Science standards under threat in Arizona

[Jose Fly]

Did you like the pic? i shared just for you.

I've seen it before.

You do know Darwin predicted race wars between civilized and savage races? Don't ya think the word savage has racist connotations? Anyways, you have a nice day.

So you're simply going to dodge any attempt at getting you to explain what your point is, just like you're dodging scientific data that demonstrates your assertions to be false.

Again I have to wonder if you honestly believe you're representing your faith in a positive way.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

Wwhy should the media give equal time to both sides of an argument when both sides are not equally supported by the evidence?

Because the evidence can be tainted. Also the evidence is spun, not only evidence the popular media is now propaganda in much of "science" and in 75% of media.

Should any ridiculous theory be given equal time in the media?

YES! Its called free speech and its called fair. The 'bad' ideas will go away if they are given equal time or at least a platform. Nothing makes someone that has an off base theory want to stick around forever and argue are someone that is being being humiliated or ignored.

Should flat Rarthers and hollow Earthers be given equal time with conventional geographers? Should anti-vaxxers be given equal time with immunologists and epidemiologists? Should people who believe helicopters work because invisible magic flying monkeys carry them be given equal time with aeronautical engineers?

I answered those remarks in the above replies. Also remember some ideas and theories that were said to be truly nutty have become science fact. Remember too that some of those ideas that seemed silly or downright crazy at the time actually were true enough to be the catalyst to pursue research that are now applied science etc. I will end this reply with two sayings I feel are wise and true* they are ; " In the future what is now science truth will be quaint myths" the other is a quote by Godel ; “I don’t believe in empirical science. I only believe in a priori truth.” Man I admire that strange man...ie Kurt Godel.

* True/truth .....(there is no such thing as 100% truth, even in mathematics)

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

I''m interested in an answer to that question as well.

As I have said before, and yes its been addressed before (by science) but the problem I have is there is not enough time for evolution to produce the change and diversity as written in its current form. Yes there are models where the change just squeaks by for the time given but I want more proof and for science to make like in the lab, real life not a bit of organic stuff, a bacteria shouldn't be too difficult if the life process understood well. Also although its not evolution proper, the question of life itself hasn't been demonstrated. Yes the circumstantial evidence is there still it has not been accomplished in the lab. BTW Vetters work while remarkable used a bacteria that was 'alive', to inject his life-form into, but like the old joke , for vetter to have created life he has to make his own bacteria...

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Because the evidence can be tainted. Also the evidence is spun, not only evidence the popular media is now propaganda in much of "science" and in 75% of media.



YES! Its called free speech and its called fair. The 'bad' ideas will go away if they are given equal time or at least a platform. Nothing makes someone that has an off base theory want to stick around forever and argue are someone that is being being humiliated or ignored.



I answered those remarks in the above replies. Also remember some ideas and theories that were said to be truly nutty have become science fact. Remember too that some of those ideas that seemed silly or downright crazy at the time actually were true enough to be the catalyst to pursue research that are now applied science etc. I will end this reply with two sayings I feel are wise and true* they are ; " In the future what is now science truth will be quaint myths" the other is a quote by Godel ; “I don’t believe in empirical science. I only believe in a priori truth.” Man I admire that strange man...ie Kurt Godel.

* True/truth .....(there is no such thing as 100% truth, even in mathematics)

Free speech guarantees everyone has a right to say what they like. It doesn't guarantee an equal platform. Science works off the available evidence. It doesn't discard evidence because it MIGHT be tainted. If you think some evidence is tainted, prove it.

 

[dimmesdale]

This is nonsense.

An unwelcome eval?

Racism existed loooooong before evolution ever made its way onto the scene.

Knocking down a strawman?

Evolution does't assume that any "race" is inferior to any other.

Civilized and savage denotes inequality. Are you saying civilized and savage denotes equality? They are Darwin words. Blacks were inferior the civilized would exterminate and replace of savage races according to Darwin. Nature alone assumes inequality since equality is a Theistic concept. So lets not steal from Theism.

Rather, it demonstrates that all humans are one biological race.

Well it adapts its story to cultural norms since racism via science in no longer in vogue. It is returning where Whites and Asians are denied via race in spite of academic qualifications. It is called diversity and race preferences even affect STEM education. Grad and medical school. They prefer academic 2nd stringers in med school via race. Science is complicit selling out for cash in the form of grants. Besides race is only one way to single out for vilification. Groups can be singled out for all kinds of reasons. Abuses.

 

[Bear Wild]

An unwelcome eval? Knocking down a strawman?

Civilized and savage denotes inequality. Are you saying civilized and savage denotes equality? They are Darwin words. Blacks were inferior the civilized would exterminate and replace of savage races according to Darwin. Nature alone assumes inequality since equality is a Theistic concept. So lets not steal from Theism.

Well it adapts its story to cultural norms since racism via science in no longer in vogue. It is returning where Whites and Asians are denied via race in spite of academic qualifications. It is called diversity and race preferences even affect STEM education. Grad and medical school. They prefer academic 2nd stringers in med school via race. Science is complicit selling out for cash in the form of grants. Besides race is only one way to single out for vilification. Groups can be singled out for all kinds of reasons. Abuses.

You do not seem to understand how to historical works within the historical background. Darwin was writing in a country and in a time of history when there was the feeling that society was progressing forward. The same can be said for Thomas Jefferson who held slaves not to mention all of the Early presidents who saw the Native Americans as inferior. It was rare at that time to have someone who would feel that less industrialized civilizations as equals. That does not diminish Darwin's work or ideas no more than it would any other form his time.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Don't have a problem with science. Do have a problem with propaganda pretending to be science. Big difference.

Me too. Funny about that.

A lot are doing just that. They are removing their kids from the public schools and putting them in private schools. They are also lobbying to take money with them in the form of vouchers to pay tuition. The money follows the student. That means less public funds for public schools. That means less teachers and services. That means larger class sizes. More stress on underpaid teachers.

I feel sorry for the kids, if they are being removed from public schools due to science curriculum including evolution. I would think that is highly unlikely in terms of being a key driver. Rather, I would think they are reacting to some of the very real problems with American public education as far as I can understand them from the other side of the world.

Heck, i talked to a frontline educator last night who was on her way to the blood bank to sell her blood. It brings her an extra 4 to 500 dollars a month. I was floored. Appalled.

Lucky she is not here, then. We don't pay for blood, it's on a voluntary basis.

So, you all better figure out a way to adapt or do paradigm shifts of your public schools system may be decimated.

There are a lot of things which need to be done, and a lot of complex problems. Inclusion of evolution in the science curriculum isn't one though.

Name one thing which is a better predictor of college success than SAT scores? When they evaluate students for college, it is mostly about SATs. They also go by race preferences, but all that is unscientific garbage. Political meddling, stupidity. The process is not blind or fair even if the SATs are.

No standardized tests are 'fair'. But that wasn't what I meant. I'm one of those hokey old teachers who sees value in education and learning beyond SATs, college entry or whatever else. Call me old fashioned I guess.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Me too. Funny about that.



I feel sorry for the kids, if they are being removed from public schools due to science curriculum including evolution. I would think that is highly unlikely in terms of being a key driver. Rather, I would think they are reacting to some of the very real problems with American public education as far as I can understand them from the other side of the world.



Lucky she is not here, then. We don't pay for blood, it's on a voluntary basis.



There are a lot of things which need to be done, and a lot of complex problems. Inclusion of evolution in the science curriculum isn't one though.



No standardized tests are 'fair'. But that wasn't what I meant. I'm one of those hokey old teachers who sees value in education and learning beyond SATs, college entry or whatever else. Call me old fashioned I guess.

.To be fair many people do not know the difference between a plasma center and a blood bank. People do sell plasma. I have never heard of a blood bank paying for blood.

 

[ecco]

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

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

 

[ecco]

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

You mean where we could teach that 80+% of people who believe Evolution are not atheists?

 

[ecco]

Wow, so the article, and your comments, in large part, indicates that religion study should be abandoned in schools, because it's complicated.

I guess what we should really be teaching is reading /understanding to fundy Christians. Where have I stated "that religion study should be abandoned in schools, because it's complicated. "?

Comon' BB, no ducking and dodging - just show where I said that.

Why are you here, again?

I guess to encourage reading skills among the home-schooled.
To help you with your self flagellating sacrifice.

 

[BilliardsBall]

It's fascinating that in your desire to have creationism taught in science class, you're willing to accept racism also being taught in the same class (and in doing so you write off racism as just "discussing philosophy").


Entrapped? It's a pretty straightforward issue. You're arguing that not allowing creationism to be taught in science class amounts to "indoctrination", and now we see that you feel the same about racism as well. One can only wonder what else you'd allow to be taught.


I suppose before you can make that claim, you'd have to show exactly which "facts and truth" you think I'm afraid of.

Also, I asked you to show where I stated that I didn't want anyone learning about anyone's religion in schools. Can you do that, or are you going to retract your claim? Or were you hoping you could just ignore it and everyone would forget?

I was taught about Nazism and the Holocaust in school, but from the perspective that not only is racism an evil, but that a person's and culture's philosophy(s) can lead to excesses and evils. It was philosophy as well as outright immoral beliefs that led cultured, aesthetic Germany to war atrocities.

I think what bothers me is you are self-led censor and opposed to first amendment freedom, or at least that's how I read it.

"you'd have to show exactly which "facts and truth" you think I'm afraid of."

Let's see, the gospel, the Bible, religion, the KKK, Nazism, racism as a philosophical underpinning, basically anything not science, maybe?

 

[BilliardsBall]

You mean where we could teach that 80+% of people who believe Evolution are not atheists?

You mean where we can teach that despite now a century of indoctrination, still, 50% of Americans disbelieve in macro-Evolution?

 

[dimmesdale]

I feel sorry for the kids, if they are being removed from public schools due to science curriculum including evolution.

Public education has a reputation for being controlled by fanatic naturalists who litigate against the schools whenever the football team takes a knee before a game. Celebrates the defeat of a library book reference in a courtroom. (Dover). This has backlash even with Muslim parents many of whom prefer Catholic education for their children. It depends on which part of the country, the location of the school so there are many variables. As it is, parents will work extra jobs to get their kids out of Public Education and they will lobby the government for refinancing education. They do not sit on the sidelines and are politically active. One of the reasons Trump won. The fact being we compete both for funds and students. Many of the best are being siphoned off to Private Schools.

I would think that is highly unlikely in terms of being a key driver.

It is in certain sections of the country. School safety is another biggie.

There are a lot of things which need to be done, and a lot of complex problems. Inclusion of evolution in the science curriculum isn't one though.

Parents simply don't buy it and i don't blame them. The claims are both outrageous and lacking evidence. Parents view it as lying to children, dehumanizing by telling them they are big-brained apes.

No standardized tests are 'fair'.

Why is the math SAT unfair?

But that wasn't what I meant. I'm one of those hokey old teachers who sees value in education and learning beyond SATs, college entry or whatever else.

Vague and not in dispute but does not address my points. They do these tests in part to evaluate academic readiness and they work overall. These are professionals working in their fields. They need to evaluate student progress. Standardized provides a sober eval of student learning absent grade inflation which is rampant. These kids will be competing in world markets going up against the smartest students from all over the world. If we don't do it right then we fail in our responsibilities to equip them to excel. If we want them running six-minute miles, then we have to get them out to the track field and time them.

 

[ecco]

19th-century evolution was the catalyst for scientific racism in the 20th century since blacks, for example, were considered one step above apes and five steps below the highest human. Any cursory reading of early 20th century writings assumes blacks were inferior subject to disease like smallpox because of defects. Darwin depicts as savages and civilized denoting inequality. All the National Socialists did was apply it since certain were considered congenital defects by race. That is how they could march women and children off to the gas chambers.

Your knowledge of history is as appalling as your knowledge of science.

A few facts you might want to consider:

• It was Christian Whites that brought Black Africans to America 100 years before Darwin
• It was Christian Whites that used the Bible, not Darwin, to justify slavery.
• Hitler justified marching primarily Jewish men, women and children off to the gas chambers by reminding people of the teachings of Christian Reformer Martin Luther.

 

[dimmesdale]

Your knowledge of history is as appalling as your knowledge of science.

I do get sick of unwelcome evals which are logic fallacies.

A few facts you might want to consider:

Translation. Cherry picking.

• It was Christian Whites that brought Black Africans to America 100 years before Darwin

  Blacks captured and kidnapped Blacks and brought them to the west cost of Africa to be sold. You left that out.
  

• It was Christian Whites that used the Bible, not Darwin, to justify slavery.

  It was justified on many grounds including historical precedent. It was opposed based on the Bible including Exodus and prayers to God in the form of hymns like Go Down Moses. You left that out. The early America was in transition.
  

• Hitler justified marching primarily Jewish men, women and children off to the gas chambers by reminding people of the teachings of Christian Reformer Martin Luther.

Missed that part where Luther advocated to murder of Jewish women and children. It was justified in the education community via Darwin and naturalism which assumes race inequality and survival. They simply applied Darwin.~ Exterminate and replace.~ The victims were considered dangerous, including women and children. Equality before God and responsibility to God are all Judeo/Christian Theistic concepts. Somebody mentioned Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson practically predicted the Civil War.

"For in a warm climate, no man will labour for himself who can make another labour for him. This is so true, that of the proprietors of slaves a very small proportion indeed are ever seen to labor. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever . . . ." - Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII5

"The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it. . . ." - Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII6

"Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them." - Jefferson's Autobiography7

 

[Subduction Zone]

You mean where we can teach that despite now a century of indoctrination, still, 50% of Americans disbelieve in macro-Evolution?

What do you mean by a "century of indoctrination"? There have been close to two millennia of indoctrination of the Christian religion. There has been no indoctrination of science. Do you realize that once again you bore false witness against your neighbor? You made a false accusation that you cannot support.

This is why you really should try to learn what you are talking about before getting into a debate.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I do get sick of unwelcome evals which are logic fallacies.

How was that a logical fallacy? Like most creationists you probably do not understand the concept.

Translation. Cherry picking.

Not really, another false accusation.

• Blacks captured and kidnapped Blacks and brought them to the west cost of Africa to be sold. You left that out.

• What does that have to do with the conversation? Remember the warning about logical fallacies, this is a combination of a Red Herring and a Tu Quoque fallacy.

• It was justified on many grounds including historical precedent. It was opposed based on the Bible including Exodus and prayers to God in the form of hymns like Go Down Moses. You left that out. The early America was in transition.

• Yes, the Bible can be used to argue on both sides of almost every issue. That was not the point. You conveniently forgot how God told Moses who they could buy slaves from after the Exodus. The Exodus story was a very racist one. The lesson that one learns from it and the verses that follow it is that enslavement of the Hebrews by others was bad, but the enslavement of others by Hebrews was fine. That sort of attitude justified slavery of the sort that we saw in the south.

Missed that part where Luther advocated to murder of Jewish women and children. It was justified in the education community via Darwin and naturalism which assumes race inequality and survival. They simply applied Darwin.~ Exterminate and replace.~ The victims were considered dangerous, including women and children. Equality before God and responsibility to God are all Judeo/Christian Theistic concepts. Somebody mentioned Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson practically predicted the Civil War.

Where was it justified by the "education community via Darwin"? Please find a reliable source. If you do that I will gladly supply you with quotes by Luther about Jews.

"For in a warm climate, no man will labour for himself who can make another labour for him. This is so true, that of the proprietors of slaves a very small proportion indeed are ever seen to labor. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever . . . ." - Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII5

"The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it. . . ." - Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII6

"Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them." - Jefferson's Autobiography7

Quotes out of context by slave owners is highly ironic. One also needs appropriate links so that others can see the quotes in context. Until then this part of your post is of no value.

 

[ecco]

It was philosophy as well as outright immoral beliefs that led cultured, aesthetic Germany to war atrocities.

Yes, the philosophical views of Hitler based on the
philosophical views of Martin Luther.

Martin Luther's dirty little book

In Mein Kampf, Hitler listed Martin Luther as one of the greatest reformers.

-Martin Luther (On the Jews and Their Lies)
Alas, it cannot be anything but the terrible wrath of God which permits anyone to sink into such abysmal, devilish, hellish, insane baseness, envy, and arrogance. If I were to avenge myself on the devil himself I should be unable to wish him such evil and misfortune as God's wrath inflicts on the Jews, compelling them to lie and to blaspheme so monstrously, in violation of their own conscience.​

 

[ecco]

You mean where we could teach that 80+% of people who believe Evolution are not atheists?

You mean where we can teach that despite now a century of indoctrination, still, 50% of Americans disbelieve in macro-Evolution?

Indoctrination? You mean a few hours of classroom teaching vs years of American Fundamentalist Indoctrination of children beginning as soon as they can walk. The word "indoctrination" is something else you do not understand.

Nevertheless...

My emphasis...

Evolution Is Finally Winning Out Over Creationism, Especially Among the Young
National polls show that creationism is beginning to falter, and Americans are finally starting to move in favor of evolution. After decades of legal battles, resistance to science education, and a deeply rooted cultural divide, evolution may be poised to win out once and for all.

The people responsible for this shift are the young. According to a recent Pew Research Center report, 73 percent of American adults younger than 30 expressed some sort of belief in evolution, a jump from 61 percent in 2009, the first year in which the question was asked. The number who believed in purely secular evolution (that is, not directed by any divine power) jumped from 40 percent to a majority of 51 percent. In other words, if you ask a younger American how humans arose, you’re likely to get an answer that has nothing to do with God.​

Do you see which way the tide is turning? I'm sure you do.