Teachers take a stand against anti-evolution teaching order

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
Why is this discussion taking place at all, in 2005? Wasn't this issue taken care of in 1850 or something?

Because ignorance never dies.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by SpencerH
This is occuring in Dover Penn, not in a 'red state'.

That's fine; I'm still glad I don't live in a red state or even a red part of a blue state.

[SpencerH]

"Just the facts maam. Just the facts."

[Gibsie]

"Why not tell students about both ID and evolution, and present your evidence to support evolution?"

1) Because it's a waste of time. I wouldn't want my kids taught the tenets of Creationist propaganda any more than I would want them taught the tenets of Holocaust Denial.

2) Teaching evolution generally includes teaching the evidence behind it.

In fact the more I think about it, even though it was just a flippant comparison, the more that Intelligent Design/ Creationism seems akin to Holocaust Denial. You have to ignore huge swathes of facts and evidence, and there's a distinct correlation between intelligence and how likely someone is to believe such rubbish... I'll have neither in the classroom thanks.

[Jaguar]

I go to a Christian School, but even so, any teacher who tried to teach Intelligent Design rubbish would be fired.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Pennsylvania is a Red State with the Blue Cities of Philadelphia and Pittsburg.

edit: The "new reply screen" had the following "thing to think about":

Pennsylvania law prohibits singing in the bathtub.

I'm so glad I'm not there anymore!

[Arrian]

That can be said for a lot of states, including those who go blue in elections.

-Arrian

[Japher]

The teachers should be canned. There is no reason for them not to read that statement. I compromise my intelligence all the time.

If the were fired could they sue for non-religious discrimination?

[alva]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
Why is this discussion taking place at all, in 2005? Wasn't this issue taken care of in 1850 or something?

The US was just about to reach that time period....until last november.

[Alexander's Horse]

I really don't see a problem in presenting the competing models. It isn't just an argument between Darwinian evolution and creationism.

I recall being taught a range of theories for the development of species, Kropotkin for example.

[Kuciwalker]

Re: Re: Teachers take a stand against anti-evolution teaching order

Originally posted by The diplomat
This statement made me laugh. So if teachers even mention Intelligent Design, then , students might actually believe in it. OH MY!!! We can't have students questioning evolution.

They should teach Aristotle's theories of physics, too - I mean, we can't have students questioning Newton!

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Japher
The teachers should be canned. There is no reason for them not to read that statement. I compromise my intelligence all the time.

Sig material

[St Leo]

Smash American Lysenkoism!:thumbsup:

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by The diplomat
I'd teach that some people incorrectly believe that the Holocaust never happened. And I could offer proof that the Holocaust did happen.

So if a highschool teacher told your child, "Some people incorrectly believe that an intelligent designer is responsible for life, and here's the proof...," you would be okay with that? I sure wouldn't, and I'm willing to bet you really wouldn't be.

Why not tell students about both ID and evolution, and present your evidence to support evolution?

Because it's a science class and ID does not entail any science. It's a theological/metaphysical issue, not a scientific one.

Why not present Hindu creationism in the science classes? Or Raelianism? There's just as much evidence for those as there is for ID.

The fact is that evolutionists are afraid that people will reject evolution.

Scientists don't care if people accept or reject science, because when it is scientifically valid, the acceptance of the the people means diddly/squat.

No, teachers don't want to be saddled with teaching non-science (note the closeness to "nonsense") in a science classroom. It has no business being there, any more than teaching Voodoo shamanism does being in a medical student's training.

People need to know that ID is not creationism. ID is simply the theory that the complexity and order we observe in nature is the result of intelligence. ID does not say the intelligence is God or what the intelligence is.

This is the funniest bit of doublespeak I've seen in a long time. Tell us, dear sir, what else could be responsible for creating this supposed "irreducible" complexity? This is nothing but backdoor creationism and you know it, so don't play the semantics game with us.

Oh, and ID isn't a "theory." Not in the scientific sense, anyway. It's nothing but an unsubstantiated bit of fallacious thinking (see the Argument from Incredulity).

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Raelianism

Are you trying to assult the belief that the Elohim spawned us on Earth?

Its just as logical as your ID!