Top home-school texts dismiss Darwin

Page 7 of 10 [ 148 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

05 Sep 2011, 3:35 pm

techn0teen wrote:

I never said they couldn't. All I said is that they need to understand and apply evolutionary concepts. They can still have belief in creationism while understanding/applying concepts associated with evolution.

Inuyasha wrote:

For all the statements that liberals are for tolerance, thank you for showing that you are projecting your own lack of tolerance onto others.

Can you please explain to me what I am doing that is intolerant? I stated to let people believe in creationism. We shouldn't force evolution on them even if we disagree. It's their choice. I thought that was the very definition of tolerance.

It is perfectly legal to believe the earth is as fat as a pancake and the sun goes around it. Perfectly legal and utterly stupid.

ruveyn

phil777
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 May 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,825
Location: Montreal, Québec

05 Sep 2011, 9:59 pm

MyFutureSelfnMe wrote:

- Parents are not trained educators. Only someone with a degree in education should be an educator. I don't care how smart you think you are. I realize public schools seem to be failing at this point anyway.

THIS ^! QFTMFT

phil777
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 May 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,825
Location: Montreal, Québec

05 Sep 2011, 10:01 pm

Also Inuyasha, it's been said in past debates that even tolerant people shouldn't tolerate intolerant people, because they would constitute a threat to social peace. <.<

techn0teen
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Sep 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 663

05 Sep 2011, 11:13 pm

Inuyasha wrote:

Not referring to you specifically, and yeah I should have gone back and looked for the earlier quote by the individual that I was directing the comment towards. My apologies for not being more specific.

Thank you for explaining. I was very puzzled.

I guess my main argument is there is already a place for people to learn creationism; church. Why does there need to be another place to teach creationism? If you want children to be exposed to creationist ideas then have them go to a church.

If you teach creationism, you need to also teach every single version of creationism. Not just the Christian version. The Buddhists have their own scripture on the creation of the Universe. So do Hindus. You have to teach them all. Fair is only fair, and we all need to be represented. :wink:

The other argument is that creationism is fine and dandy as a belief but it is not useful. It is far more useful to teach kids science and technology. This knowledge has drastically increased our standard of living. A basic understanding of evolution is necessary in any discipline requiring biology. So basically medicine, bioinformatics, farming, genetic transformation, nursing, and doctors. Basically all the good paying jobs.

I don't think it's right to have kids be disadvantaged because of their parent's choices and beliefs. If I was an employer, you would have to know evolution. I would have a written test. Because knowing evolution indicates a deeper level of thinking. I don't care if you believe it. I only care you know it.

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

06 Sep 2011, 12:57 am

phil777 wrote:

Also Inuyasha, it's been said in past debates that even tolerant people shouldn't tolerate intolerant people, because they would constitute a threat to social peace. <.<

You know the people I've seen preach tolerance usually are the most bigoted people I've met.

We hear all these claims about how people that listen to Glenn Beck are somehow hate mongers, that explains why Tea Party rallies are nonviolent.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

06 Sep 2011, 6:10 am

This embracing of Anti-Darwinism is just another sign of the anti-intellectualism of the far right. The literal biblical interpretations that many on the right believes should regulate science and all other disciplines may send America one day into the descent of ignorance and fanaticism that had engulfed Afghanistan under the Taliban.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

06 Sep 2011, 6:39 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

The far left folk deny the inheritability of intelligence. They believe that human nature can be molded and ignore the genetics. Is that any better?

I believe in the Separation of Science and State.

ruveyn

MagicMeerkat
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,003
Location: Mel's Hole

06 Sep 2011, 2:44 pm

I am homeschooled. One thing I noticed in the Christan based text is that they tend to focus on religion more than science or whatever is supposedly being taught. I was confused and couldn't understand it.

_________________
Spell meerkat with a C, and I will bite you.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

06 Sep 2011, 3:06 pm

ruveyn wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Yes, it actually is considerably better, as the left is still endorsing science.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

06 Sep 2011, 4:57 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

Yes, it actually is considerably better, as the left is still endorsing science.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Not completely true. The lefties deny the genetic component of intelligence. It is one of their shibboleths.

Recall the reception that Hernstein and Murray got with -The Bell Curve-. The science was sound but the conclusions were completely unacceptable to the left folk.

ruveyn

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

06 Sep 2011, 5:21 pm

ruveyn wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Yes, it actually is considerably better, as the left is still endorsing science.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Still, the left isn't denying the proven geological age of the earth, nor are they claiming that all life is only six thousand years old, and created exactly the way they are today. That's a significant difference, as this can only erode our collective intellect.
As far as the Bell curve - I recall the charge that the book stated that different races had collectively different intelligence levels - with blacks at the low point. I don't doubt a genetic component to an individual's intelligence - but the operative word is individual. I don't believe for a minute that one race is genetically more intelligent than another.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

06 Sep 2011, 5:41 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

I suspect you will find differing intelligence levels among various racial, cultural and ethnic groups. If intelligence does have a genetic component (and that appears to be the case) then one should find variations in average intelligence over various racial groups. Such groups are sorted out by their genetic characteristics as opposed to culture and language.

What happened was that the Brethren of the Left had a collective fit over even the hint of an implication that blacks were not as smart on average as other racial groups. They foamed at the mouth and gathered together with torches and pitchforks in front of Charles Murray's house. They even burned a question mark on his lawn.

ruveyn

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

06 Sep 2011, 6:02 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Yes, it actually is considerably better, as the left is still endorsing science.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

So you're admitting the left basically could be supporting racism.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

06 Sep 2011, 6:41 pm

Inuyasha wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Yes, it actually is considerably better, as the left is still endorsing science.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

So you're admitting the left basically could be supporting racism.

Huh? Do you even have the slightest idea what the commotion over The Bell Curve is even about? Trust me, it's not the left who come off looking racist.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

06 Sep 2011, 6:50 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Yes, it actually is considerably better, as the left is still endorsing science.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

So you're admitting the left basically could be supporting racism.

Huh? Do you even have the slightest idea what the commotion over The Bell Curve is even about? Trust me, it's not the left who come off looking racist.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I didn't say I supported the Bell Curve, I believe in judging people on their merits, not their skin color.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

06 Sep 2011, 7:03 pm

Inuyasha wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Inuyasha wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Yes, it actually is considerably better, as the left is still endorsing science.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer[/
So you're admitting the left basically could be supporting racism.

Huh? Do you even have the slightest idea what the commotion over The Bell Curve is even about? Trust me, it's not the left who come off looking racist.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I didn't say I supported the Bell Curve, I believe in judging people on their merits, not their skin color.

Well, guess what, you and the liberals agree on something. As I understand the Bell Curve, it argues that the intelligence levels apply to whole races and ethnic groups, rather than to individuals. Case in point, the Bell Curve argues that members of the white race are more intelligent than members of the black race. You are in fact in agreement with liberals who say that this is nothing but hogwash.
A better argument says cultural influences are a better explanation for a supposed IQ difference. For instance, American black college students studying abroad do better than their black counterparts studying in America. Apparently, there's still a subliminal message in our country directed at blacks that they will fail. If the Bell Curve has any positive legacy, it will perhaps be that we can overcome this unspoken, invisible negative influence on blacks, now that there is proof of it's existence.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Page 7 of 10 [ 148 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

Jump to:

Top home-school texts dismiss Darwin Post Reply New Topic

Top home-school texts dismiss Darwin