Top home-school texts dismiss Darwin, evolution

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


But they are classified as the same species. Why?

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

 

Which ever one their parents, the one's that raise them and pay for their needs and wants, want them to learn.

I'm talking about science CLASS, not what you teach at home. Several posters here have said that creationist (read: Christian propaganda, not a pan-theistic view of the world) needs to be taught in science CLASS.

I personally don't care if you stunt your child's education at home. They'll pay for it in college, I'm sure. But if some religious zealots ever try to force their skewed worldview on my children in their science class, then the school board will quickly find itself in front of the Supreme Court for violation of the first amendment.

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin

 

But they are classified as the same species. Why?

No, ring species are not members of the same species. They are members of the same genus, but different species, hence why they can't interbreed..

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


Fair enough. Now let me ask you to prove that love exists. Or hate. How about happiness? Some things are self evident. Or is that not allowed. lol. Prove this, prove that. Prove that God does not exist. Can you do that for me. I mean you want proof that he does? But when I ask for proof that he doesn't, you just shake your head. That is what gets me. You say guilty until proven innocent. I say innocent until proven guilty.

reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

Then why are they called Ring SPECIES.

If they are not part of the same species...lmao...then how can that be evidence of one species changing into another?

Did someone observe the change? If so who?

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

 

Fair enough. Now let me ask you to prove that love exists. Or hate.

You...you have heard of psychology and neuroscience, have you not?

Prove that God does not exist.

So, now we have to prove a negative, and the only alternative to NOT being able to prove god does NOT exist, is that he does? You can't disprove that Thor, Zeus, Zoroaster, or the great Juju of the sea are non-existent. Do you believe in them, too? They seem to fit your criteria of being proven to "not, not exist".

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

 

Then why are they called Ring SPECIES.

If they are not part of the same species...lmao...then how can that be evidence of one species changing into another?

Did someone observe the change? If so who?

They are called "ring species" because species is plural, meaning MORE THAN ONE SPECIES. It's really a very basic grammatical concept.

The change wasn't observed, because speciation takes hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of years. Genetic research, however, has shown that the species are intimately related, with a very recent common ancestor. They became divided by geography and then went through diverse speciation due to different geographies.

There are papers, chapters, and whole books written on the salamanders of California and the gulls of the arctic. You should read up on them seomtime.

Originally posted by drwizardphd


Evolution is a fact.

Well no.....its a theory

That's pretty much universally accepted among the scientific and educated community. However, there is still no definite explanation for creation. Evolution is simply the progress life has taken since the point of creation. Evolution does not explain how creation occurred. To think you must believe one or the other is a logical fallacy.

Well hell I guess we can stop right now then..... are you so sure that evolution has been the driving force?

I feel sorry for the children who are not being taught evolution because of their parent's beliefs. They won't ever get the chance to make up their minds, and their understanding of the world will be forever limited.

Compared to the ones who learn nothing in the public schools...hehe I feel sorry for them. Lets see who does better on SAT ACT, collage, post grad etc.

I'm surprised this is even an issue article-wise or thread-wise. Time and time again we hear 'Keep it out of the classroom!' and 'Do whatever you want in your own homes but leave us alone!'

Looks like that is being done in this case so leave them alone, I say. Just more evidence there is MUCH more than meets the eye for this subject and the true intentions of an agenda are exposed.

It has nothing to do with 'do what you will, just keep it away from us' and more to do with 'Egads! You must do what we say or else something is wrong with you.'

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

Originally posted by Conclusion
Which ever one their parents, the one's that raise them and pay for their needs and wants, want them to learn.

Then ok home school them. Do not however ask for a completely unfounded scientific theory to be taught as science in a state school. Separation of church and state, ever hear of it? I'm not american and i've heard of that one. Also what about all the none religious parents? Why should they have their children taught a religious theory?

Once again, science in the science classroom please.

LOL. So I always wondered who was in charge of telling me what I can and cannot do. To you it is unfounded just as to me evolution is unfounded. Don't get your panties in bunch. Let the people vote on it. Or are you one of those people who think you know best for everyone else. How about you teach you kids what you want and we peacefully allow other people to teach their kids what they want. That works for me. I have no problem with science. I actually like it. Evolution however is not a science. It is only a theory to try and explain what life is, and doesn't do a good job in my opinion. It has its good points and bad points. Just like you think of Christianity. You can talk propaganda all you want. I know there are people who say they are Christians and condemn others. Well they will be met with the same condemnation. But I for one, Sir, will not allow their shortcomings to effect my search, knowledge, experiences, views. Just as I will not allow you.

reply to post by Tyler 720

Home school is just the religious(facist) rights answer to the liberal (socialist) lefts brainwashing tacticts.

Neither one teaches the most important thing one could ever learn, how to think for ones self.

The person who can rationaly put together two previous thoughts or ideas into one new unheard of idea is the most dangerous person to each of these obssessive,compusive, destructive , manipulative, overbearing, psychopathic, delusional, mirror images of each other.

I happen to home school one of my three children & I we always use a variety of sources for each subject to ensure he has the ability to draw his own conclusions rather than relying on the interpretation of one author.

Independent thought & creativity are high on my priority lists when it comes to educating my son so please do not lump all home-schoolers together into the religious(facist) group because some of us out here home-school just to make sure our kids get the education that public school failed to provide.

Every child has a goddamn right to learn about evolution, for one simple reason - it is current scientific consensus about lifes origin.

If you consider it false, you have to teach it your child, too, or you should not be allowed to homeschool your child.
Then when your child understands evolution (which I doubt he/she will, when you dont understand it yourself, but he/she has to pass a test or something...), then you can teach whatever creation myth you consider true, but keep it out of school.

My sister was homeschooled, and it was a good thing, but only till her 4 grade, then the stuff gets a little more advanced, and only a professional teacher should teach.

reply to post by AshleyD


I could not agree more.

I applaud you.

reply to post by Conclusion

LOL. So I always wondered who was in charge of telling me what I can and cannot do. To you it is unfounded just as to me evolution is unfounded. Don't get your panties in bunch. Let the people vote on it. Or are you one of those people who think you know best for everyone else. How about you teach you kids what you want and we peacefully allow other people to teach their kids what they want.

Ok. Here is the problem.

No, you CANNOT vote on what your child learns, unless you have a PhD in that subject. There is no place for democracy in science. Science is a dictatorship of scientists.

Do whatever you want in home, but state has a right to teach your child current scientific consensus, including evolution.

Originally posted by Maslo
Every child has a goddamn right to learn about evolution, for one simple reason - it is current scientific consensus about lifes origin.

If you consider it false, you have to teach it your child, too, or you should not be allowed to homeschool your child.
Then when your child understands evolution (which I doubt he/she will, when you dont understand it yourself, but he/she has to pass a test or something...), then you can teach whatever creation myth you consider true, but keep it out of school.

My sister was homeschooled, and it was a good thing, but only till her 4 grade, then the stuff gets a little more advanced, and only a professional teacher should teach.

Who the hell are you to determine what is right for someone else. Live your life and stay out of others. By saying that you are doing exactly the same thing the religion of atheism is accusing Christians of. lol. Hypocrite.

YOU---Teach what I say. The way I want. I am right you are wrong. WA WA WA WA WA.

ME---(softly) hold on....it's ok...shhhh...i've got your bottle...shhh.

Originally posted by Conclusion
Please state the differences in a specific manner.

You have been given the references. Read them and, if you think there are no differences, say so, and explain why. Then we can discuss the matter.

He did not say Socrates taught at a school. Please read more careful.

My apologies; you are quite right. Well, Plato and Socrates are historical fact; there is a plenitude of independent evidence to prove they both existed. The creation story as told in the Bible, on the other hand, is based on no facts whatsoever.

False is your opinion.

On the contrary, the falsity is implicit in the construction of the example. A somewhat subtle point in rhetoric, I fear; not easy to understand.

reply to post by Maslo


So you one of them that agrees the state should own your child. hmmmm. Well when they pay for their needs and wants...and I mean all of them...I will agree with you. Until then, Parents should have all rights to teach their children any peace loving thing they want.

Originally posted by Tyler 720

Neither one teaches the most important thing one could ever learn, how to think for ones self.

This is the single most important point in this thread.

I greatly applaud this statement.

Nothing further to add.

reply to post by Astyanax

You have been given the references. Read them and, if you think there are no differences, say so, and explain why. Then we can discuss the matter.

Ah. Okay I got it. You can't. If you cannot back up your own claims with your own work and proof, please make no such allegations.

My apologies; you are quite right. Well, Plato and Socrates are historical fact; there is a plenitude of independent evidence to prove they both existed. The creation story as told in the Bible, on the other hand, is based on no facts whatsoever.

Lol. You need to understand time is not relative first.

On the contrary, the falsity is implicit in the construction of the example. A somewhat subtle point in rhetoric, I fear; not easy to understand.

No you don't fear yet......lol.....but one day we all will fear.

reply to post by Conclusion

Who the hell are you to determine what is right for someone else. Live your life and stay out of others. By saying that you are doing exactly the same thing the religion of atheism is accusing Christians of. lol. Hypocrite.

I am not a hypocrite. If the situation would be reversed - creationism would be mainstream theory considered true by a majority of scientists, and evolutionism a fringe theory embraced just by me and a few lunatics, my stance would be the same - teach my child current scientific consensus in school, and I would teach him evolution at home.

Who the hell are you to determine what is right for someone else.

Tell me then, who should determine what a child should learn? In my honest opinion, not the parents, but scientists.

Being a parent brings plenty of responsibilities, but little rights. And parents certainly do not have a right to exclude anything from science class.