Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tough Assignment: Teaching Evolution To Fundamentalists
Ft. Wayne Journal Gazette ^ | 03 December 2004 | SHARON BEGLEY

Posted on 12/18/2004 5:56:30 PM PST by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 701-720721-740741-760 ... 1,081-1,093 next last
To: js1138
What specifically about redwoods needs explaining?

Start with this: What size pump would you need to elevate 160 gallons of water 300 feet up?

721 posted on 12/20/2004 6:14:08 PM PST by BJungNan (Did you call your congressmen to tell them to stop funding the ACLU? 202 224 3121)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 593 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan
In other words, you can't answer the question so you are reply with a cute little answer that makes you look stupid. Sorry, I don't mean that as an insult. But it really is a stupid reply.

Well, either I'm stupid, or maybe you -- like virtually all creationists -- have no sense of humor. Or maybe both.

722 posted on 12/20/2004 6:24:00 PM PST by PatrickHenry (The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 720 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Well, either I'm stupid, or maybe you -- like virtually all creationists -- have no sense of humor. Or maybe both.

Like I said...

723 posted on 12/20/2004 6:26:37 PM PST by BJungNan (Did you call your congressmen to tell them to stop funding the ACLU? 202 224 3121)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 722 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan
You make my point. It is all religion. And again I say and noone replies, if you are going to teach one, then teach them all. Why the exclusion in favor of the exclusive presentation of evolution?

Because it's SCIENCE class and all the evidence there is (comparative anatomy, genetics, paleontology, embryology, 29+ independent lines in all) points to evolution.

Still waiting for the reply...tap...tap...tap...

How exactly does one teach "You can't make me see"-ism, anyway? What does one learn by being immune to information?

724 posted on 12/20/2004 6:27:24 PM PST by VadeRetro (Nothing means anything when you go to Hell for knowing what things mean.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 716 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

I was under the impression that mainstream science had largely discredited this viewpoint, which originated well before the discovery of DNA. If you are right on this matter, I stand corrected.


725 posted on 12/20/2004 6:32:49 PM PST by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 675 | View Replies]

To: Wallace T.
If you are right on this matter, I stand corrected.

For your purposes, considering me right on all matters will be a close enough approximation. Hatchling insects look like worms (an earlier-appearing and more primitive phylum). Hatchling frogs (an amphibian) look like fish (an earlier-appearing and more primitive phylum). Hatchling horseshoe crabs look like trilobites. I hope you're getting the idea by now. Hatchling lampreys look like Amphioxus and/or fossil Pikaia, primitive chordates both.

More along the same lines here.

726 posted on 12/20/2004 6:38:04 PM PST by VadeRetro (Nothing means anything when you go to Hell for knowing what things mean.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 725 | View Replies]

To: js1138

Tell me, is a Christian a Christian because you say so, or some council or authority says so, or because he says he believes in Christ?

Do you believe or know of anyone who would concider Satan a Christian?


727 posted on 12/20/2004 6:39:09 PM PST by loboinok (GUN CONTROL IS HITTING WHAT YOU AIM AT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 691 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Hatchling frogs (an amphibian) look like fish (an earlier-appearing and more primitive phylum).

Got my cut-and-paste going at the expense of accuracy. Chordata is a phylum which Amphioxus, fish, and frogs share.

728 posted on 12/20/2004 6:42:05 PM PST by VadeRetro (Nothing means anything when you go to Hell for knowing what things mean.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 726 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
How exactly does one teach "You can't make me see"-ism, anyway? What does one learn by being immune to information?

Here, I will answer your question for you. And it is anything but being immune to information. This debate is all about information.

Kids, in this section of our curriculum we are going to look at the different ways that people think the world started and how man got to the point that he is today. Some will tell you that we evolved. We will go into detail on that. Others say we were created by a superior being, God. Using science as best we can, we will try to undertand how someone could have that perspective. And we will look at some other ideas on the origins of the Earth and life as well.

The purpose here is to present you with as much information, or lack of it as the case may be, for you to have as full an understanding of this question as possible. Keep in mind, though, that no matter the explanation for the origins of life and the Earth, when all is said and done, noone knows for sure and noone ever will. If someone tells you they are certain, that they have evidence, that is only their belief. You have to decide for yourself what you believe, if anything at all. And there will be no fooling yourself if you have a complete understanding of the issues and the debate. So, let's get started by first looking at Evolution.

Those that believe in evolution say it is grounded in solid sceience. They point to evidence they say confirms every species on Earth evolved from a single organism, spliting off into different species and then turing into all that you see around you today. For example, they look at similarities between apes and man and conclude that man came from ape. By contrast, those that believe a god created the Earth will tell you that it is just a matter of god having created an ape and having created a man.

Who is right. I am not going to answer that. Let's look at what the evolutionist say points to their belief that man came from an ape. We will get to the part about coming from a single organism later. Then we will look at what creationist say shows that evolution is wrong and they they say supports their belief that the world was created by a god.

729 posted on 12/20/2004 6:45:49 PM PST by BJungNan (Did you call your congressmen to tell them to stop funding the ACLU? 202 224 3121)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 724 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan
Start with this: What size pump would you need to elevate 160 gallons of water 300 feet up?

I imagine a redwood is bigger than said pump in all particulars. You've been presented with a nicely detailed explanation. Before demanding a "better" one, you might explain something about what was wrong with the old one.

If water getting to the top of a redwood is a mystery, water getting to the 35,000 foot level in the atmosphere is a mystery beyond comprehension.

730 posted on 12/20/2004 6:46:34 PM PST by VadeRetro (Nothing means anything when you go to Hell for knowing what things mean.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 721 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Chordata is a phylum which Amphioxus, fish, and frogs share.

Next thing you'll be telling us is that all those different kinds of chordates got their spinal cords because of common descent. Give it up!
</creationism mode>

731 posted on 12/20/2004 6:47:28 PM PST by PatrickHenry (The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 728 | View Replies]

To: Havoc
This is pure bunk.

So you believe, anyway.

Evolution has not withstood the test of time as he says

Sure it has. It's stronger and better established today than ever before, as anyone who keeps up with the scientific literature already knows. Please tell us where you learned your "non-fact".

and doesn't hold up under scrutiny..

Oh? Feel free to demonstrate this amazing claim with specific examples.

As soon as you start poking at it, the theories many holes become apparent.

Such as...?

Given the theory is written on crepe paper to begin with,

Now you're just babbling.

Go to any well-stocked research library, you'll find out just how silly you're being here.

732 posted on 12/20/2004 6:48:23 PM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Well, either I'm stupid, or maybe you -- like virtually all creationists -- have no sense of humor. Or maybe both.

You are so self absorbed you think you know that I am a creationist. As for my having "no sense of humor", that is a dodge on your part. You could have just said, your right, I was just having a little fun but it was not an intellegent reply. And that would have been okay. We are supposed to evolve on here. My comment to you was an effort to keep this discussion doing just that, evolving, not regressing back to some school yard style exchange.

733 posted on 12/20/2004 6:50:20 PM PST by BJungNan (Did you call your congressmen to tell them to stop funding the ACLU? 202 224 3121)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 722 | View Replies]

To: js1138

Asked and answered - for the last time. If you can't read and respond to the answers you got the first time around and acknowledge that it has been answered, don't ask again - it's deceitful.


734 posted on 12/20/2004 6:53:56 PM PST by Havoc (Reagan was right and so was McKinley. Down with free trade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 645 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan
Others say we were created by a superior being, God. Using science as best we can, we will try to undertand how someone could have that perspective. And we will look at some other ideas on the origins of the Earth and life as well.

Sunday School or perhaps Comparative Religion. Science more or less by definition explores natural processes, not supernatural ones, especially since there's no evidence for the latter.

The purpose here is to present you with as much information, or lack of it as the case may be, for you to have as full an understanding of this question as possible.

All of creationism, and the essence of your very own objections to the scientific data presented on this thread, is that no one can drag you kicking and screaming to a comprehension of it. Let's call this science "Dumb Bleep-ism." That's shorter than "You Can't Make Me See"-ism. That's kind of content-free.

Now, I realize the paragraphs you spout in this post are an attempted answer to that, but again, there's nothing for the poor hapless teacher to present if he isn't a Know-Nothing himself. If he thinks he actually understands the "Know-Something" part of the course--and as science teacher he should--then there isn't much nice he can say inside any state-mandated presentation of BJungNan "I'm Dumb As Petrified Dinosaur Dung And You Can't Stop Me"-ism.

By contrast, those that believe a god created the Earth will tell you that it is just a matter of god having created an ape and having created a man.

But a science teacher would be obliged to say that this statement belongs in SUNDAY SCHOOL where it doesn't matter that there's no evidence for it.

735 posted on 12/20/2004 6:55:15 PM PST by VadeRetro (Nothing means anything when you go to Hell for knowing what things mean.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 729 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
If water getting to the top of a redwood is a mystery, water getting to the 35,000 foot level in the atmosphere is a mystery beyond comprehension.

I agree with you. It is all amazing. As for the water to the top of the Redwood, I will first say that I am not a scientist. My roomies in college were all into science, working on their masters degrees and some into such things as rapid cell division to try and get a redwood to grow faster. It was they who explained to me that it was a complete mystery how a redwood tree can get water to the top.

The explanation you say was offered does contain the word believe. I don't think it was purporting to know the exact answer, an admission that we simply don't know. We know some of what takes place, but we don't know how.

Happy to hear how I am wrong on this.

736 posted on 12/20/2004 6:55:28 PM PST by BJungNan (Did you call your congressmen to tell them to stop funding the ACLU? 202 224 3121)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 730 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
If he thinks he actually understands the "Know-Something" part of the course--and as science teacher he should--then there isn't much nice he can say inside any state-mandated presentation of BJungNan "I'm Dumb As Petrified Dinosaur Dung And You Can't Stop Me"-ism.

Yea, well tell that to my biology professor in college. As he put it, after you study the science of biology if you still believe there is not a god then you have far more faith than I do.

737 posted on 12/20/2004 6:59:41 PM PST by BJungNan (Did you call your congressmen to tell them to stop funding the ACLU? 202 224 3121)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 735 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan
In other words, you can't answer the question so you are reply with a cute little answer that makes you look stupid. Sorry, I don't mean that as an insult. But it really is a stupid reply.

Why would you expect otherwise to a stupid question?

738 posted on 12/20/2004 7:01:21 PM PST by balrog666 (The invisible and the nonexistent look very much alike.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 720 | View Replies]

To: BJungNan
I'm not following you at all.

I am sorry for not being clearer.

How about trying a scenario. :-)

You are a teacher and are teaching a science class about the boiling point of water. Now you know that it changes with pressure etc. However, someone asks you to teach an alternative belief that the water really boils at different pressures due to divine intervention instead of basic physics. Would you be so inclined to do so?

This is how throwing creation in with a science course on evolution and biology comes across.

BTW, if we are going to teach creation beliefs, which one takes the highest priority? How muddled do we make the curriculum taught in this classroom anyhow?

739 posted on 12/20/2004 7:03:09 PM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 672 | View Replies]

To: js1138
What if your understanding is wrong? ...

What if. What if your understanding is wrong. We can ask that question all day. You'll never own up to being wrong even if it's pointed out clearly that you are wrong. And you will continue to say we're all wrong because everyone on the planet that disagrees with your conclusions is just too stupid to understand something only you seem to have the intelligence to understand. The only thing that really shows is your haughtiness. Try selling that to the public - You're stupid so shut up.. you can't and they wouldn't put up with it. In fact, they've already gotten a sense of that and have been insensed by it as much as the rest of us here.

740 posted on 12/20/2004 7:03:31 PM PST by Havoc (Reagan was right and so was McKinley. Down with free trade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 643 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 701-720721-740741-760 ... 1,081-1,093 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson