Take THAT religious nutters!

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Lord Avalon
Shoe or gourd?

It's not a shoe, it's a sandal!

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


The vast majority of people in the US are educated in public schools. The vast majority of private schools teach evolution/etc.

The vast majority of students who score low come from public schools.

You don't know what you are talking about.

This issue itself (which I agree with UC on to be clear), probably effects ten thousand highschool students at most.

JM

And, incidentally, I also don't know what you are talking about. I was replying to Kirnwaffen...

Still doesn't change my point that your government should create some standardized criteria so that schools can't just teach whatever crap they like.

[Jon Miller]

They do, for public schools.

You were suggesting that our poor performance was because of issues like this. However, most of our students go to public schools, which fall under any of the things you complained about.

So yeah, you don't know what you are talking about.

JM

[Krill]

Those are my juniper bushes!

[Traianvs]

No need to get so hostile. I simply replied on Kirnwaffen's comment

No. US students are awarded diplomas based on their grades in high school and having taken a specified number of courses in different subjects. Admission to college is based on your performance in high school and on certain standardized test scores, but individual schools set their own admission criteria.

I merely inferred from his comment that there's no such thing as criteria. Well anyway if there are, then either US criteria are really low, or teachers are not being checked whether or not they teach the right stuff. But I digress

[Jon Miller]

Just because there isn't any criteria for schools in general, doesn't mean that there isn't a criteria for public schools, where 80+% of the students are educated.

JM

[Ben Kenobi]

Well of course. If I were happy as an atheist, don't you think I would have stayed there?

[trev]

Because it is just a piece of text, it doesn't reference any evidence or observation. Legitimite articles will reference actual, repeatable observations and experiments. That is why The Bible is not valid as a source of evidence. It may be interesting for an ancient historical analysis (with archaeological evidence) but apart from that, it's just another book. Would you refer to a film or a book as a source of evidence? How about Harry Potter or Fantasia? Of course you wouldn't!

It is providing a description of 2 dinosaurs which matches with fossils found by palaentologists. Although written poetically, the description is real enough to imply that the writer was familiar with dinosaurs as a living animal (surely an observation of animal life that has some validity from a scientific point of view).
The essay I referenced from St John of Damascus also is written from the viewpoint of a person who has knowledge of dinosaurs from personal observation. Both sources confirm the fossil record that such animals existed in the past, but they go further and suggest that at least some species of large dinosaurs existed until the 8th Century AD.
The question is why is this evidence that dinosaurs only became extinct after 8th Century AD ignored and students routinely taught instead the falsehood they became extinct 60 million years ago. Their existence 1300 years ago cannot be disproved, there is writing that refers to such animals as being alive at that time, there are also numerous myths and legends that speak of dragons (essentially a synonym for dinosaurs) coexisting with humans and terrorizing humans and humans fighting back killing dragons.
The available evidence from writings and legends strongly suggest that dragons/dinosaurs existed until about a 1000 years ago. This correct information should be taught in schools, not dismissed for no good reason.
For those who say legends of knights going out and killing dragons should be ignored, it is well known that legends do generally have a factual base behind them, even if distorted a bit and therefore if correlated with other evidence as they are should not be excluded as relevant to scientific investigation.

[trev]

'WHILE REGULUS WAS BESIDE THE BAGRADAS RIVER A SERPENT OF HUGE BULK APPEARED TO HIM, THE LENGTH OF WHICH IS SAID TO HAVE BEEN ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY FEET. ITS SLOUGH WAS CARRIED TO ROME FOR EXHIBITION PURPOSES. AND THE REST OF ITS BODY CORRESPONDED IN SIZE. It destroyed many of the soldiers that approached it and some also who were drinking from the river. Regulus overcame it by a crowd of soldiers and hurling-engines. '
quote from http://www.gutenberg.org/files/18047/18047-8.txt .
This is an extract from an English translation of Dio Cassius the Roman's History of the Roman Empire which was a historical work of 80 volumes, about half of which has been lost. It is generally considered by historians to be a reliable historical work and therefore this extract from it should not be considered in error, but a real description of a dinosaur killed by the Romans.

[Whaleboy]

Trev are you the guy who believed that the Earth was flat?

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


PH, don't you get it?

You aren't showing me anything I haven't already believed at one point or another.

I've seen all that and you think now, my opinion is going to change? Do you think I was raised a Christian? Please don't assume I grew up in Christ, because I didn't, and the sooner you realise that you'll find better arguments.

I'm not asking you to believe, I'm asking you to question...

[trev]

Trev are you the guy who believed that the Earth was flat?

NO
Are you going to disregard the writings of Dio Cassius who carefully researched the history of the Roman republic and empire before writing his 80 volumes of history and is considered a reliable historian?

[BeBMan]

Are you guys debating here whether the bible can serve as source for various kinds of research? Of course it can, that doesn't mean one automatically takes the complete content for facts. OTOH it also doesn't mean it's automatically all useless because it's a religious book. Actually "use as a source in research" implies that there's a critical approach to it, different from "use as holy book of a/your religion".

[trev]

Thanks for your statement BeBro, although you probably do not agree with my conclusions on many things I am glad to see you have an open mind on using it as a source for research.
My argument is that independent sources from the Bible, Dio Cassius, St John of Damascus and the unknown sources of many, many legends all suggest that dinosaurs existed until about the last 1000 years, and this evidence should not be unilaterally dismissed by the scientific community.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by trev
Thanks for your statement BeBro, although you probably do not agree with my conclusions on many things I am glad to see you have an open mind on using it as a source for research.
My argument is that independent sources from the Bible, Dio Cassius, St John of Damascus and the unknown sources of many, many legends all suggest that dinosaurs existed until about the last 1000 years, and this evidence should not be unilaterally dismissed by the scientific community.

That's where the "critical approach" thing would kick in, cuz if there's lots of contradicting research I wouldn't follow a (whatever) source.