Evolution Must Be Taught in Public Schools

[Pyrotex]

I'm telling you guys, this is the most important presidential election I have seen in my lifetime (with the possible exception of Kennedy vs. Nixon). There is probably more at stake on this one than for any election in the 20TH Century. There is more to win and WAAAAAAYYYY more to lose if we wind up with the wrong person in charge.

We could well see the end of the "American Experiment", our citizens slowly retreating back into a state of ignorant and uneducated bliss, unable to distinguish between superstition and knowledge, between astronomy and astrology -- gullible victims of every "fat-burner pill", "perpetual motion machine", "herbal cure" and "aura manipulation" con that comes down the pike. Our technological infrastructure will slowly fall apart, and we will sink down into tribalism, book burnings and petty crusades.

And the future colonists on Mars and the Moon will all speak Chinese.

[Nitack]

Originally Posted by Pyrotex

I'm telling you guys, this is the most important presidential election I have seen in my lifetime (with the possible exception of Kennedy vs. Nixon). There is probably more at stake on this one than for any election in the 20TH Century. There is more to win and WAAAAAAYYYY more to lose if we wind up with the wrong person in charge.

We could well see the end of the "American Experiment", our citizens slowly retreating back into a state of ignorant and uneducated bliss, unable to distinguish between superstition and knowledge, between astronomy and astrology -- gullible victims of every "fat-burner pill", "perpetual motion machine", "herbal cure" and "aura manipulation" con that comes down the pike. Our technological infrastructure will slowly fall apart, and we will sink down into tribalism, book burnings and petty crusades.

And the future colonists on Mars and the Moon will all speak Chinese.

The problem Pyrotex, is that both candidates are equally problematic. One is pandering to the religious right (McCain), despite their war on science. The other is pandering to the populists (Obama), not caring that all the government programs are economically unsound and will drive us into bankruptcy. They both suck ass here.

[Kayra]

While I would find the teaching of creationism in public schools or ID in a science classroom anywhere ludicrous right from conception all the way to implementation, I have come to the conclusion that globally the scientific process is an amazingly self righting mechanism, and reason far more widespread in the general populace then most in this forum believe.

Those that choose to believe will believe regardless of the facts. Those requiring some semblance of reason and logic in a scientific discussion would likely lend themselves to Evolution.

As proof of this, many "Religious" countries produce excellent scientists and provide deep and meaningful contributions to the world of science.

The greatest concern I have is the teaching of these concepts before the student is capable of the required level of critical thinking to be able to establish the difference between a scientific theory (and all the bonuses and shortcomings theories entail) and a that of a religious fable recently constructed with a purpose contrary to reason and logic.

With the inclusion of ID in a science classroom I suppose more people would see it as a legitimate concept, but I would think that science would not be the worse for the loss of such folk.

Destruction of the legal doctrine of "Separation of church and state" is a drastically different matter and the repercussions of this should be carefully considered.

Consequences of this may include (but are most certainly not limited to):

• Reversal or destruction of the very first amendment to your constitution.(Think on that)
• Increased intolerance of those NOT of the Christian belief
• Eventually granting the government the right of authority over individual conscience(monstrous consequences)
• Increased sway of a religious organization over the policies of the entire country. While some would say this is what the country needs, it would only be those of the "correct" faith saying so.

As Thomas Jefferson wrote "legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions".

Violate this basic tenant of your constitution with great care.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by Pyrotex

I'm telling you guys, this is the most important presidential election I have seen in my lifetime (with the possible exception of Kennedy vs. Nixon). There is probably more at stake on this one than for any election in the 20TH Century. There is more to win and WAAAAAAYYYY more to lose if we wind up with the wrong person in charge.

We could well see the end of the "American Experiment", our citizens slowly retreating back into a state of ignorant and uneducated bliss, unable to distinguish between superstition and knowledge, between astronomy and astrology -- gullible victims of every "fat-burner pill", "perpetual motion machine", "herbal cure" and "aura manipulation" con that comes down the pike. Our technological infrastructure will slowly fall apart, and we will sink down into tribalism, book burnings and petty crusades.

And the future colonists on Mars and the Moon will all speak Chinese.

Most of the time these days I would feel lucky if there were any space colonists at all As long as it's a human language I feel it's a plus. But you are correct and not just because of the erosion of science but the religious right seems to be convinced the Earth is the only place we should be and that when god comes back all the stuff we've destroyed will be brought back and fixed. Wow, dinosaurs in my back yard! This BS must end with out a religious war that will kill us all.

[Galapagos]

The trouble is as big as everything else over in Texas:
The Atheist Experience: Crippled dogs and one-trick ponies

Originally Posted by Martin

I've just returned from the Texas SBOE hearings on Science TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills) standards, and I'm so full of disgust and dismay that I'm at a loss for words to express it with enough rancor. You can, however, expect me to go on at length anyway. The whole thing was such a goddamn farce from the outset that I'd had more than enough after only one hour, at which point I could only roll my eyes and walk out the door. If you haven't encountered the gall and dishonestly of creationists on their own turf before, and even if you have many times, it's always the kind of experience that leaves you feeling worse about humanity in general.

I wonder if any of our few Texan Hypogaphers are attending. When the "Academic Freedoms" garbage rolled through my state, I was too far from any of the meetings to attend.

[riper]

Originally Posted by Lemon

Living in Bible thumping Alaska, I'm always amazed at peoples ignorance when it comes to evolution. I don't understand how they can believe that Jonah lived in a whale, and then completely deny that evolution is even possible.


Evolution won't be taught a lot of areas, until there is strong leadership advocating that it is possible, right now religious zealots picket on the platform of hositility with science, perhaps if there was leadership talking about how maybe the two can coexist, there would be steps moved to allow evolution in schools.

People dont believe in evolution because they always believe what they want to believe. Even the same Bible that you live in is not the same as it was the very day it came into being. It has been changed into what is more convenient for people.
this is one of the reasons why we face a lot of problems in the world. Instead of looking at what is actually there, we create our own believes that match with our desires. For example, no body said that hanging a cross with Jesus on your neck is going to protect u from evil but yet a lot believe it will.
Evolution denies the very first thing that is writing in the Bible. But it does not denies God.

[pamela]

hello Riper,
yes people will believe what they choose, no doubt.
But there is something to be said for interpretation. You stated that "evolution denies the very first thing written in the bible" and of course that would mean God. I believe what we are addressing here is the evolution of man. With that being said, God created man from dust: what's in dust? If we look beyond the statement that God created man as if in a poof, then maybe we can ascertain that those items found in the earth and subsequent dust are the very things that make up the evolutionary process. From the most simplest organism to variation to adaptation to reproduction and or mutation can lead to the existance of what we know as mankind. What is a day? That God created man on the sixth day-what is that measurement to God? God does not run on man's time table and it would be ludicrous to think he does. Any logically minded person would agree that the earth is not six-seven thousand years old yet mainstream Christianity would want you to believe that.To take the bible in its most literal form is a recipe for disaster, and I believe that history has proven that. There is absolutely no reason why evolution should not be taught in schools. The mindset needs to change. It is these people who would prevent this from happening are the same ones who choose to put God in a box. A god that they have created as opposed to a creator.Science is science and religion is religion they are separate but can coexist, as long as minds remain open and not constrained to interpretation.

[Pyrotex]

Hi Pam,
everything you said is pretty much true. But Riper has a point, I think. Or he reminded me of a point.
The big reason that educational organizations cannot educate children about the fundementals of biology (aka, evolution) is that critical thinking is required. The teachers don't have it and cannot defend teaching evolution. The parents don't have it and are free to use any substitute for critical thinking they have at hand. For example, appeals to authority ("my preacher says the Bible tells us..."), anecdotal evidence, ("I heard that one of them evolutionists at a college openly condemned the Bible as garbage..."), urban myths ("those human and dinosaur footprints they found right here in Texas proves that..."), falsified facts ("My church showed that when college kids believe in evolution, they're twice as likely to have oral sex with..."), stupid pseudo-facts ("Those evolutionists can't even agree among themselves, so the whole thing must be bogus..."), and on and on and on.

And there's nobody there to refute this STUFF. Everybody nods their head. Yup. Makes sense to me.

Unfortunately, teaching critical thinking skills is a prerequisite for teaching evolution. Or for teaching history itself, or for teaching any other history-like science.
And they don't teach critical thinking in Texas.

[HydrogenBond]

I don't have a problem with both versions being taught in school. Here is what I see happening. Creationism will be preferred by the youngest children, if we didn't lobby and brain wash one way or the other. The reason is, science is not easy for everyone. It will take time to develop the science concepts to a level where evolutionary theory can be understood and not just blindly memorized like a religion. The concepts of genes and statistical proof, will confuse the young child since it takes some skill to master it. Creationism is easier to pick up, since it is written like a story.

As an analogy, it is easier to teach small children the fairy tale that atoms are like little solar systems with little electron planets going around the central nucleus sun, than try to teach them about wave functions. Wave functions would be as hard teach a young child even though it is true. The child would get bored and default to the solar system analogy since it is more fun to learn. But this lesson isn't even real, so it is not science in the scientific sense of being provable.

It would be interesting for parents to be act impartially, for the children's sake, and let them learn both. As their educational maturity evolves let the children make their own choices. As time goes on and their science knowledge advances, more and more children will shift to evolution. Just treating evolution as a dogma, at young ages, is not what science is, since science requires proof. Science is handcuffed relative to its own philosophy of proof at the younger ages. But in the second half science comes into its own.

[Pyrotex]

HB!! That makes sense.