Evolution Must Be Taught in Public Schools

[Moontanman]

open mined about things that could actually happen.

 

Goku, you really need to explain what you mean by this, why wouldn't anyone be open minded to things that could actually happen?

 

are you open mined about things that absolutely are not possible?

 

 

Absolutely yes! All you need is evidence of the impossible happening and i and most everyone else will be willing to believe it and bring it into the possible column. When radioactivity was first discovered it was considered impossible to get energy out of matter with out a chemical reaction. Radioactivity was first seen as some sort of perpetual motion type thing and impossible. But once the impossible was shown to be true it was put in the possible column, no problem, no one had to die, no wars were fought over the reality of radioactivity. No armies were raised to defend the dogma of immutability of matter. Think of how many people had to die just to break away from the Catholic Church. Many other times when religious doctrine changed people felt the need to defend their world view by violence and killings. If tomorrow someone demonstrates that matter can indeed somehow travel faster than light you will not see one group of scientists trying to kill the other group to silence them. so yes i am prepared to believe in the impossible, all it needs is evidence, i am even prepared to believe in religion, all it needs is evidence, so far it has none.

[goku]

Such as?

 

life

[goku]

Goku, you really need to explain what you mean by this, why wouldn't anyone be open minded to things that could actually happen?

 

so you want me to tell you why you are not open minded about what could actually happen?

[goku]

All you need is evidence of the impossible happening and i and most everyone else will be willing to believe it and bring it into the possible column.

 

like what, superman?

 

some things are just impossible, a man that can fly and has great great strength is one of the many.

but there is evidence of superman, and if you didn't know how to look at that evidence you wouldn't know that it is false.

[goku]

Help them how?

 

that is a very good question, how could an uneducated nobody like me help anyone?

 

only God knows.

[Moontanman]

like what, superman?

 

some things are just impossible, a man that can fly and has great great strength is one of the many.

but there is evidence of superman, and if you didn't know how to look at that evidence you wouldn't know that it is false.

 

There is no evidence of Superman goku, he is an entirely fictional character. No one has ever claimed superman was real. Truly impossible things would have no evidence for their existence. many things are thought to be impossible that later turn out not to be when evidence for them pops up. I think you misunderstand what i am talking about, No one take an "impossible" idea and then sets out to prove it possible. Evidence about the natural world is gathered, sometimes that evidence shows something happening that was thought to be impossible. No one started out to show that energy could be derived from matter through the decay of atoms. An anomaly was detected, the people involved gathered evidence to try and explain that anomaly. It turned the anomaly was caused by the decay of atoms, radioactivity was discovered. No one sat back and thought WOW i think I'll prove that atoms are not indestructible today and energy come from apparently nowhere when they decay.

[Moontanman]

so you want me to tell you why you are not open minded about what could actually happen?

 

I am open minded goku, evidence is all i need to see something as possbile, many around here would say i am too open minded. I am willing to entertain ideas most se as completely impossible so yes tell me why I am not open minded about anything with evidnce to show it could be ture.

[cooloola]

Goku - I believe in evolution AND am a caring, moral, law abidding, and may I add loving human who watches out for others and works toward making the world a better place. I also appreciate the words of the man Jesus of Nazareth as well as other very wise people who have lived (Siddartha [buddha], Lao-tse, Baha'u'lah). Jesus's teaching implores me to be kind to others and not to think I am better than others. Not to attack others for their chosen belief or way of life. I choose to believe in evolution.

 

moontanman - I understand your anger, and it's basis in fear, fear of those who use religion as a vehicle for hatred. Anger will only fan the flames and I think you know that.

[cooloola]

T-bird - mythology and fiction as a vehicle for the disemination of truth - absolutely!

The words of Shakespeare at the forefront of my mind.

[Buffy]

that is a very good question, how could an uneducated nobody like me help anyone?

Are you saying that you think you're "an uneducated nobody?" I don't agree.

 

I think you have to have more faith in yourself.

 

It is simplicity that makes the uneducated more effective than the educated when addressing popular audiences, :)

Buffy

[C1ay]

life

 

"life" is absolutely not possible?

[Galapagos]

More news from Texas:

 

This is from a couple weeks ago, but slipped under my radar. The Austringer tears apart an op-ed piece written by stealth creationist Ken Mercer:

The Austringer Texas: Ken Mercer Confirms “Weaknesses” are Old-School Religious Antievolution Arguments

Texas State Board of Education Member Ken Mercer has an op-ed piece in the San Antonio Express-News. You may recall Mercer from his advocacy of various “weaknesses” taken from the religious antievolution ensemble of arguments at a hearing on November 19th. The opinion piece by Mercer simply confirms that Mercer doesn’t have a grasp of the topic and relies on the religious antievolution literature as his source for commentary on the field of evolutionary science.

 

 

 

And very good news, the Texas science standards have been appropriately re-worded, and the "weaknesses" nonsense removed, restoring scientific integrity:

Final draft on science standards pleases scientists, watch groups | State | Star-Telegram.com

The final proposal for the state’s science curriculum pleases scientists and watch groups, who say it will help protect Texas public school classrooms over the next decade from what they call "watered-down science" — specifically during the instruction of evolution.

 

Much of the concern over earlier versions of the proposed curriculum centered on a requirement that students be able to analyze the "strengths and weaknesses" of scientific theories, a phrase which some say is being used by creationists — including some members of the State Board of Education — to subvert the teaching of evolution.

 

But with the "weaknesses" requirement removed and a new definition for science, the new plan makes it clear that supernatural explanations like creationism and intelligent design have no place in public classrooms, said Dan Quinn with the Texas Freedom Network, an Austin-based nonprofit group that opposes religious influence on public education.

 

 

Of additional interest for those who follow the ID controversy, here are two summaries of big news from the ID camp in 2008:

This Week in Evolution: This year in "intelligent design"

Stranger Fruit: The Year in ID – 2008 Edition

[ditchr]

What about all the religious kids?

[InfiniteNow]

What about all the religious kids?

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

[Moontanman]

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> :computerkick:

 

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.