftly.

Yes but what you propose leaves no room for oversight. You leave no legal authority to ensure that when the Government "messes up" you have the ability to ensure the curriculum is swiftly replaced. Do you not have a responsibility to your children to make sure you are able to give them the best education possible? Are you not assigning that responsibility to another with no regard to accountability?

You dont have any right to not teach your homeschooled child evolution because it is an independent opinion of the scientists, not the government.

Ummm. Actually I do. Show me where I have consented to have that right removed? The individual retains all rights not assigned to Government. When, where, and how was this assignment made.

If evolution would be some government conspiracy and scientists really would not believe in it, you would have right to do something about it. But thats not the case.

And how would someone go about exercising that right? what is the "something" that I would be able to "do"?