Arkansas inflicts child abuse on its school children

[Wildswanderer]

Who's doing that?

I've yet to enter a science class where that was taught to anyone.

Maybe not explicitly, but that's the take away.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Computers don't reproduce like biological organisms, do they?

Can you name one of these "holes" you speak of? The things you mentioned here aren't holes.

First, the idea of a linear progression in evolution is a lie, and yet you still see that picture everywhere, of apes gradually walking more upright until we get to humans. The theory has had to be modified into a wild bush with millions of branches instead of a straightforward tree. And those branches are missing most of their sections that connect them to other species. The ones that are supposed to make the connections are all highly debatable.
The supposed ancestor of the dog and cats for example, consists of a few teeth and leg bones. Step outside the Evolution paradigm and it all looks like nonsense. The only reason they try to fit the species together is that they are already committed to the evolution theory.

 

[Jose Fly]

What nonsense! We taught our kids that God created. Evolution is the popular position, and creationism isn't just for Christians BTW. It's got nothing to do with TV evangelists. And reject the wonder of the natural world? That's what evolution theory does! It makes it all pointless, just an unending line of causation by nothing for no reason. And makes us just animals. The default position of American culture is evolution.
Child abuse is teaching kids that nothing matters because they are just apes and the universe is just the result of blind chance. And they have understood that quite well, as indicated by suicide and depression and hopelessness that is epidemic among the young.

You seem to be saying that even if evolution is true, we still shouldn't teach it in schools because it can lead to some philosophical/religious conclusions that people like you don't like.

 

[Wildswanderer]

You seem to be saying that even if evolution is true, we still shouldn't teach it in schools because it can lead to some philosophical/religious conclusions that people like you don't like.

But it's not proven true. Just because populations adapt, doesn't equal molecules to man evolution.

 

[Jose Fly]

But it's not proven true.

Yeah it is. It happens, right before our eyes, all the time.

Just because populations adapt, doesn't equal molecules to man evolution.

Yeah, we're all very familiar with this ridiculous creationist talking point....."that's not evolution, that's adaptation", as if arbitrarily relabeling something makes it go away.

But bigger picture-wise, remember that we're talking about what gets taught in public schools. Right now we decide what gets taught in science classes based on what scientists say is the current state of the science. Whether creationists like and agree with it or not, the fact is the scientific community overwhelmingly agrees that evolution happens and life on earth shares a common evolutionary ancestry. So that's what gets taught.

Would you change that? If so, what specifically would you change? Would you rely on non-scientists to determine science curricula? Would you discard what scientists say they've agreed on? Something else?

 

[ElishaElijah]

Yeah it is. It happens, right before our eyes, all the time.

Would like to see your example

 

[ElishaElijah]

Yeah, we're all very familiar with this ridiculous creationist talking point....."that's not evolution, that's adaptation", as if arbitrarily relabeling something makes it go away.

Would like to see how you make the conclusion that because human beings adapt to their environment that this proves that an ape became a man eventually.

 

[Jose Fly]

Would like to see your example

Of populations evolving? You're really not aware that it happens? I mean, you have to be aware of how bacteria evolve resistance to antibiotics, right? Or how viruses evolve around vaccines (it's why we need new flu shots every year)?

Now I'll be honest with you. Just about every time a creationist has said something like "show me", as you did, after I provide some examples they almost invariably respond with something like "but it didn't turn into a cow", which is either an indication that they were never interested in the data in first place, or they have little to no knowledge of basic biology (or both).

So maybe you can surprise me.

Would like to see how you make the conclusion that because human beings adapt to their environment that this proves that an ape became a man eventually.

I've never said anything like that.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Right now we decide what gets taught in science classes based on what scientists say is the current state of the science.

This is problematic because scientist have been wrong, scientists can have the latest testing equipment and in a couple years find out that they were wrong when better equipment comes out. So you end up teaching a lie and make excuses for it.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Of populations evolving? You're really not aware that it happens? I mean, you have to be aware of how bacteria evolve resistance to antibiotics, right? Or how viruses evolve around vaccines (it's why we need new flu shots every year)?

Now I'll be honest with you. Just about every time a creationist has said something like "show me", as you did, after I provide some examples they almost invariably respond with something like "but it didn't turn into a cow", which is either an indication that they were never interested in the data in first place, or they have little to no knowledge of basic biology (or both).

So maybe you can surprise me.


I've never said anything like that.

Then we aren’t talking about evolution and there isn’t a common definition.

 

[Jose Fly]

This is problematic because scientist have been wrong, scientists can have the latest testing equipment and in a couple years find out that they were wrong when better equipment comes out.

So how would you set science curricula?

So you end up teaching a lie and make excuses for it.

Do you understand that "being wrong" does not equal "lying"? In the field I work in there was one prominent scientist a few years ago who was convinced of a certain explanation for something. Later on after he retired, we came across some new data that showed his explanation was wrong. But we don't think of him as a liar, or look back on his work as lies. Understand?

Then we aren’t talking about evolution and there isn’t a common definition.

In biology, there is. Evolution is a change in allele frequencies (genetics) in a population over time.

 

[ElishaElijah]

In biology, there is. Evolution is a change in allele frequencies (genetics) in a population over time.

This isn’t what Darwin was pushing

 

[ElishaElijah]

Do you understand that "being wrong" does not equal "lying"? In the field I work in there was one prominent scientist a few years ago who was convinced of a certain explanation for something. Later on after he retired, we came across some new data that showed his explanation was wrong. But we don't think of him as a liar, or look back on his work as lies. Understand?

Did I say that? No. I said you end up teaching a lie, a falsehood, something not true.

 

[McBell]

This isn’t what Darwin was pushing

You do understand that the Theory of Evolution has come a long long ways since Darwin, right?

I never have been able to figure out why creationists are stuck 150 years in the past.
But this is a prime example of why religion needs to remain outside the science class room.

 

[McBell]

Did I say that? No. I said you end up teaching a lie, a falsehood, something not true.

Do you not know the difference between a lie and a falsehood?

Actually, that would explain quite a few of your posts.....

 

[Jose Fly]

This isn’t what Darwin was pushing

Irrelevant to the definition of "evolution" in biology today. When biologists say "the population evolved a new trait", we all understand what that refers to. No biologist thinks that refers to universal common ancestry.

Did I say that? No. I said you end up teaching a lie, a falsehood, something not true.

Again, how would you change the way in which science curricula is set?

 

[McBell]

Yeah it’s always changing and has to.

Of course it does.
It adheres to the most reliable current data.

In the end you’ll be kneeling at the feet of Jesus confessing that He is Lord.

Still waving that bold empty threat?

Really, you should come up with a new song and dance.

 

[Jose Fly]

Do you not know the difference between a lie and a falsehood?

It's rather obvious that he does not.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Again, how would you change the way in which science curricula is set?

Already been over all that in this thread

 

[ElishaElijah]

Of course it does.
It adheres to the most reliable current data.


Still waving that bold empty threat?

Really, you should come up with a new song and dance.

It’s reality and the only song and dance left.