Evolution debunked in 1 paragraph.

[stu]

You suggested evolution was not important. It is one of the most essential elements in the knowledge and understanding of science. You suggest not bothering with such science to give priority to other things. So what do you mean if that is not removing evolution?

Doing things like that, not bothering with essential parts of learning because they can't be taught other stuff like reading and writing is symptomatic of the whole problem, not a remedy to it.

They can’t find England on a map quite possibly because someone said “Geography is only 3%.. a minor issue”

You think it will appease teachers some way to remove stuff so they just do less? That’s going to do kids justice how exactly?

Quote from tomdavis:

Where did I ever suggest that evolution should be "removed?" I was making the point that kids aren't learning much of anything. Fifty percent of high school graduates don't know who Isaac Newton was, and an equal number can't find England on map. Do you expect them to even begin to grasp evolutionary science?

Do you have kids in public schools? Do you teach? Do you have any exposure on a day-to-day basis of what's going on in public schools?

After many years of experience, I can tell you that the issues you point to are symptoms, not problems. The underlying probems are with the competing agendas of teachers, unions, administrators, parents and students. Until that core problem is solved, our education system will continue to slide down hill. That's why we took our kids out of public schools and put them into private schools.

 

[Trader666]

STUpid and Gafly both "debate" against the demons in their minds, not the content of posts.

Quote from tomdavis:

Where did I ever suggest that evolution should be "removed?"

 

[tomdavis]

I never said evolution wasn't important, nor did I say it shouldn't be taught. I did say that it's possible for kids to learn to read, write and do basic math irrespective of their beliefs on the subject. A few years ago, one of the top theoretical physicists at UCLA said that he found evolutionary theory to be "inadequate." It create quite a stir, but it obviously didn't stop him from learning math and physics.

I'm not advocating or even suggesting that evolution not be taught; but it is, by measure of content, a small part of the K-12 educational curriculum that consists of many subjects (grammar, compostion, literature, music, art, foreign languages, US History, World History, math, chemistry, biology, physics, etc). I don't accept the proposition that anyone who doesn't believe in evolution can't learn anything else either.

That brings me back to the bigger point: Fifty percent of high school graduates don't know who Isaac Newton was, and an equal number can't find England on map. Most can't do simple math. Do you expect them to even begin to grasp evolutionary science?

Quote from stu:

You suggested evolution was not important. It is one of the most essential elements in the knowledge and understanding of science. You suggest not bothering with such science to give priority to other things. So what do you mean if that is not removing evolution?

Doing things like that, not bothering with essential parts of learning because they can't be taught other stuff like reading and writing is symptomatic of the whole problem, not a remedy to it.

You think it will appease teachers some way to remove stuff so they just do less? That’s going to do kids justice how exactly?

 

[stu]

Yes I do expect them to begin to grasp evolutionary science. The basics, certainly.
You don’t?

Just as I expect them to do simple math AND understand why Newton was so important. I expect that they be taught about evolution, one of the most important aspects of science, as they would or are supposed to be taught, any one of the most important aspects of math.

That they are not, or at least not learning it, and that you sound like you think that is ok in regard of evolution, is disappointing, cheating them even more, making matters worse. Not helping in my opinion.
No other major developed country does that, as far as I know.

Quote from tomdavis:

I never said evolution wasn't important, nor did I say it shouldn't be taught. I did say that it's possible for kids to learn to read, write and do basic math irrespective of their beliefs on the subject. A few years ago, one of the top theoretical physicists at UCLA said that he found evolutionary theory to be "inadequate." It create quite a stir, but it obviously didn't stop him from learning math and physics.

I'm not advocating or even suggesting that evolution not be taught; but it is, by measure of content, a small part of the K-12 educational curriculum that consists of many subjects (grammar, compostion, literature, music, art, foreign languages, US History, World History, math, chemistry, biology, physics, etc). I don't accept the proposition that anyone who doesn't believe in evolution can't learn anything else either.

That brings me back to the bigger point: Fifty percent of high school graduates don't know who Isaac Newton was, and an equal number can't find England on map. Most can't do simple math. Do you expect them to even begin to grasp evolutionary science?

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from trendlover:

You see? He (believe) in miracles = designer?
Lucrum, this man is saying he want students to know how scientists come to conclusions for the natural world. Then he talk about people have to (believe) miracles? And he want to teach that?

I maybe wrong but I think you're misreading it.

I may also be misreading you, your English sucks. Although I have no doubt your English is infinitely better than my best rendition of whatever your native language is.

 

[Trader666]

No, you want them to incorrectly believe, as you do, that evolutionary science and the existence of God are mutually exclusive.

Quote from STUpid:

Yes I do expect them to begin to grasp evolutionary science. The basics, certainly.

 

[tomdavis]

Of course I WANT them to grasp it -- but a system that can't teach students to read or do basic math, or even locate England on a map, is in a state of total collapse. THAT'S MY POINT. The entire system has failed and needs to be revamped. Arguing about evolution or any other single subject is just re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The entire ship is sinking. It doesn't matter what song the string quartet is playing is playing on the aft deck. The ship is going down.

Quote from stu:

Yes I do expect them to begin to grasp evolutionary science. The basics, certainly.
You don’t?

Just as I expect them to do simple math AND understand why Newton was so important. I expect that they be taught about evolution, one of the most important aspects of science, as they would or are supposed to be taught any one of the most importent aspects of math.

That they are not, and that you sound like you think that is ok, is disapointing, cheating them even more, making matters worse. Not helping in my opinion.
No other major developed country does that, as far as I know.

 

[stu]

Ok, and I'm saying a system that can't teach students to read, or do basic science (which by necessity includes evolution), do basic math (which by necessity includes multiplication), or even locate England on a map, is in a state of total collapse.

Quote from tomdavis:

Of course I WANT them to grasp it -- but a system that can't teach students to read or do basic math, or even locate England on a map, is in a state of total collapse. THAT'S MY POINT. The entire system has failed and needs to be revamped. Arguing about evolution or any other single subject is just re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The entire ship is sinking. It doesn't matter what song the string quartet is playing is playing on the aft deck. The ship is going down.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Trader666:

No, you want them to incorrectly believe, as you do, that evolutionary science and the existence of God are mutually exclusive.

And herein lies what I believe to be their agenda.

 

[stu]

Quote from Lucrum:

And herein lies what I believe to be their agenda.

..which isn't being at all scientific of you.