Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You may disagree that about evolution being proven science. However, actual science seems to disagree with YOU. There is zero verifiable science behind creationism. Zero as in none. It's a religious theory based on faith. Evolution is a scientific theory. A scientific theory has been through the scrutiny of the scientific process. I don't believe for a second that you don't know the difference between religion and scientific theory. Gravity is a theory too, do you doubt that? If my child were taught creationism as science I'd be in school in a second.
Lying to children about what is and isn't science is far more damaging in the long run than a teacher calling some abstract set of politics stupid.
I've lived in the liberal suburbs of Connecticut and conservative suburbs in Texas. I guess I have some perspective that people who haven't lived in both places have about which area is more tolerant.
Evolution stated man evolved from an ape like creature.
The thing that makes it a theory is the missing link has not been found.
If you accept man evolved from a simian like creature, you still have the problem is where did the simian like creature evolve from. Evolutionary theory is based only in man evolves from ape and does not deal with the origins of all life.
The big bang theory deals with he origin of all life and it is no more provable then creation.
Creationism says man was create by god. Big bang and creationism both take a great deal of faith to believe in in defining the origin of life.
No I don't, and moreover, I didn't say that I did. This teacher handled the controversy inappropriately.
That doesn't mean that kids shouldn't be exposed to controversy, including political controversy, as many here are arguing. I was a teacher myself once upon a time, and felt that it was my responsiblity to present all sides of a controversy, and I did my best to stay neutral about it.
But if a student came up to me after class and asked me what my personal opinion was, I would be honest with them about it, while being sensitive to their beliefs, if they differed.
per se.
Moving on from the Evolution/Creationism thing, as I don't REALLY wish to discuss it - I won't convince you, you won't convince me. The End.
There was no "controversy" in the classroom. There is no debate as to what the responsibilities of the three branches of the government are. The Schoolhouse Rock video, showing how a bill becomes law, does not ask for opinions on the election of 2008. I know that for a fact, even though I haven't viewed it since the early 90s. "I'm just a bill... a lonely old bill and I'm sitting here on Capital Hill"
The only "controversy" was my taking issue with the teacher telling his classroom that I am stupid. Which is what he did. Some can try to gum it up and make this a political debate, but it's not. A teacher should NOT have the right to say those things in a classroom.
Evolution stated man evolved from an ape like creature.
No, it states that we evolved from a common ancestor with other primates.
Quote:
The thing that makes it a theory is the missing link has not been found.
All forms are transitional. "Missing link", while a popular phrase used by Creationists, really has no scientific validity. Moreover, research into endogenous retroviruses has conclusively proven that we are descended from a common ancestor with the other primates. We no longer need a fossil from every generation of every species that ever existed, not that we ever did in the first place.
Quote:
If you accept man evolved from a simian like creature, you still have the problem is where did the simian like creature evolve from.
That is not a problem at all. Primates evolved from pre-existing mammals.
Quote:
Evolutionary theory is based only in man evolves from ape and does not deal with the origins of all life.
Both false and true. It is false that evolutionary biology only deals with humans. Frankly I am shocked that you seem to think so. It deals with ALL life. Plants, animals, everything.
But it is true that evolution does not address the ultimate origins of life on this planet - BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE TO. That is called "abiogenesis" and is a different field of study. Evolution doesn't care HOW life started, it only explains how it developed once it was here. This is a classic Creationist fallacy, refuted so many times that I am always surprised to find people that do not understand it.
Quote:
The big bang theory deals with he origin of all life and it is no more provable then creation.
That has nothing whatsoever to do with evolutionary biology. Nothing. Evolution is a fact, no matter how the Universe began. It is also a theory in the same sense that the Theory of Gravity is a theory. Changes to the theory don't mean stuff starts flying off the Earth, the theory is just an explanation, it does not mean "guess" in scientific language, as so many Creationist like to argue.
Quote:
Creationism says man was create by god. Big bang and creationism both take a great deal of faith to believe in in defining the origin of life.
Faith, yes. But what about evidence?
Do we perform science based on faith, or on facts?
And irrelevant posts like this are the reason I chose to leave that out. This isn't about WHO you support, it's about whether or not an elementary school teacher has the right to use his influence in such a manner.
My wife went back to school and her English professor drank out of an "Obama" coffee mug and wore "Obama for President" buttons in class. Wanna bet if you said or wrote an essay critical of Obama that her grade would suffer?
Moving on from the Evolution/Creationism thing, as I don't REALLY wish to discuss it
I bet you don't.
Quote:
There was no "controversy" in the classroom. There is no debate as to what the responsibilities of the three branches of the government are. The Schoolhouse Rock video, showing how a bill becomes law, does not ask for opinions on the election of 2008. I know that for a fact, even though I haven't viewed it since the early 90s. "I'm just a bill... a lonely old bill and I'm sitting here on Capital Hill"
I think you need to understand that I was responding to posters in this thread that were asserting that children shouldn't be exposed to controversy in school. I think that's a stupid idea that will result in stupid kids.
Quote:
The only "controversy" was my taking issue with the teacher telling his classroom that I am stupid. Which is what he did. Some can try to gum it up and make this a political debate, but it's not. A teacher should NOT have the right to say those things in a classroom.
As I said, I thought the teacher handled the situation inappropriately.
I would have called you "seriously misinformed about science", I think.
My wife went back to school and her English professor drank out of an "Obama" coffee mug and wore "Obama for President" buttons in class. Wanna bet if you said or wrote an essay critical of Obama that her grade would suffer?
Not in my class.
Teachers that cannot grade objectively shouldn't be teachers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"I'm just a bill... a lonely old bill and I'm sitting here on Capital Hill"
