Evolution Must Be Taught in Public Schools

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by ditchr

What about all the religious kids?

Does being religious mean that you're not allowed to be exposed to the truth of reality?

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by ditchr

What about all the religious kids?

What about them?

[HydrogenBond]

The question is why does evolution need to be taught in schools? I am not saying it should not be taught, but what is the logic for the necessity? It sounds like indoctrination to make sure the brain is washed into compliance before children can think for themselves. That way they are programmed like a robot making it harder to teach an old dog new tricks.

I like science. I also think evolution should be one of the chapters in the science books that deals with many areas of science. But putting it on center stage, creates the impression this is more proven than any area of science including chemistry. That is an illusion that may have other motivations behind it as describe above.

If we draw a bell curve of all of science, as a function of direct solid proof as evident in practical application (needs to be real to be applied in a practical way), evolution is not at the curve maxima. In the science book I would stress the maxima first and proportion time relative to this curve. Toward the the tailing we would have evolution, global warming, which are sort of hopeful areas of science. They should also be presented with the unbiased nature, characteristic of real science. The idea is to not just indoctrinate but get the students to think and question. These are the leaders of the future. Blind herd animals is not what science is about.

[Kayra]

HydrogenBond, I never would have guessed you were a science buff <grin>

The spotlight was shone on evolution by those wishing to usurp, weaken, and ultimately remove it from public school curriculum. It was a small spotlight mind you, shone only at the perceived discrepancies found within the theory itself.

The scientific community responded in defense by shining a brighter light on the entire theory, faults and all.

The necessity of teaching the only scientific theory to date that has a decent chance of explaining our very existence can not really be understated, so long as the fact that it is a theory is included in that discussion.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

The question is why does evolution need to be taught in schools? I am not saying it should not be taught, but what is the logic for the necessity? It sounds like indoctrination to make sure the brain is washed into compliance before children can think for themselves. That way they are programmed like a robot making it harder to teach an old dog new tricks.

It needs to be taught in schools HB because it's science, science is taught in school and so would evolution. Evolution is not indoctrination any more than physics is indoctrination. Teaching science is teaching the real world and how it works, nothing more nothing less. Creationism is indoctrination, science is not.

I like science. I also think evolution should be one of the chapters in the science books that deals with many areas of science. But putting it on center stage, creates the impression this is more proven than any area of science including chemistry. That is an illusion that may have other motivations behind it as describe above.

Creationists have put evolution on center stage. No one is suggesting that evolution be any bigger part of science than any other part. Creationists are the one who have brought this to center stage, not science.

If we draw a bell curve of all of science, as a function of direct solid proof as evident in practical application (needs to be real to be applied in a practical way), evolution is not at the curve maxima. In the science book I would stress the maxima first and proportion time relative to this curve. Toward the the tailing we would have evolution, global warming, which are sort of hopeful areas of science. They should also be presented with the unbiased nature, characteristic of real science. The idea is to not just indoctrinate but get the students to think and question. These are the leaders of the future. Blind herd animals is not what science is about.

Get real HB, where do you come up with this stuff? Evolution is one of the most documented of all theories, it has more supporting evidence than most areas of science, evolution is about as close to fact as any theory we have. Evolution is not a hopeful area of science, you are trying to distort the truth to make your case. Again, Science is not indoctrination, religion and creationism are indeed indoctrination, Obfuscation seems to be your best weapon, no matter how often you state misleading ideas HB they will never be the truth. Science is not indoctrination, science is a way of looking at the natural world by collecting evidence and formulating hypothesis and eventually theories about the natural world. It is not simply a party line that has to be followed. Science is all about thinking and seeing the real world as it is. Refusing to see this does not change it.

[Pyrotex]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

... If we draw a bell curve of all of science, as a function of direct solid proof as evident in practical application (needs to be real to be applied in a practical way), evolution is not at the curve maxima. ....

HBond,
I have to agree with Kayra and the others.
You have been sorely misinformed. Where do you get your information?
Not supported by direct solid proof???

The evidence that Darwin had back in the 1840's and 50's was but a tiny fraction of what we have today. He had geological strata from a few dozen sites. There were hundreds of large fossils. There were the first glimmerings of how creatures interreacted in complex ecological "systems". And there was only a vague idea of heritance, gained from dog breeders, horse breeders and pigeon fanciers.

And yet, his evidence was deemed overwhelming and convincing to the vast majority of educated Europeans by the time of his death. The debate was won on the evidence.

Since then, we have discovered Mendelian genetics--tremendous evidence supporting evolution. We have discovered DNA--even vaster evidence for evolution, giving us the detailed mechanism for natural selection. We now know basically ALL the geological strata of the planet and ALL its ecosystems. We now have tens of millions of fossils, including fossils of bacteria and soft-bodied creatures Darwin never dreamed of. Our knowledge of chemistry is vastly superior and its application to evolution even more so.

Who would tell you otherwise? Who would hide this information from you? Who would lie to you about the massive evidence that proves evolution in every detail? What miscreants would commit such a crime against your intellect?

Creationists, perhaps?

[C1ay]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

The question is why does evolution need to be taught in schools?.....Blind herd animals is not what science is about.

Originally Posted by Oxford English Dictionary

science • noun
1 the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
2 a systematically organized body of knowledge on any subject.

— ORIGIN Latin scientia, from scire ‘know’.

Knowledge is what science is about and schools are where we convey knowledge. Evolution encompasses all of the knowledge we have on the adaptation and mutation of species. It is not something that we think occurs but rather that which we know occurs. We know for a fact that evolution occurs and that is knowledge that needs to be shared. That is what schools are for.

[Pyrotex]

As a side note, there is a book out by Michael Behe, arguably the biggest single advocate of Creationism in the USA. The Edge of Evolution, I think it's called. I read the first chapter. Behe now admits that creatures did in fact change over geologic time due to natural forces. In other words, "evolution happened". Even HE can no longer resist the mountainous tide of evidence for that.

He has backed up to yet another defensive position, trying to prove that all the cosmological evidence and oldest geological evidence and chemical evidence "proves" that the Universe was "designed" (or constructed by some "intelligence"), with the sentient intention of artificially seeding Earth with the first "life" in such a way that it would eventually evolve into a specifically intended (preordained) intelligent creature (us) capable of knowing and appreciating its Creator.

So, HBond, your "chief creationist general" has abandoned the fight against Evolution, leaving you and your small band of insurgents alone on the field, facing the "massed artillery" of evidence and reason that supports Evolution.

If I wuz you, I would start digging a foxhole about now.

[pamela]

It would appear that some teachers deem creationism as science

from Discover
Time and again, on local school boards and in national courts, evolution wins out over creationism. Despite the strength of these victories, however, evolution continues to encounter competition in the classroom. According to the first rigorous nationwide survey of how evolution is taught in U.S public schools, as many as one in eight high school biology teachers presents creationism or intelligent design as a viable scientific alternative to evolution.

The researchers, led by Penn State political scientist Eric Plutzer, questioned nearly 1,000 teachers about their personal beliefs and the amount of class time they devoted to evolution and creationism. The results? About one in six of the surveyed teachers espoused young-earth creationist views, and most of them taught their students those views. Only 23 percent strongly agreed that evolution was a central theme in their teaching.

The survey suggests that teachers might be more willing to build their coursework around evolutionary principles if they felt better prepared. “Teachers who lack confidence in their own knowledge of evolution feel uncomfortable getting into confrontations about it with either students or members of the community,” says Michael Berkman, coauthor of the study. Providing teachers access to courses in evolution could help bridge that gap, but there is no current strategy to apply such a plan to the nation’s schoolrooms. Berkman adds, “Science organizations and people who are concerned about instruction in biology should be paying attention to what’s actually going on in the classrooms.”

#36: Creationism Lurks in Public High Schools | Evolution | DISCOVER Magazine

[Galapagos]

Uh-oh.... they're back in Florida:

Florida Citizens for Science Blog -- You’ve got to be kidding me …
State Sen. Stephen Wise of Jacksonville announced through an article in the Florida Times Union that he plans to file a bill this legislative session to require evolution to be balanced with a discussion of intelligent design. Yes, require. Not just allow, but to require. Of course, we have to wait for the bill to be filed so we can see the actual language. Sometimes news accounts tweak what people say just a little bit, but then the whole meaning changes. Sometimes the person interviewed isn’t clear enough when talking to reporters.

Perhaps the bill won’t require the teaching of intelligent design. But if it does, I have to wonder if Sen. Wise has all of his marbles. A similar move was made in Pennsylvania. It didn’t go well for the intelligent design folks at all. They lost in a federal court case. The local school district was stuck with a million dollar legal bill. School board members were voted out of office. Intelligent design as a challenge to evolution went down in flames because of its clearly religious roots and purpose.

I suspect they will not get very far this time around, but of course I will be keeping my eye on this anyway.

More coverage for anyone else who wants to follow along:
Florida Creationism: “Freedom” Bill Is Coming The Sensuous Curmudgeon
The Austringer Florida: Reliving the Past
Pharyngula: Here we go again &mdash; Florida's turn!