Glad I'm not in Kansas anymore.

Furious

Critical Thinker
F
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
295
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050810/sc_nm/life_evolution_dc

The 10-member board must still take a final vote, expected in either September or October, but a 6-4 vote on Tuesday that approved a draft of the standards essentially cemented a victory for conservative Christian board members who say evolution is largely unproven and can undermine religious teachings about the origins of life on earth.
Click to expand...


I know this has been brewing in Kansas for a while, but I suspect there will be a bit of a whooshing sound as critical thinking biology teachers no longer decide to teach in Kansas schools.

A sad day indeed. :(
 
OK, here's what I really really really want to know.

HOW IN THE HELL CAN PEOPLE WHO FARM FOR A LIVING NOT BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION? Does there not exist somewhere in Kansas a wheat museum with a description of the crappy, barely-edible grasses from which wheat came? Does no one in the state remember the days before they bought Roundup ReadyTM seeds from Monsanto and they had to choose which plants to keep for next year's seed? Do they seriously think that early cows had those huge distended udders and would die if a machine didn't milk them every day?
 
manny said:
Do they seriously think that early cows had those huge distended udders and would die if a machine didn't milk them every day?
Click to expand...

Why, an intelligent designer made them that way of course. Strictly for humans to use, I might add. You obviously haven't researched all available literature on the subject.

It obviously was part of a plan, and you are a close-minded evolutionist to not see that other possibilities should be instructed in a high school classroom.

Not to get too much into stereotypes, but my instinct tells me that ID supporters aren't really into history class or museums either.
 
My training is primarily as an English teacher, and I have devoted four years to this training. However, I also have several credit hours in science and art, as minors, so that I can be qualified to teach those subjects as well.

I still intend to get the remaining credit hours needed for certification in those subject areas. But I will not teach ID, and will not work in a school that requires me to teach ID. If parents want their children to learn about the Christian God, send them to a Christian church.

Never mind any of the other issues associated with this: what about all the various peoples of the world who have their own creation stories? Are we to teach all of those, as well?

Pueblo creationism is vastly different from Christian creationism, is different from Japanese creationism, is different from Xhosa creationism, is different from Mayan creationism. If I am to teach one, should I not, by rights, teach them all?

This all makes me so ill.
 
a_unique_person said:
Australian conservative politicians are jumping on the bandwagon too. Gutless little creeps.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/natio...n-option-nelson/2005/08/10/1123353386917.html

I could not have imagined this ten years ago. Shows how much our current leader, John Howard, has debased the level of political stadards in this country.
Click to expand...

Correction, IIRC, there is also a Labor Party pollie saying it's a matter for the schools to decide. That's why they have been in opposition for ten years, they won't provide an alternative.
 
I think Nelson (australian minister for education and member of the australian christian Taliban) simply wants to reintroduce compulsory "scripture" lessons via the backdoor in the form of "ID"... I think he is just annoyed that students can no longer be forced to sit through religion lessons...
 
I, for one, shall be starting a letter-writing campaign to Brendon Nelson and the press immediately to soundly protest this idiocy. Maybe I will be the lone voice in the wilderness, maybe one of thousands, we shall see.

Science is not about "choice", it is about facts. Something Nelson seems to have forgotten in this sop to his radical Christian backers.
 
(Slingblade)

I still intend to get the remaining credit hours needed for certification in those subject areas. But I will not teach ID, and will not work in a school that requires me to teach ID. If parents want their children to learn about the Christian God, send them to a Christian church.

(New Age)

And yet, you want to be able to teach evolution to more than 90% of the students who would be offended by it.

Why the big need to offend so many?
Is it that most of you want to shove "your" beliefs down other's throats?

Sounds like many of you may be "fundamentalist" atheists.

(Zep)

Science is not about "choice", it is about facts.

(New Ager)

So I guess we don't need to teach the "Theory" of evolution then.
 
New Ager said:

And yet, you want to be able to teach evolution to more than 90% of the students who would be offended by it.

Why the big need to offend so many?
Click to expand...

It's not a need to offend, it's a need to teach science. If they find science offensive, that's their own problem.

It's a phenomenally bad idea to temper science classes out of some fundamentalist Christian political correctness.
 
New Ager said:
(Slingblade)

I still intend to get the remaining credit hours needed for certification in those subject areas. But I will not teach ID, and will not work in a school that requires me to teach ID. If parents want their children to learn about the Christian God, send them to a Christian church.

(New Age)

And yet, you want to be able to teach evolution to more than 90% of the students who would be offended by it.

Why the big need to offend so many?
Is it that most of you want to shove "your" beliefs down other's throats?

Sounds like many of you may be "fundamentalist" atheists.

(Zep)

Science is not about "choice", it is about facts.

(New Ager)

So I guess we don't need to teach the "Theory" of evolution then.
Click to expand...

Lets not teach the Theory of Gravity either. Or the Theory that the Earth is not flat. Or the Theory that the Earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way round.

In fact why don't we just abandon trying to teach the kids anything scientific at all.

If students are offended by reality, tough luck. That's the way the world is and there is no point in pretending otherwise.
 
New Ager said:


And yet, you want to be able to teach evolution to more than 90% of the students who would be offended by it.

Why the big need to offend so many?
Is it that most of you want to shove "your" beliefs down other's throats?

Sounds like many of you may be "fundamentalist" atheists.
Click to expand...

Pure political correctness. Teach people lies and suppress science because some people might be "offended". Gimme a break. You guys are just angry that your silly outdated beliefs are becoming obsolete.

I predict that fundy christians will become just as violent as fundy muslims when their myths are even more marginalized.

So I guess we don't need to teach the "Theory" of evolution then.
Click to expand...

Thanks for being a live demonstration of "conservative" white-trash ignorance.
 
manny said:
OK, here's what I really really really want to know.

HOW IN THE HELL CAN PEOPLE WHO FARM FOR A LIVING NOT BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION? Does there not exist somewhere in Kansas a wheat museum with a description of the crappy, barely-edible grasses from which wheat came? Does no one in the state remember the days before they bought Roundup ReadyTM seeds from Monsanto and they had to choose which plants to keep for next year's seed? Do they seriously think that early cows had those huge distended udders and would die if a machine didn't milk them every day?
Click to expand...

They (not me) believe that there is a difference between micro-evolution and macro-evolution. They define the former as the ability for a specific species to change quite significantly through either random mutations or human-influenced breeding. They define the latter as the animals changing enough that they become a new species.
 
slingblade said:
My training is primarily as an English teacher, and I have devoted four years to this training. However, I also have several credit hours in science and art, as minors, so that I can be qualified to teach those subjects as well.

I still intend to get the remaining credit hours needed for certification in those subject areas. But I will not teach ID, and will not work in a school that requires me to teach ID.
Click to expand...

If it were me, I'd go the other direction and volunteer to teach it. Then I'd say things like "This 'intelligent designer' had very specific things in mind when she designed all life." Then I'd point out that such a designer is not required to be immortal; perhaps she created all this and then died.

But seriously, the kids need to be exposed to someone who has a thorough understanding of evolution - someone who can point out the weaknesses of the arguments against evolution. Don't make the kids suffer because of the foolishness of administrators and board members.
 
New Ager said:
And yet, you want to be able to teach evolution to more than 90% of the students who would be offended by it.
Click to expand...
:(

Oh for crying in the dark. Education is not about offending or not offending. If this is the basis for education then we are screwed because someone will always be offended by something in just about any curriculum.
 
Tony said:
Thanks for being a live demonstration of "conservative" white-trash ignorance.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure of this. Given the username "New Ager" I'm not getting redneck right-wing fundy christian "god did it", but rather loony left-wing healing crystal "space aliens did it". :p

eta: Both camps are anti-science.
 
WildCat said:
I'm not so sure of this. Given the username "New Ager" I'm not getting redneck right-wing fundy christian "god did it", but rather loony left-wing healing crystal "space aliens did it". :p

eta: Both camps are anti-science.
Click to expand...

Upon the first impression, you'd think so (I did). But after reading his first post on this thread, I have reason to think otherwise.
 
New Ager said:
And yet, you want to be able to teach evolution to more than 90% of the students who would be offended by it.

Why the big need to offend so many?
Is it that most of you want to shove "your" beliefs down other's throats?

Sounds like many of you may be "fundamentalist" atheists.
Click to expand...
Others have responded to your post in a sufficient fashion. I must add I find your willful ignorance startling. Perhaps you are being intentionally provocative, but still.
(Zep)

Science is not about "choice", it is about facts.

(New Ager)

So I guess we don't need to teach the "Theory" of evolution then.
Click to expand...
Again, this has been dealt with, but I'll ask you directly: Do you know what a scientific theory is?

Also, for extra credit:

Why do male primates have nipples?
Why do humans possess fingernails and toenails?
Why do humans have light hair growth on much of their bodies?
 
Regnad Kcin said:
Why do male primates have nipples?
Click to expand...
Don't all male mammals have nipples? Male cats do for sure, it's definitely not just primates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom