Evolution Must Be Taught in Public Schools

[Galapagos]

Originally Posted by CraigD

The final condition in Steve’s statement is, I think, critical. Objections to the teaching of ID in non-religious schools by students, parents, teachers, scientists, and civil liberty activists are based on the conclusion that there are not any good points of intelligent design.

This conclusion is due mostly, I think, to a review of the origin of the terms and writings of the leading proponents of the ID movement, which revealed that the representation of ID as a scientific theory was an intentional deception, part of a strategy put forth in a document titled “The Wedge”, intended:[indent]"To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural, and political legacies"
"To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God"

I think you summed up most of my personal objections pretty well above. "Teaching The Controversy" of ID is just a very, very clever way of sneaking creationism into schools. Between The Wedge Strategy and the court rulings, I don't think any reasonable person should be found supporting it.

I think it is also relevant to note that the founder of ID and author of The Wedge Document, Phillip E. Johnson is also an AIDS denier; someone who doesn't believe that AIDS is caused by HIV. It would be absolutely absurd to suggest that either of these fringe ideas be taught to children.

edit- I'd also like to re-post this article by Dan Dennett titled "Show Me The Science" about ID.. I've posted it before, but it's just so good, I think everyone should read it:

Edge: SHOW ME THE SCIENCE by Daniel C. Dennett

Originally Posted by Dennett

PRESIDENT BUSH, announcing this month that he was in favor of teaching about "intelligent design" in the schools, said, "I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought." A couple of weeks later, Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, the Republican leader, made the same point. Teaching both intelligent design and evolution "doesn't force any particular theory on anyone," Mr. Frist said. "I think in a pluralistic society that is the fairest way to go about education and training people for the future."

Is "intelligent design" a legitimate school of scientific thought? Is there something to it, or have these people been taken in by one of the most ingenious hoaxes in the history of science? Wouldn't such a hoax be impossible? No. Here's how it has been done....

[ldsoftwaresteve]

I would like to thank my friends for coming to my aid because they understand that I'm not exactly talking about what some of my pummelers think I'm talking about.

My point of view comes from thinking that people will make the correct choices provided they are aware of their options and they haven't been lied to. I especially like CraigD's response where he showed the fraudulent behavior of one of I.D.'s defenders. I don't like liars of any stripe.

Everyone seems to take for granted the fundamental correctness of the Public School system. I am not one of this group of people, however.

The blatant disregard for the wishes of people who have different worldviews is one of the reasons that public education, as discussed in this thread, is flawed. If the folks whose ideas were not being represented in the school system had the option of not paying for the schools, then I'd have zero problem with teaching evolution as the one and only cause of speciation, etc. But nobody gets to opt out. If someone is getting screwed, something is wrong - or am I the only one that sees that?

Why?

Does anyone remember the cry, 'No taxation without representation!'?

If truth is gained by empirical evidence, where is the empirical evidence that shows Public Education isn't fundamentally flawed? Where is the evidence that says it's correct?

Or is this one of those areas where there isn't any truth and we just go along with what the omniscient experts say is good for us? (which is the tone that some of my 'pummelers' have taken with me. Thanks by the way. )

And the statement that one person made about the people who don't want their kids taught evolution just send them to a religious school - would be valid, if they could take the taxes they paid for 'public education' and put it toward the cost of that schooling. But they don't get to do that. Instead, they get screwed.

Perhaps the correct solution would be to teach no theory related to speciation. Just point the kids to a list of all related theories and tell them to go determine what they think is right.

But, and this is another major problem I have with public education, our kids are taught what to think, not how to think. And this whole thread is a perfect example of that.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by ldsoftwaresteve

The blatant disregard for the wishes of people who have different worldviews is one of the reasons that public education, as discussed in this thread, is flawed.

I disagree. Truth and reality is not a democracy. It's not about what people believe, it's about how nature behaves, and THAT's what I want taught.

I agree that we need to improve our school systems, no disagreement there. However, one of the best ways we can do this is to stop listening to what people who have zero training on the subjects want taught, to throw out the silly religious nonsense and lies, and focus on reality.

As you can probably see, I'm heavily biased toward science.

You don't get to democratize reality, and truth is not decided by how many people believe in something.

Again, we don't teach the stork theory of childbirth, so why is this any different? (hint: it's not!)


I appreciate your concerns about tax dollars and people having a say in how they get spent, but that's a completely separate issue. Right now, those dollars are being spent to pay teachers and to buy books, and I want those teachers accurately representing reality, and those books to be based on evidence and falsifiable predictions.


There is a site I like which handles issues such as this, and they do a far better job of providing information and perspective than I can. Check it out, spend some time clicking through the pages:

About National Center for Science Education
Creationism versus Evolution - Background

Originally Posted by ldsoftwaresteve

Perhaps the correct solution would be to teach no theory related to speciation. Just point the kids to a list of all related theories and tell them to go determine what they think is right.

Absolutely no friggin way! Then the religiots would win. I'm not willing to dumb down the truth because it conflicts with some morons personal belief system. Nature/reality care not what we do or do not believe.

I think I summed this up better way back at post #34 of this thread. I'll repeat that here:

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

Science is not a democracy. It's not about having multiple views, it's about having the most accurate one. Every theory is given a chance, and it is discarded once it's proved it's lack of worth.

Creationists have been given every opportunity to support their belief scientifically, and they have failed each time.

It's like they're bragging about being an amazing soccer player, who should have every right to be on the field with the champs, but each time you put them in front of the net, they miss the goal.

Most of us have just been smart enough to recognize that they'll never hit the goal, and we've chosen instead to spend our time watching the folks who actually know how to play.

Also, Steve, I don't think most kids yet have the working knowledge or mental capacity to separate the wheat from the chaffe all by themselves. At some point, we really do need to designate an expert in the field to point them in the right direction. If we show them a bunch of garbage theories, too many of them will think they are right because they align with the wishful thinking they've been taught since being indoctrinated to their parents religion.

[ldsoftwaresteve]

But for all the science and empiricism backing up Evolution, you still accept public education financed by property taxes and income taxes as a valid institution without having a valid theoretical base to it. There is, after all, a reason that it sucks so bad and it doesn't have anything to do with Evolution or I.D.

I happen to think that everyone should have a PC. I think the government should make and distribute PCs to everyone. Free. Well, they'll build them with tax dollars and then distribute them for free. But everyone should have one whether or not they use it.

Of course, the quality might go down just a tad. Oh well.

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by ldsoftwaresteve

The blatant disregard for the wishes of people who have different worldviews is one of the reasons that public education, as discussed in this thread, is flawed. If the folks whose ideas were not being represented in the school system had the option of not paying for the schools, then I'd have zero problem with teaching evolution as the one and only cause of speciation, etc. But nobody gets to opt out. If someone is getting screwed, something is wrong - or am I the only one that sees that?

I believe Steve misunderstands US constitutional and public law.

To the best of my knowledge, it contains no provision prohibiting “getting screwed” – which I gather in this context means being required ones children to study curriculum offensive to one. The Constitution assures that legislatures and other branches of government cannot do certain things to individuals, such as force us to quarter troops, or imprison or execute us without “due process of law”, express our views (“freedom of speech, or of the press”), or engage or not engage in any particular religious ritual (“the free exercise [of religion]”). Beyond a fairly small but categorically broad lists “privileges and immunities”, Congress and the legislatures of the various states can place many sorts of requirements on us, including, that we attend school in which we are exposed to material offensive to a few or many, paid for with taxes collected from the offended and un-offended alike, so long as it is neither religious (nor, by broader principle of common law, illegal). The only remedy we have against such offense is the political process. We can vote for new legislators (and, where elected rather than appointed, school board members) to repeal the laws enacted and change the policies subjecting students to these offenses. If desired, we can even elect legislators who will legally end public education altogether, leaving education entirely to private individuals, as was the case in the US prior to around 1850.

Originally Posted by ldsoftwaresteve

Does anyone remember the cry, 'No taxation without representation!'?

With the exception of educational resources provided by the federal government (eg: “No Child Left Behind”) to US citizens of US districts and possessions (eg: The District of Columbia, the US Virgin Islands), US citizens vote for the state and federal representatives that determine our taxes and the policies of our public schools. Therefore, I don’t believe this cry applies to the situation we’re discussing.

Originally Posted by ldsoftwaresteve

But, and this is another major problem I have with public education, our kids are taught what to think, not how to think. And this whole thread is a perfect example of that.

This objection illustrates, I believe, a common misconception about US law. The most fundamental US law – the Constitution - in no way guarantees all Americans a good public education, nor even any public education.

That public education is provided and required is due to the actions of our elected legislatures and school boards. Were a majority of legislators and a sympathetic executive (governor on the state level, the President on the federal), or a large majority of legislators supporting such a policy to be elected, public education could simply be ended, with or without a corresponding reduction in taxes, and, as was the case prior to about 1850, individuals or collections of individuals or local government be entirely responsible for their and their children and neighbors’ private educations.

An interesting and, I think, encouraging postscript to the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case is that 8 of the 9 members of the Dover school board were defeated by candidates with stated positions opposing the teaching of ID in the 11/8/2005 election following end of the trial and preceding the decision of the case. Another is that, despite accusations of “left wing” bias from such pundits as television show host Bill O’Reilly, the judge in the case, John Jones is a declared Republican, appointed by Republican President George W Bush. It appears that even self-defined religious social conservatives object to the teaching of Intelligent Design in public school.

[ldsoftwaresteve]

CraigD:

This objection illustrates, I believe, a common misconception about US law. The most fundamental US law – the Constitution - in no way guarantees all Americans a good public education, nor even any public education.

Your erudition amazes me Craig. Honestly.

But we are equating the U.S. Constitution to truth, aren't we?

Incidentally, I would probably not send my children to a school which taught I.D. as the cause of the evolution of species. Just so you know.

My objection to this thread is it accepts as truth or fact that Public Education is valid - and the only proof of that is the fact that a voting process created it. So, am I to accept it as truth because of the fact that enough people voted for it?

It seems amazing to me that on the one hand all of you argue for 'Evolution' based upon the preponderance of evidence proving it, while on the other you accept the idea of Public Education based upon a vote. With nothing to back it up except a majority at the time the vote was taken.

But then again, human action is outside the bounds of truth I guess. Is that what we're saying here?

Let me go further with this, please. Science has abdicated the humanities to religion because we believe we cannot objectively measure such things as goodness or evil. Not having a way to do that 'empirically', we just tossed up our hands and said, 'Here Religion. You take it. It's too f@#king hard for us to figure out."

And then, when a band of religious f#$king fanatics declares war on another band of fanatics, you sit back and say how bad religion is. And please understand that I agree with that. It is bad. But the real crime was when 'science' abdicated the humanities.

You scientists are bitching about something you caused.

[Moontanman]

Real science takes another hit. Myth has won yet again!

New legal threat to school science in the US - opinion - 09 July 2008 - New Scientist

[Nitack]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

Real science takes another hit. Myth has won yet again!

New legal threat to school science in the US - opinion - 09 July 2008 - New Scientist

Wow... this is scary crap. Rather than mandate that ID must be taught, they simply give teachers the ability to teach it alternative theories to evolution.

I am sure it will still be struck down the moment a teacher tries to teach it and a kid's parents sue though. In a public school a teacher is an extension of the government. It will violate the establishment clause and die another fiery death.

How much money has to be wasted fighting the Evangelists attempts to use classrooms as a vehicle for indoctrinating people? Can I sue the Discovery Institute for damages to the education of my children because of all the public funds that had to be used to fight their pseudoscience?

STOP PUSHING YOUR FALSE GOD ON ME! "Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here. "

[ldsoftwaresteve]

Don't make me pay for your schools then.

Let's privatize all schools. Let people who want to donate money to help needy kids and families do that, but don't force people to pay for something they don't believe in.

I do not believe in God but I do not believe in theft either. When you take something from another person against their will to give them something they don't want, you are stealing from them.
It's just plain theft.

But see, this is where science has failed us. Science abdicated the humanities and left it to ... what? a vote?

Science deals with attempting to identify what is true and then we try and fit it into a society based upon ... whim. The whim of the moment. The fact that one group gets superior numbers over the other group. Where's the logic in that?

[Nitack]

Originally Posted by ldsoftwaresteve

Don't make me pay for your schools then.

Let's privatize all schools. Let people who want to donate money to help needy kids and families do that, but don't force people to pay for something they don't believe in.

I find your argument some what hypocritical. Your take objection to forcing people to pay for schools that teach a topic that they don't believe in, evolution, but in order to teach Intelligent Design you would be forcing people who don't believe in that topic to fund it as well. Shouldn't the measure of what is taught in a science class be that it is actually scientific?

You do a disservice to every child forced to sit in that class if you try to pass off ID as actual science. It is not science and the only thing you will accomplish is to further reduce the standards for critical thinking and scientific thought in our general populous.

As I said, Intelligent Design would be acceptable if it is presented for what it actually is, a religious belief. Trying to mask it as science in order to give it more "Truthiness" shows their own lack of faith and fear that they need to lie to preserve their religion.