Science standards under threat in Arizona

[ecco]

The majority of court convictions are not based on forensics but different types of evidence. Like testimony. It is all evidence.

You mean consider testimony like:

But your honor, I was torn between what God was telling me and what Satan told me.
​

-or-

If those are my fingerprints on that gun, then The Devil put them there.

​

That means they do not, in court restrict the search to one type and refuse to consider the other types.

If you are implying that science refuses to consider some types of evidence, please specify what types of evidence science refuses to consider.

 

[dimmesdale]

Now, we actually test our theories and require them to *be* testable.

Don't conflate experimental with historical.

We shouldn't be wasting time with flat-earthers or creationists in a science class.

Evolution is junk science. It is a waste at best. At worst it is evil leading to race wars.

National Socialism is applied biology. Rudolf Hess.

And no, I said absolutely nothing about what can be said or debated *in a debate class*. But science class isn't a debate class. Nor, for that matter, is a math class, nor a history class.

They can and do debate history.

In each, the best of what professionals have to say about the subject is what should be taught.

What should be taught is subjects which prepare students to compete in world markets. Subjects like math proficiency to the minimal level of Algebra 2 for high school grads. In our public schools, some build houses from the ground up. They need to learn subjects and skills which make them college ready. Not waste time on historical claims of animal lineage of man. Propaganda. They don't have classroom time for useless pursuits.

If you want to teach a religious viewpoint, feel free to go to your local church and promote anything you want. That isn't the role of public schools.

It is the folks who pay the freight who determine what is taught and that is at the state and local level. Not courts politicians etc all noneducators who do not pay a dime to local schools outside their districts. Besides they do teach it outside the schools because children have a right from God to know who they are and not be lied to by adults. Adults have an obligation to God to teach them the truth. Your side cannot compete which is why you want censorship. It falls apart under scrutiny. It probably should be a parental obligation to teach their children certain things they need to know like shooting a gun. Atheist mandates are destroying public education and making Christian schools stronger. That means the bottom students get the shaft once again. Less money to public education means fewer teachers and bigger class sizes. There are all kinds of bad consequences for students from low-income families in bad neighborhoods.

 

[BilliardsBall]

So again, provide a standard by which creationism gets taught in science class, but the KKKs views on race don't.

You've dodged this question so many times now, it's obvious you're deliberately ignoring it. The question now is, why?

Personally, I have no problems with teaching the KKK in schools, because I likewise learned about the KKK in schools. The question is moot, though, because the difference is I learned about the KKK and that their ideas were backward and abhorrent in schools, but you and yours instead advocate we learn NOTHING about anyone's religious anything in American schools. A fairly ignorant, culturally insensitive stance, for sure.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Personally I would love to see evolution/creationism taught/debated starting in freshman high school. I'd also like to see Christianity, Judaism, Islam and atheism taught/debated.

I guarantee that any school that did this would be picketed by the Christian Right and a few other groups as well.

Debating Christianity/Islam/Judaism in school? They and I would rejoice! Why do you think I debate at a Religious Forum?!

 

[Polymath257]

Don't conflate experimental with historical. Evolution is junk science. It is a waste at best. At worst it is evil leading to race wars.

I'm not conflating them.

And no, evolution is NOT junk science: it is, in fact, the basis of modern biology and is supported by mountains of evidence, running from paleontology, to genetics, the developmental biology, etc.

National Socialism is applied biology. Rudolf Hess.

Which has nothing to do with modern biology.

They can and do debate history. What should be taught is subjects which prepare students to compete in world markets. Subjects like math proficiency to the minimal level of Algebra 2 for high school grads. In our public schools, some build houses from the ground up. They need to learn subjects and skills which make them college ready. Not waste time on historical claims of animal lineage of man. Propaganda. They don't have classroom time for useless pursuits.

What they should learn is modern science in order to be competitive in the world markets where biology is becoming more and more a factor. I actually would advocate at least beginning Calculus for a requirement for high school. That would barely keep us up with the rest of the world. Knowledge of basic biology, and that means the basics of evolution *is* part of being ready for college.

It is the folks who pay the freight who determine what is taught and that is at the state and local level. Not courts politicians etc all noneducators who do not pay a dime to local schools outside their districts.

Which is part of the problem with the educational system in the US. Instead of having the subjects be determined by professionals in the field, it is determined by politicians who know nothing catering to the ignorance of others who know nothing.

Besides they do teach it outside the schools because children have a right from God to know who they are and not be lied to by adults. Adults have an obligation to God to teach them the truth. Your side cannot compete which is why you want censorship. It falls apart under scrutiny. It probably should be a parental obligation to teach their children certain things they need to know like shooting a gun. Atheist mandates are destroying public education and making Christian schools stronger. That means the bottom students get the shaft once again. Less money to public education means fewer teachers and bigger class sizes. There are all kinds of bad consequences for students from low-income families in bad neighborhoods.

No censorship is being proposed: simply making sure the subjects being taught are representative of what is known in those subjects. God and religion should not be taught in the secular schools, except, perhaps, as part of sociology and cultural studies.

And I agree: we should be supporting public schools much better than we are. Instead of giving tax breaks to religious schools, those taxes should be put into the public schools. Instead of giving tax breaks for churches that have side businesses that compete with others, we should make sure that religious institutions are not taking advantage of their tax-exempt status to game the system (which they currently are).

 

[Jose Fly]

Personally, I have no problems with teaching the KKK in schools, because I likewise learned about the KKK in schools.

So you have no problem teaching the KKK's views on race in science classes.

As twisted as that is, I appreciate your honesty.

you and yours instead advocate we learn NOTHING about anyone's religious anything in American schools

Show where I expressed such a view.

 

[ecco]

Atheist mandates are destroying public education and making Christian schools stronger. That means the bottom students get the shaft once again. Less money to public education means fewer teachers and bigger class sizes.

Betsy Devoss is a proponent of Government support of and funding for Christian schools. Do you really believe Betsy DeVoss is an atheist?

Mike Pence is a proponent of Government support of and funding for Christian schools. Do you really believe Mike Pence is an atheist?

 

[ecco]

Personally I would love to see evolution/creationism taught/debated starting in freshman high school. I'd also like to see Christianity, Judaism, Islam and atheism taught/debated.

I guarantee that any school that did this would be picketed by the Christian Right and a few other groups as well.

Debating Christianity/Islam/Judaism in school? They and I would rejoice!

Really? How often have you gone to a local school board meeting and suggested they should teach comparative religions at the high school freshman level?

Now, please take the time to read the following:

Why comparative religion courses are untenable in American public schools

Which religions do we teach? It’s impossible to teach them all given that there are more than 10,000 species of belief on our planet, and you can’t teach “comparative” religion without at least a broad sampling—including the faiths of eastern Asia, Oceania, and Africa. Too, how do you teach them? You can imagine the squabbles between Sunni and Shia Muslim parents over the relative weights given to these faiths.

And what about the bad stuff that religion has inspired: the Inquisition, the Crusades, ISIS, and the doctrines of many faiths that oppress women, gays, or even unbelievers, as well as terrorize children. Do you neglect those issues, which, after all, comprise one reason to teach religion as a major force in history? How can you understand the colonization of America without understanding religious persecution? How can you teach about religious wars without mentioning the emnity produced by thinking that you, as opposed to your neighbor, have the absolute truth. And how do you deal with the Holocaust? Was that purely a cultural phenomenon?

The American solution, of course, is “fair play”: teach that all religions are not only good, but equally good, and that anything bad associated with them can be imputed not to religious beliefs but to culture. That is, you sanitize the entire endeavor to such a degree that students fail to understand religion.


​

Why do you think I debate at a Religious Forum?!

Well, here's your opportunity. Since you say you would "rejoice!", please comment on the above.

 

[Audie]

Don't conflate experimental with historical. Evolution is junk science. It is a waste at best. At worst it is evil leading to race wars.

National Socialism is applied biology. Rudolf Hess.

They can and do debate history. What should be taught is subjects which prepare students to compete in world markets. Subjects like math proficiency to the minimal level of Algebra 2 for high school grads. In our public schools, some build houses from the ground up. They need to learn subjects and skills which make them college ready. Not waste time on historical claims of animal lineage of man. Propaganda. They don't have classroom time for useless pursuits.

It is the folks who pay the freight who determine what is taught and that is at the state and local level. Not courts politicians etc all noneducators who do not pay a dime to local schools outside their districts. Besides they do teach it outside the schools because children have a right from God to know who they are and not be lied to by adults. Adults have an obligation to God to teach them the truth. Your side cannot compete which is why you want censorship. It falls apart under scrutiny. It probably should be a parental obligation to teach their children certain things they need to know like shooting a gun. Atheist mandates are destroying public education and making Christian schools stronger. That means the bottom students get the shaft once again. Less money to public education means fewer teachers and bigger class sizes. There are all kinds of bad consequences for students from low-income families in bad neighborhoods.

What the (heck) is an atheist mandate?

Wonder btw if you could explain why
students in non religious (see "atheist")
schools in Japan, Korea, Hong Kong,
Taiwan and Singapore so far outclass
American students?

No fair just making up some answer.

 

[Polymath257]

What the (heck) is an atheist mandate?

Wonder btw if you could explain why
students is non religious (see "atheist")
schools in Japan, Korea, Hong Kong,
Taiwan and Singapore so far outclass
American students?

No fair just making up some answer.

If anything, it looks like having to cater to the sensibilities of religious fundamentalists is what is destroying our educational system.

 

[Skwim]

My solution

. ​

 

[Audie]

My solution

View attachment 24380

. ​

Great idea. I will join you.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

You don’t have to take my word for it. Ask any teacher of grades 3-8 if they cover evolution in the year. They will confirm what I said. It is covered each year.

I am a teacher. I know what is being taught in the classrooms today. I know how much time is spent on the various subjects.

We covered it, when I was teaching. And it's true that classroom teaching time is a zero sum game. But compared to some of the other momentous wastes of time that were included in the yearly curriculum, evolution doesn't even go close to making the list of 'time wasters'. Specific religious instruction on the other hand...

 

[BilliardsBall]

So you have no problem teaching the KKK's views on race in science classes.

As twisted as that is, I appreciate your honesty.


Show where I expressed such a view.

How is it twisted to discuss philosophy in science classes? You never took a "philosophy of science class"? You never heard of same?

You think you entrapped me with your "elegant, ineffable question"? I'm a Christian witness who has spoken to rightists and leftists and Satanists and listened. Why do you fear facts and truth in SCHOOL?

 

[Subduction Zone]

How is it twisted to discuss philosophy in science classes? You never took a "philosophy of science class"? You never heard of same?

You think you entrapped me with your "elegant, ineffable question"? I'm a Christian witness who has spoken to rightists and leftists and Satanists and listened. Why do you fear facts and truth in SCHOOL?

Is this just another Dodge on your part? Pretty soon you can open your own dealership.

 

[Polymath257]

How is it twisted to discuss philosophy in science classes? You never took a "philosophy of science class"? You never heard of same?

You think you entrapped me with your "elegant, ineffable question"? I'm a Christian witness who has spoken to rightists and leftists and Satanists and listened. Why do you fear facts and truth in SCHOOL?

Philosophy of science isn't science. it is philosophy. The two are very different subjects. yes, both are interesting, but only the basics of the philosophy should be in the science class.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Really? How often have you gone to a local school board meeting and suggested they should teach comparative religions at the high school freshman level?

Now, please take the time to read the following:

Why comparative religion courses are untenable in American public schools

Which religions do we teach? It’s impossible to teach them all given that there are more than 10,000 species of belief on our planet, and you can’t teach “comparative” religion without at least a broad sampling—including the faiths of eastern Asia, Oceania, and Africa. Too, how do you teach them? You can imagine the squabbles between Sunni and Shia Muslim parents over the relative weights given to these faiths.

And what about the bad stuff that religion has inspired: the Inquisition, the Crusades, ISIS, and the doctrines of many faiths that oppress women, gays, or even unbelievers, as well as terrorize children. Do you neglect those issues, which, after all, comprise one reason to teach religion as a major force in history? How can you understand the colonization of America without understanding religious persecution? How can you teach about religious wars without mentioning the emnity produced by thinking that you, as opposed to your neighbor, have the absolute truth. And how do you deal with the Holocaust? Was that purely a cultural phenomenon?

The American solution, of course, is “fair play”: teach that all religions are not only good, but equally good, and that anything bad associated with them can be imputed not to religious beliefs but to culture. That is, you sanitize the entire endeavor to such a degree that students fail to understand religion.


​

Well, here's your opportunity. Since you say you would "rejoice!", please comment on the above.

Wow, so the article, and your comments, in large part, indicates that religion study should be abandoned in schools, because it's complicated. Let's ease up on STEM in schools, too, because quantum mechanics is complicated, and we don't want to hurt young people by giving them hope they can ever tackle complex subjects.

Why are you here, again?

 

[metis]

Debating Christianity/Islam/Judaism in school? They and I would rejoice! Why do you think I debate at a Religious Forum?!

Why "debate", which can lead to many problems, and not just learn? In my Intro to Anthro class I covered the basics of the five largest religions and never had a problem.

 

[dimmesdale]

We covered it, when I was teaching. And it's true that classroom teaching time is a zero sum game. But compared to some of the other momentous wastes of time that were included in the yearly curriculum, evolution doesn't even go close to making the list of 'time wasters'. Specific religious instruction on the other hand...

The more they spend in class the more they learn. They can do compare analysis based on class time alone. Students do better overall with more yearly class time. So i don't know what you mean by zero-sum. Too much class time is eaten up with behavior problems and teaching kids civil behavior. Things they should be learning at home. Once again, the schools have to pick up the ball because of parental failure. If they study the DOI, they are studying religion indirectly. Rights from God which transcend the rule of kings is straight out of Exodus which is the primary source. That has value and is rooted in our history. Evolution has no applicable value in life. What application value does LUCA have for Students? Will it increase the SAT scores? I would not have gotten a 750 (out of 800) on my math SAT if i did not learn about LUCA in Evo class? Current medicine makes no sense unless we have a detailed understanding of common ancestor mystery creatures? It has no value. They cannot blindly reconstruct mystery creatures based on genetics/bones in the present. The claim is preposterous. The paradigm governs the interpretation of the evidence. The built-in assumptions are already established.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

The more they spend in class the more they learn. They can do compare analysis based on class time alone. Students do better overall with more yearly class time. So i don't know what you mean by zero-sum. Too much class time is eaten up with behavior problems and teaching kids civil behavior. Things they should be learning at home. Once again, the schools have to pick up the ball because of parental failure. If they study the DOI, they are studying religion indirectly. Rights from God which transcend the rule of kings is straight out of Exodus which is the primary source. That has value and is rooted in our history. Evolution has no applicable value in life. What application value does LUCA have for Students? Will it increase the SAT scores? I would not have gotten a 750 (out of 800) on my math SAT if i did not learn about LUCA in Evo class? Current medicine makes no sense unless we have a detailed understanding of common ancestor mystery creatures? It has no value. They cannot blindly reconstruct mystery creatures based on genetics/bones in the present. The claim is preposterous. The paradigm governs the interpretation of the evidence. The built-in assumptions are already established.

Wow...ok.

1) Zero sum game simply means to add something you need to take something away. The school day here is 6.5 hours. Divide it up however you like, it's still 6.5 hours.
2) I have no issue with general religion as a subject to study. Specific religious instruction is a whole different kettle of fish.
3) You are welcome to see science as a giant conspiracy. Take your kids out of the science classroom, much as I would take mine out of specific religious instruction.

You might see education as a way to get a better SAT, but that's only part of what it's about.