Darwin's Theory Of Evolution

[Fantasea]

I apologize,

Apology not necessary.

but there are people that see "Jesus" as a business, other than a savior.

This has always been popular; but the availability of TV has broadened the scope and increased the audience exponentially. These folks capitalize on the vacuum in their lives felt by the many who have fallen away from their church and haven't the courage to return. So, they succumb to the dialogue which is specifically concocted to appeal to that group.

Then other than the Jesus ban wagon, on the other side we have the Darwin wagon. They don't need heal anyone, nor do they need to, since they have a stronghold on our schools. Like I have posted in other posts, we all know recruiting childern is the worst exploitation of our childs lives, to promote our own ideas. Using minds that are not fully developed, would be easier to brainwash them because they don't know any better with the information they have in their early childhood. But I still wonder why we can promote "Evolution" but Bahumbug any other teachings in our schools. It just seems like a double standard!

Since there is a religious component to the question, and since the beliefs of the families of the school children vary, my belief is that the subject should be ignored in the public schools. Creationism can't be taught and evolution should not be inflicted upon them.

Interested kids can find plenty of information in libraries and on line.

 

[nkgupta80]

evolution is relavent in biology and medicine, which is relavent to progress in healthcare and cure for diseases. Creationism certainly isn't.

 

[Busta]

evolution is relavent in biology and medicine, which is relavent to progress in healthcare and cure for diseases. Creationism certainly isn't.

Everyone would benefit from the lack of confusion, potential arguing, personal insults and word wars that would be avoided if, when you are discussing evolution, you say exactly what what form of evolution you are referring to.

Natural Selection, Adaptation, Mutation and Origin of Life are all distinct forms of evolution.
Creationism conflicts with Origin of Life and prehistoric human Mutation, but not Natural Selection, Adaptation nor current Mutation.
Seeding only conflicts with Origin of Life and not anything ells.
Intelligent Design (rather by God or Aliens) only conflicts with Origin of Life and a very small part of Mutation.

When converting the parameters of your speech to speak in scientific terms, be sure to only use scientific terms and to use them accurately. There are differences between Conjecture, Hypothesis, Theory and Law. Be sure not to use the words "conclusive" or "proof" in place of "supporting" or "evidence". Science can never conclusively prove anything, it can only present supporting evidence.

When converting the parameters of your speech to speak Theologically, be sure to use the correct term for what subtype of theology you mean. Faith, Religion and Church all have very different meanings. One can have Faith without Religion or Religion without Faith. Neither Faith nor Religion are required to belong to a Church. No one needs to be in possession of Faith, Religion or a Church in order to express morality. Atheism can be easily confused as either "there is no God" or "I have no faith one way or another". The name "God" refers to the soul of the universe, the creator and the eternal being all at once. "YAWA" and "Allah" mean the exact same thing as "God".

Be sure to clarify exactly what you mean.

 

[stsburns]

Apology not necessary. This has always been popular; but the availability of TV has broadened the scope and increased the audience exponentially. These folks capitalize on the vacuum in their lives felt by the many who have fallen away from their church and haven't the courage to return. So, they succumb to the dialogue which is specifically concocted to appeal to that group. Since there is a religious component to the question, and since the beliefs of the families of the school children vary, my belief is that the subject should be ignored in the public schools. Creationism can't be taught and evolution should not be inflicted upon them.

Interested kids can find plenty of information in libraries and on line.

Fine with me! :comp: I believe that peoples beliefs should be equally reprensented in schools. Schools open to any religion or belief.

 

[Dogger807]

Fine with me! :comp: I believe that peoples beliefs should be equally reprensented in schools. Schools open to any religion or belief.

[FONT=&quot]Does this include the belief that all religions are man made explanations of existence with no basis in fact or reality?[/FONT]

 

[stsburns]

[FONT=&quot]Does this include the belief that all religions are man made explanations of existence with no basis in fact or reality?[/FONT]

:spin: It's things like that that start religious wars, or forced believers. They were forced join their belif or die. History has shown both Muslims and Catholics have forced whole civilizations into believing their God. But as for schools, they should be able to teach every crack pot theory out there, man made or not! Unless you like unrest?

 

[Dezaad]

Apology not necessary. This has always been popular; but the availability of TV has broadened the scope and increased the audience exponentially. These folks capitalize on the vacuum in their lives felt by the many who have fallen away from their church and haven't the courage to return. So, they succumb to the dialogue which is specifically concocted to appeal to that group. Since there is a religious component to the question, and since the beliefs of the families of the school children vary, my belief is that the subject should be ignored in the public schools. Creationism can't be taught and evolution should not be inflicted upon them.

Interested kids can find plenty of information in libraries and on line.

So, in summary, where science, or any subject for that matter, conflicts with religious belief, it should not be taught? There is, after all, potentially a religious component to any question. For example, Astronomy teaches that, because Physics teaches that light travels at a certain constant speed, it is a fact that the Universe is far older than some Creationists would allow. Are you going to disallow the teaching of Physic's discoveries about the nature of light? It is irrelevant that as a Christian, you may not believe the 'literal' creation account. Some do, and therefore it is a religious question.

Religion should be summarily ignored when considering what to teach in Science classes.

 

[Fantasea]

:spin: It's things like that that start religious wars, or forced believers. They were forced join their belif or die. History has shown both Muslims and Catholics have forced whole civilizations into believing their God. But as for schools, they should be able to teach every crack pot theory out there, man made or not! Unless you like unrest?

When, nationally, barely 70% of kids in the public system manage to graduate from high school, because, for the most part, they were never taught to read to grade level, 'that' is the problem which requires concentration of effort, not some pie in the sky attempt to drill evolution into their heads.

Teachers, being up to their ass in proliferating politically correct alligators, are unable to attend to the primary mission, which is to drain the swamp.

 

[Dezaad]

When, nationally, barely 70% of kids in the public system manage to graduate from high school, because, for the most part, they were never taught to read to grade level, 'that' is the problem which requires concentration of effort, not some pie in the sky attempt to drill evolution into their heads.

Teachers, being up to their ass in proliferating politically correct alligators, are unable to attend to the primary mission, which is to drain the swamp.

That is indeed a problem. But the solution is hardly ending the teaching of scientific theories. Nor is the solution introducing non-scientific conjecture into science classes.

 

[Fantasea]

Originally posted by Fantasea:
Apology not necessary. This has always been popular; but the availability of TV has broadened the scope and increased the audience exponentially. These folks capitalize on the vacuum in their lives felt by the many who have fallen away from their church and haven't the courage to return. So, they succumb to the dialogue which is specifically concocted to appeal to that group. Since there is a religious component to the question, and since the beliefs of the families of the school children vary, my belief is that the subject should be ignored in the public schools. Creationism can't be taught and evolution should not be inflicted upon them.

Interested kids can find plenty of information in libraries and on line.

So, in summary, where science, or any subject for that matter, conflicts with religious belief, it should not be taught? There is, after all, potentially a religious component to any question. For example, Astronomy teaches that, because Physics teaches that light travels at a certain constant speed, it is a fact that the Universe is far older than some Creationists would allow. Are you going to disallow the teaching of Physic's discoveries about the nature of light? It is irrelevant that as a Christian, you may not believe the 'literal' creation account. Some do, and therefore it is a religious question.

Religion should be summarily ignored when considering what to teach in Science classes.

Actually, the quote is from a post I wrote, so I'll respond.

Much of the confusion lies with the lumping together of all "Creationists" among whom there are undoubtedly thousands of competing ideas, theories, and beliefs.

Which one should be considered correct? And who is competent to decide which is correct? Should more than one be considered correct? A dozen? A hundred?

What is your understanding of the 'literal' creation account? Perhaps this is where the divergence occurs.

Perhaps you can convince me that I erred when I wrote, "Creationism can't be taught and evolution should not be inflicted upon them."

 

[Fantasea]

Originally Posted by Fantasea
When, nationally, barely 70% of kids in the public system manage to graduate from high school, because, for the most part, they were never taught to read to grade level, 'that' is the problem which requires concentration of effort, not some pie in the sky attempt to drill evolution into their heads.

Teachers, being up to their ass in proliferating politically correct alligators, are unable to attend to the primary mission, which is to drain the swamp.

That is indeed a problem. But the solution is hardly ending the teaching of scientific theories. Nor is the solution introducing non-scientific conjecture into science classes.

What is the point of wasting time and effort in the attempt to teach the concepts of X, Y, and Z, to students who haven't been taught to master the practices required by A, B, and C?

Scientific theories taught at elementary and secondary level are ineffectual because they barely scratch the surface, and in most instances resonate solely with those few who fit the description of 'the nerd'.

If there is a primary goal in the public education system, it is to ensure that all students are sufficiently well qualified to graduate from high school. Anything which impedes the achievement of this goal should be stripped away.

Devoting more time and effort to the essentials would lower the atrociously high dropout rate, raise the abominably low graduation rate, and spur more to go on to college where it makes perfect sense to teach and explore scientific theories in the depth and breadth that is required to fully understand and appreciate them.

There are many, many important educational subjects which are correctly reserved exclusively to post-secondary institutions. Why not, then, the important subjects relating to "The Origin of Man"?

As I see it, that way, everybody wins, nobody loses.

 

[stsburns]

When, nationally, barely 70% of kids in the public system manage to graduate from high school, because, for the most part, they were never taught to read to grade level, 'that' is the problem which requires concentration of effort, not some pie in the sky attempt to drill evolution into their heads.

Teachers, being up to their ass in proliferating politically correct alligators, are unable to attend to the primary mission, which is to drain the swamp.

Why not! Someone is going to drill into to their heads, schools are just taking advantage of their opportunity. About today's High Schoolers, their are many things that come into play, of why a student drops out of school. Drugs, Laziness, Arrested, etc... I want to ask you how did "reading level" get invovled in the discussion of Evolution? How does it relate? What do you mean by "Drain the swamp?"

 

[Fantasea]

Why not! Someone is going to drill into to their heads, schools are just taking advantage of their opportunity. About today's High Schoolers, their are many things that come into play, of why a student drops out of school. Drugs, Laziness, Arrested, etc... I want to ask you how did "reading level" get invovled in the discussion of Evolution? How does it relate? What do you mean by "Drain the swamp?"

The bare fact is that with few exceptions, those who eventually drop out can be identified years earlier just by observing their behavior and attitude toward school.

A kid in the first grade, as all kids are, is anxious to fit in, to belong, to be respected by other kids. As time passes, so long as he keeps up with the class, problems are minimal.

The fourth grade is usually the tipping point.

A kid in the fourth grade, who cannot read the text books on which lessons are based, and can't read the questions on test papers can no longer keep up with the class and understands that he doesn't fit in, doesn't belong, and is not respected by other kids. This is the kid who acts out this distress by assuming the part of the class clown or if he has the physical size, the class bully.

These kids tend to congregate and gang formations of one kind or another commence. They give up on school and yearn for the day when they can legally drop out. Many are content to join the ranks of minimum wage earners because their horizon is so short. They can't see far enough ahead to understand that they have been sentenced to a life of under-achievement.

Others, not content with that limitation, seek other means to increase their income. Look at the prison population and you will find that the overwhelming majority of inmates have one thing in common; they are poorly educated and most have never finished school.

The primary teaching mission, year by year, is to see to it that the student is fully prepared to move on to the next year. That is draining the swamp.

The alligators are all of the politically correct distractions which prevent that from happening.

Reading is the keystone upon which all learning depends. Without it, nothing, absolutely nothing else can occur.

I believe the relationship between reading and teaching evolution should now be apparent.

I seem to recall a comment about reserving evolution for the post-secondary schools where it can be understood, debated, and appreciated.

Prior to that, it's a waste of time and effort. The surface can barely be scratched at the high school level, and the if there is any interest in the subject, it will be limited to those who the other kids refer to as "the nerds".