Letters: Plenty of views on the evolution debate
In response to the Tuesday column by Lisa Falkenberg "Education board a dangerous sideshow": I question if allowing the teaching of problems with the Darwin theory is so dangerous, if so in what way? I disagree with Falkenberg, and believe it is not dangerous to teach our children about weaknesses in Darwin's theory, but that they be allowed to ...
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Houston Chronicle.
Since: Apr 08
#1 Mar 25, 2009
Selected excerpts from selected letters:
"In response to the Tuesday column by Lisa Falkenberg “Education board a dangerous sideshow”: I question if allowing the teaching of problems with the Darwin theory is so dangerous, if so in what way? I disagree with Falkenberg, and believe it is not dangerous to teach our children about weaknesses in Darwin’s theory, but that they be allowed to hear both sides of the argument. I believe there are intellectual arguments for and against the theory. Finally what about the full title of Darwin’s Origin of the Species’ which is, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life. Can we teach our children that this is wrong or would that be prohibited by this new ruling? What race should we teach them is favored?"
PW - This writer doesn't understand that "Darwin's" theory has been modified over the past 150 years. There are not 2 sides to this argument. There is the Theory of Evolution which explains the diversification of life on Earth. There are no competing theories. There are not groups of scientists debating whether the ToE is valid or not. There are only groups of fundamentalists who purposefully choose to remain ignorant concerning science. The writer also does not understand that word usage changes over time and the Darwin was not racist.
"Regarding Tuesday’s Lisa Falkenberg column about the teaching of evolution,“Education Board a dangerous sideshow,” B1, it is important to note that there are indeed weaknesses in the theory. The evidence tends to support that life on Earth evolved over time. But the evidence is dramatically incomplete so the theory is not an indisputable fact.
Science is the critical examination of information in an attempt to learn the truth. Science does not cherry-pick the data.
Indeed, science considers all available data, even the data that tends to disprove the observer’s ideas. Let’s be sure to present all the evidence and let’s examine it critically, OK? Teaching children that a majority of people believe in a creator is not the same as teaching religion, it’s merely presenting a fact. As long as all ideas are presented without condescension or bias, I don’t know what valid objection any reasonable person could possibly have."
PW - Again - exactly what weakness are there to teach? This is never explained by the fundiots/IDiots.
Since: Nov 08
#2 Mar 25, 2009
We all know what those weaknesses are. The theory of evolution does not align with some people's religious convictions. The danger is teaching kids that scientific conclusions can be ignored in preference for religious faith.
#3 Mar 26, 2009
A plenitude of views is NO substitute for objective evidence. Not one of the many sides to this debate will admit to this.
Add your comments below
|Lyin Ted Cruz||10 hr||truth||4|
|No more farts, on to Gettysburg Sausages (Aug '17)||14 hr||Balloons||35|
|say it in six words||17 hr||Spider||2|
|Camaro ZL1.R||19 hr||KsdBu||6|
|Coffee house||22 hr||wondering||8|
|Remembering Houston's 2016 Tax Day flood3 MinsI...||Wed||Walter glen stockton||1|
|Roseville california ? Someones father ?||Tue||Herrod||4|
Find what you want!
Search Bellaire Forum Now
Copyright © 2018 Topix LLC