billvon 2,400 #51 January 12, 2012 >Well, we can sure tell where you stand on the issue ....separate them and >make the issue as divisive as possible. Why do you feel you have to conflate them? They are separate topics and separate tools must be applied. >No, Bill, I'm not going to be led off the deep end with you on your typical >wild-ass extrapolations here. So the only wild-ass comparison you want to make is creationism and evolution. The rest are just dumb. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #52 January 12, 2012 >"The Louisiana law, passed in 2008, allows for the teaching of any concept >that challenges a scientific theory in order to promote thinking by >students. " It would be fun to see what happens in Louisiana if an activist group gets hold of that law and uses it to require teaching of Sharia Law as an challenge to US law in civics classes. To promote thinking by students of course. Might have a few heads exploding. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,255 #53 January 12, 2012 QuoteCreation vs Evolution is such a divisive issue How PC of you. Wussing out of offending people instead of teaching what's right. QuoteIf you only teach one, then you're gonna wind up with a programmed tool instead of an educated, thinking human. Absolutely right, if you teach one - that one being creationism. The solution is to teach the other instead. QuoteSuppose physics majors were only taught Newtonian physics...they will be at a great disadvantage when they hit the real world. Suppose Political Science majors were only taught democracy. Again, they are going to have a hard time dealing with the real world. Suppose History majors were only taught American history? Again.... How are those even remotely approximate? Democratic and non democratic governments both exist. American history and global history both exist. Evolution happens and creationism/ID doesn't.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #54 January 13, 2012 QuoteYour post implies that Evolution and Creationism are equal. No, your misunderstanding and proclivity for extrapolation is the problem. Nice to think that you are an expert on "logic" and are able to make a determination on others, though. Can you explain why you think dividing people into separate groups is going to promote understanding on either side of the issue? I open. Science is already a required class in public schools. Do you think it's a good idea to make it a requirement to establish a religion class as a required subject in public schools? That would support your need for separate learning opportunities, right? Why the need for a separate class in public schools anyway? We already have that separation going on....science in school, religion in church. Maintaining status quo is going to help?My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #55 January 13, 2012 QuoteQuoteWell, we can sure tell where you stand on the issue ....separate them and make the issue as divisive as possible. Got it. OK...you prefer separate classes. I prefer same class to simplify the effort to contrast and compare and give them an opportunity to discuss together. Which version of creation should be taught? There are so many and they are all equally as likely be valid. What kind of question is that? I dunno...you tell me. How many religion classes do you want to create? How many versions of History do you want to teach? How many versions of Political Science do you want to teach? Do you not think that any topic could be taught in general terms or do you only think in terms of all-in-one detailed specifics? OK...now I get silly: Oh wait....we have that already....Science 101, Science 201, Science 301. Or, are you thinking in terms of Science 2,000,501 terms? One class covers all for everybody? "Move over BMOC and let the 7,281 first-graders sit down."My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #56 January 13, 2012 Once again *WHOOSH*My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #57 January 13, 2012 Quote Why do you feel you have to conflate them? They are separate topics and separate tools must be applied. As I stated before....promote understanding. Simple as that. If you can't talk about two different things without confusing the two, then it's not the subjects that are the problem. >No, Bill, I'm not going to be led off the deep end with you on your typical >wild-ass extrapolations here. Quote So the only wild-ass comparison you want to make is creationism and evolution. Show me where you get the idea that I am comparing the two. More extrapolations, maybe? OK...since you insist: Providing a learning opportunity allows others to compare and contrast. Compare and contrast in no way means "equate". It is simply a learning tool. One cannot form a valid opinion about Creationism and Evolution unless you know something about each. Anything else is blind obedience to what you are being told. Simple as that. You want separate classes? We already have that and what has it bought us? Lots of wasted air being blown off the top of soap boxes in argument. My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #58 January 13, 2012 Quote>"The Louisiana law, passed in 2008, allows for the teaching of any concept >that challenges a scientific theory in order to promote thinking by >students. " It would be fun to see what happens in Louisiana if an activist group gets hold of that law and uses it to require teaching of Sharia Law as an challenge to US law in civics classes. To promote thinking by students of course. Might have a few heads exploding. Probably, nay, for sure it would. Some don't want people in classes learning about anything other than what they themselves want them to learn. Now where have we seen that before?My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,255 #59 January 13, 2012 QuoteOnce again *WHOOSH* Once again, since that's the only thing you have to say on the subject, how can you possibly pretend to know what you're talking about. Your ignorance is frightening. You're the damned poster boy of why creationism is kept out of science classes - people like you end up thinking it's equivalent to science.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #60 January 13, 2012 QuoteQuoteYour post implies that Evolution and Creationism are equal. No, your misunderstanding and proclivity for extrapolation is the problem. Nice to think that you are an expert on "logic" and are able to make a determination on others, though. Can you explain why you think dividing people into separate groups is going to promote understanding on either side of the issue? I open. Science is already a required class in public schools. Do you think it's a good idea to make it a requirement to establish a religion class as a required subject in public schools? That would support your need for separate learning opportunities, right? Why the need for a separate class in public schools anyway? We already have that separation going on....science in school, religion in church. Maintaining status quo is going to help? Well schools usually have seperate classes for each type of class. Creationism is a part of religion not science. It's not another side of an issue. Evolution is a part of science. I will say it again. Evolution and Creationism are not two sides of an issue. One is science the other is religion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #61 January 13, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteWell, we can sure tell where you stand on the issue ....separate them and make the issue as divisive as possible. Got it. OK...you prefer separate classes. I prefer same class to simplify the effort to contrast and compare and give them an opportunity to discuss together. Which version of creation should be taught? There are so many and they are all equally as likely be valid. What kind of question is that? I dunno...you tell me. How many religion classes do you want to create? How many versions of History do you want to teach? How many versions of Political Science do you want to teach? Do you not think that any topic could be taught in general terms or do you only think in terms of all-in-one detailed specifics? OK...now I get silly: Oh wait....we have that already....Science 101, Science 201, Science 301. Or, are you thinking in terms of Science 2,000,501 terms? One class covers all for everybody? "Move over BMOC and let the 7,281 first-graders sit down." Your logic is very flawed. You are the one who thinks that creationism should be taught in science classes. So which creationism do you think should be taught? There are so many. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 340 #62 January 13, 2012 Hi Andy, I think I get where you are coming from. One problem that I see, though, is that those who believe in Creationism would likely not be very happy about the treatment it would get in a science class, even if the instructor were to be careful to avoid the topic of the existence/nonexistence of God. If I were to be compelled to teach creationism/intelligent design alongside evolutionary biology, the only possible outcome would be a meticulous exposition of why creationism is not science and why it explains nothing on a useful level. I would also be compelled to raise questions such as why God bothered to create all those nasty disease-causing parasites, why He made women so that they suffer a much higher rate of death in childbirth than any other primate, etc. The only possible way to make creationism appear to have equal footing would be to dumb down evolutionary biology to "From goo to you through the zoo" so it can stand alongside "God did it", and that I would never do. Frankly, students could very well come out of such a class with very serious doubts about their faith that they didn't have coming in. While that might not be an undesirable outcome (in the sense that faith is deeper when people have actually thought about what their beliefs entail, instead of blindly parroting of dogma), I suspect parents and the public (at least here in Georgia) would see things differently. There is also a first amendment issue to consider. The courts have ruled repeatedly (and correctly IMHO) that creationism and intelligent design are inherently religious beliefs. Since there is no way to contrast creationism with evolution without having creationism come off much the worst, doing so at a state-funded university (or any publicly funded school) could and probably would be challenged as a state-funded attack on a religion, which would be unconstitutional. I once informally suggested teaching a course that would present the arguments for creationism/young Earth etc, one at a time, each argument followed by a rebuttal from a scientist in an appropriate discipline (biology/geology/astronomy). I was told such a course would certainly be challenged on constitutional grounds, so I didn't pursue it any further. It's a shame really, as it would be a great vehicle for presenting the explanative power of science vs the lack of any power of creationism to explain anything beyond "God did it, and mere humans can't begin to understand how He did it". Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #63 January 13, 2012 >As I stated before....promote understanding. Simple as that. If you >can't talk about two different things without confusing the two . . . Just two? What about the Islam creation myth? The Norse? The Egyptian (remarkably similar to the Chrisitian one) The Greek? The Hindu? The Iroqois? The Inuit? Why teach just two? Why not teach all of them and let kids make up their minds? Sure, it would take weeks - but if that's what it takes to create clear thinkers, isn't it worth sacrificing (say) algebra? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 186 #64 January 13, 2012 Quote>As I stated before....promote understanding. Simple as that. If you >can't talk about two different things without confusing the two . . . Just two? What about the Islam creation myth? The Norse? The Egyptian (remarkably similar to the Chrisitian one) The Greek? The Hindu? The Iroqois? The Inuit? Why teach just two? Why not teach all of them and let kids make up their minds? Sure, it would take weeks - but if that's what it takes to create clear thinkers, isn't it worth sacrificing (say) algebra? I understood there would be no math. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
