Should evolution be taught in high school?

[LWsciencejunkie]

Darwins Stepchild wrote:

<quoted text>
Hi, LW. Long time, no see.
Still debating the Muslims?

Smooootch for Dar, too!

Muslims cannot "debate". They simply parrot the same, boring, bloody and atavistic BS they've been marinating in for many centuries. I do, however, like to kick 'em around online from time to time...But I am hell on Xtian fundiots too....When I have time.

[Sheila]

Drew Smith wrote:

<quoted text>
Ummm, not everywhere. In many U.S. states, it isn't even part of the science curriculum, or when it is, it is burdened with so many disclaimers as to nullify any value to it. For instance, in Oklahoma, the word "evolution" isn't mentioned in the state science curriculum standards. In practice, many teachers barely mention it, in order to avoid confrontations with students or parents or school boards.
<quoted text>
Apparently not. In my high school biology class, I recall no mention of evolution. Instead, the class was primarily devoted to various biological systems, together with dissection of a number of different species (worms, frogs, etc.). Everything I learned about evolution, I had to learn by reading books outside of the public school system.
<quoted text>
It's not "paranoia" when there are so many examples of its not being taught. If you want more details, go here:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/9u0610162...

I thought all the textbooks were standardized, for all states, and biology classes. After all the facts are still the same no matter where you live. That smacks of 1984ism.

[MikeF]

Sheila wrote:

<quoted text>Like there hasn't been hundreds if not thousands of off-topic comments on the"Legislature" thread in the past! Most before my appearence and many after, by other people.Pages and pages of off-topic, in fact. Cartoons! Grandmas! Sex?!etc.Here's one of special interest from the King, er...Shinning himself on #27419 or was it #27444?,"All us guys exchange meat for sex." A good thousand pages ahead of me.

You're beginning to whine now, dear. I think you're smart enough to see the difference between some off-topic comments (which we all make) and the chat-room you and LT have engaged in.

[FossilBob]

LWsciencejunkie wrote:

<quoted text>
SMOOOOOTCH!
I have been on the rampage; glorifying in my complete and total recovery! Since that "glorifying" takes place almost 100% outside, AND I have an adorable little three-month-old granddaughter, I haven't had much time for Topix.
Yerself?

Wow... knocked me right over!

I have been glorifying in the freedom of retirement! I, too, have been outside much of the last 6 months...hiking, gardening, working in local parks, now rebuilding a small garage as a garden shed....

Had several family members in the hospital the last month; all are now out and doing well:)

Life is good...

[Sheila]

MikeF wrote:

<quoted text>
You're beginning to whine now, dear. I think you're smart enough to see the difference between some off-topic comments (which we all make) and the chat-room you and LT have engaged in.

Anyone who doesn't like it shouldn't search it out to read it. How would you know what's being said when more than one person has said that they "can't find the thread?" Got it saved to favorites? As long as it's off the board, who's it hurting? Tell me where you see it. I want to know.

[Sheila]

This thing is way too sensitive, sorry.

[Drew Smith]

Sheila wrote:

I thought all the textbooks were standardized, for all states, and biology classes. After all the facts are still the same no matter where you live. That smacks of 1984ism.

Textbook decisions are usually made at the state level, and each state is free to go its own way. But obviously some states have a *much* larger school population than others. For instance, Texas, California, and Florida alone purchase as many textbooks as the next 18 states. And unlike California, which doesn't adopt the same textbook for all of its high schools, Texas does, which means that high school textbook publishers try to make Texas happy. The chair of the Texas State Board of Education is a creationist. And he and his fellow creationists on the Texas SBOE have tried to insert "strengths and weaknesses" language specifically into the curriculum relating to evolution in an effort to water down the science standards.

[Sheila]

Drew Smith wrote:

<quoted text>
Geez, Sheila, these boards really aren't about you. If you want to find a place to engage in exhibitionist cybersex, can't you find some place *other* than boards intended to discuss the science behind evolution? People like me and Chimney and others who are here to debate the actual topic of the board aren't going to take kindly to the hijacking of the board for personal exhibitionism, so you have no reason to act surprised when someone objects to your behavior. The problem isn't your gender. The problem is your behavior. And you have control over that, presumably.

As if Muq the sitting duck won't be patiently waiting to be reamed by his favorite femme bot? BTW, I don't think Muq is real, I think he's a mannequin you guys have set up to play with. Nobody's that tenacious defending religion.

[MikeF]

Sheila wrote:

<quoted text> Anyone who doesn't like it shouldn't search it out to read it. How would you know what's being said when more than one person has said that they "can't find the thread?" Got it saved to favorites? As long as it's off the board, who's it hurting? Tell me where you see it. I want to know.

Don't be silly. No, I don't have it saved to favorites (I don't use IE anyway).

As a registered user, Topix sends me a notification whenever a topic I have replied to is updated. Which is most of the ones in the evolution forum. So there's is no need to search. It pops up whenever you or anyone else posts. So virtually nothing you post is 'off the board'.

[Sheila]

Chimney wrote:

<quoted text>
I am interested in the subject of evolution and related discussion. When going off topic into your cyber sex forays I have not minded in the least, and funny comments welcome too. I am unlikely to get involved in your side chats though, cos its not why I am here.
However, you appeared to make comments about me being egotistical and your poodle followed up with "is he annoyingly verbose or merely annoying?".
I merely responded in kind. Its feeble to dish it out and then when its thrown back, make accusations of "lack of sense of humour".
As for the doubly disingenuous whining, after attacking me unprovoked, about me being "mean to you" or "hating women"? Well I don't think much of people who play these puerile games of provoking and then playing the victim when they receive a response in kind. I will leave it to you to estimate whether that is a primarily feminine tactic or a Palestinian one.
Have I said enough now?

You called me a cyberslut over a comment that wasn't even aimed at you or was even insulting. And nobody asked you to "join" a thread you already knew was "ours." It's just too easy to tick you, isn't it? You want to say more? Bring it on! Muq won't mind.

[Sheila]

MikeF wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't be silly. No, I don't have it saved to favorites (I don't use IE anyway).
As a registered user, Topix sends me a notification whenever a topic I have replied to is updated. Which is most of the ones in the evolution forum. So there's is no need to search. It pops up whenever you or anyone else posts. So virtually nothing you post is 'off the board'.

Crap! Why didn't somebody say so earlier? I thought once the thread was down we were alone on there.

[MikeF]

Sheila wrote:

<quoted text> Crap! Why didn't somebody say so earlier? I thought once the thread was down we were alone on there.

Sorry about that. I thought you probably knew.

[Noodly James]

Sheila wrote:

<quoted text> I thought all the textbooks were standardized, for all states, and biology classes. After all the facts are still the same no matter where you live. That smacks of 1984ism.

Actually, about 30% of science teachers admit to not teaching evolution is biology classes either due to their lack of agreement with the material or because they get threatened when they do. The majority of these are obviously in the south.

[Drew Smith]

Sheila wrote:

<quoted text> Crap! Why didn't somebody say so earlier? I thought once the thread was down we were alone on there.

Threads (also called "topics") are never down. Here's a link to all of the threads that make up the Evolution Debate Forum:
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution

Note that threads might fall off the first screen (if nobody replies to them in a month or so), but they are always still listed.

[Spinodontosaurus]

look at the first comment in this link
http://www.topix.com/forum/science/dinosaurs/...
Teaching evolution to drill it into peoples heads will hopefully stop stupid people like this.

[MUQ]

To: Darwin Step Child

The growth of mathematics, science, medicine and technology has been gradual and every nation and civilization has contributed towards it.

Therefore we should have a big heart when analyzing contributions of every civilization towards it. Showering unnecessary praises on any one group or negating all contributions of any particular group are both wrongs.

Arabs before Islam knew very little about Science and Mathematics, but within a quarter century of Death of Prophet, they became the Biggest Super Power of those days.

After the consolidation of Military victories, came the advances in Science, Mathematics , Astronomy and other fields.

Ancient books of Science, Philosophy, Mathematics and all other branches were translated into Arabic. Muslims learned these and then added their own efforts and distributed this knowledge to all parts of Muslim world.

The concept of Zero originated in India, but it was laying dormant there, Muslims took it, added numericals to it and made in popular to the whole world.

Why should we belittle the efforts of Muslim Scientists and Mathematicians?

The original works of Muslims are still available in libraries around the world and every one can see what they contain.

For many centuries , Muslims were the leading Scientists, Physicians Astronomers and Mathematicians in the world.

It was Muslim Spain which was the source of distributing knowledge in Europe in those centuries.

Europeans took over from Muslims and expanded the knowledge an a much higher level. Why should they feel shy to accept the parts played by Islam and Muslims in the advancement of Science, Medicine, Mathematics and other field.

You should not compare the present condition of Muslims with the first ten centuries of Islamic Civilizations. Nations have ups and downs in their history.

Who could believe that mere ten centuries ago, most people in Europe had no concept of personal hygiene , had never seen a Hot Steam Bath , and did not have even rudimentary knowledge about Medicine. It were Muslim cities of Baghdad, Granada and Others that had the Most hygienic Hospitals in entire world!!

But Muslims should not live in past, if they are backward today, does not mean that it was always the case.

[MUQ]

Since I cannot pay "compliments" to every one for their "love Posts" on this thread, here is another of my Weekly Suppliment from the Book of Mr. Harun Yahya.

This in my view is the "best" answer to these posts.

[MUQ]

Is believe in Creator against Science, Reason and logic or Vice Versa? Part-25

In the name of Allah, Creator and Cherisher of Universe, His peace and Blessings be to all prophets, including the last and Final prophet Mohammad, Afterwards,

In this Chapter, Mr. Haroon discusses about Facts of Creation

Facts of Creation:

1. With the collapse of the theory of evolution in every field, prominent names in the discipline of microbiology today admit the fact of creation and have begun to defend the view that everything is created by a conscious Creator as part of an exalted creation.

2. This is already a fact that people cannot disregard. Scientists who can approach their work with an open mind have developed a view called "intelligent design". Michael J. Behe, comments

“The result of these cumulative efforts to investigate the cell – to investigate life at the molecular level – is a loud, clear, piercing cry of "design!" The result is so unambiguous and so significant that it must be ranked as one of the greatest achievements in the history of science.… The dilemma is that while one side of the elephant is labelled intelligent design, the other side must be labelled God.(Michael J. Behe, Darwin's Black Box, New York: Free Press, 1996, pp. 232-233.)


3. As we have described elsewhere in this book, the balances in nature are so delicate and so numerous that it is entirely irrational to claim that they developed "by chance".

4. In previous chapters we saw the clear signs of the existence of Allah. Unquestionably, what we have described here is only a very small portion of His infinite evidence. Wherever one turns, one comes across signs that point to the existence of the Creator.

5., then, why are there still so many atheists in the world?

a. When we look for answers to these questions, we come across a number of philosophical prejudices which shape the beliefs of atheistic people–including those of atheist scientists. Generally defined as materialism,

b. This philosophical view holds that the universe is eternal and operates without any need for a Creator. According to atheists, matter is the only power that exists. Matter is not created and it functions in an uncontrolled fashion without the intervention of a Creator.

c. Their denials, however, rest on no solid ground. They have simply convinced themselves about the eternity of matter and have strongly embraced this belief.

d. They have accepted the theory of evolution with the same reasoning and persevered in their belief.

This situation shows that there exist prejudices that cause these people to commit themselves to materialism, and its natural outcome, atheism.

Moreover, they try to impose their denial on the public at large.

(Contd.)

[MUQ]

In this very interesting chapter Mr. Yahya takes a critical look at what is the reality of physical world and are we sure that what we see, hear, touch or smell really exists?

The topic is very controversial and every one is entitled to his or her opinion. I do not accept fully what Mr. Yahya presents here, but let us see his argument.

The World of Electrical Signals

1. All the information that we have about the world in which we live is conveyed to us by our five senses. The world we know of consists of what our eyes see, our hands feel, our noses smell, our tongues taste, and our ears hear.

2. We never think that the "external" world could be anything other than that which our senses present to us, as we have been dependent on only those senses since birth.

3. Modern research in many different fields of science points to a very different understanding and creates serious doubt about our senses and the world that we perceive with them.

4. The starting-point of this approach is that the notion of an "external world" shaped in our brain is only a response created in our brain by electrical signals

5. Frederick Vester explains the point that science has reached on this subject:
Statements of some scientists posing that "man is an image, everything experienced is temporary and deceptive, and this universe is a shadow", seems to be proven by science in our day.( Frederick Vester, Denken, Lernen, Vergessen, vga, 1978, p.6)

6. The famous philosopher, George Berkeley commented on the subject as follows:

We believe in the existence of objects just because we see and touch them, and they are reflected to us by our perceptions. However, our perceptions are only ideas in our mind. Thus, objects we captivate by perceptions are
nothing but ideas, and these ideas are essentially in nowhere but our mind… Since all these exist only in the mind, then it means that we are beguiled by deceptions when we imagine the universe and things to have an existence outside the mind. So, none of the surrounding things have an existence out of our mind.(George Politzer, Principes Fondamentaux de Philosophie, Editions Sociales, Paris, 1954, pp.38-39-44)

Peace be to you all

[Lil Ticked]

Sheila wrote:

<quoted text> As if Muq the sitting duck won't be patiently waiting to be reamed by his favorite femme bot? BTW, I don't think Muq is real, I think he's a mannequin you guys have set up to play with. Nobody's that tenacious defending religion.

Go to the christian threads ...holy jeez . They can be a tenacious group. Whether it is about gay marriage, evolution, or which denomination is worse than atheism.
Ask Bob he knows.