Creationists and Public Schools

Post Reply New Topic

And there we agree. I have seen at close range what goes on in the College ofv Education.

My kids knew how to transect a circle, use log and trig tables, read, and identify the constellations before they entered the first grade.

Each time, their second- or third-grade teachers sent notes home telling me that I should not teach my own kids beyond their current public-school curriculum.

Imagine being 8 years old and having a teacher tell you to not say things in class like "binary pulsar", "polynomial", and "John Locke".



[sarcasm]

Thank you, Grand Ledge Public Schools.

[/sarcasm]

Yes - my sister [what did I do to deserve such a brother and such a sister? And what sin did they conmmit that they got me] worked with the Waldorf Schools. Visited with her first grade daughter. Talking to her, mentioned the alphabet. Sis gently asks that she NOT be told about the alphabet, their theories are very specific about when it is okay to learn to read. The Public Schools are not alone - caveat emptor in the private school market.

How did I miss Grand Ledge when I was in East Lansing and heading frequentlyu west to Chicago or Grand River?

Last edited by Philologos on 23 Jul 2011, 6:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The problem with creationism (or at least with young earth creationism) is that it is NOT a realistic alternative to evolution. ALL the evidence found so far supports evolution and is explained neatly by it. NO evidence yet found supports a literal reading of Genesis and much has been found that falsifies such a reading. That's quite a contrast, wouldn't you say? On one side literally tons of evidence from all branches of science that all point to the same reality. On the other side a literal interpretation of a book written in the Bronze Age that has NO evidence at all supporting it and much falsifying it.

It's hardly fair to give equal time to alternative ideas when one idea explains the evidence and the other is falsified by the evidence. Give creationism the time it deserves in public school science classrooms. The teacher could announce at the beginning of class that some people choose not to accept the fact of evolution due to personal beliefs. If he wanted to rub it in, the teacher could announce he will now present all the evidence for young earth creationism, and then stand there for thirty seconds of silence.

It is important to note that evolution has nothing to say about whether or not there is a God, or if it is the God of the Bible. If there is a God, and it is THAT God, all science does is describe His creation as accurately as humans can do. Furthermore, the explanations must account for all the evidence and be falsified by none or else those explanations are rejected. It's hardly a doctrine or dogma. One does not "believe" in evolution. One either accepts it or denies it as a fact of nature. To deny it is just as silly as to deny gravity exists.

Finally, to teach the fact of evolution to students in science class rooms is not the state bashing religion, any more than teaching that the earth is not really flat. If some flat earthers are offended by reality, then they should home school their children.

This part that I placed in bold type is a deliberate mis-quote of my own post, and is therefor a lie.

I have reported it, and I hope that it's a bannable offense.

Since when are schools supposed to teach alternatives to accepted and proven theories? We have tons of alternative History - For example, a guy who thinks that the stories of Egypt , Greece and Babylon are all about the same kings and thinks he has evidence. The elements are still for some fire , water, wind instead of actual chemical elements.

Last edited by Vexcalibur on 23 Jul 2011, 6:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

That's because, currently, it doesn't look there are actual realistic alternatives, but if you happen to have one (a valid one) then show them.


Correct, what is important is the science.

When (if) those alternative theories have any real, valid, material evidence to back them up.

This usually means, "Never".

and this surely does not apply to "intelligent design". There is not a sliver of empirical evidence to back it up nor can it be empirically falsified.

ruveyn

--------------

For the record, it was not a lie, itr was not a quote but a failed bracketing, and is in absolute agreement with Fnord's point/

We try to allow or mechanical slippage.

Will the editing catch this right? A pox on this quote system!

Last edited by Philologos on 24 Jul 2011, 10:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

Thankfully my son's teachers to date seem to enjoy that he has learned things out of school. With so many educationally rich summer camp options, lots of kids know things beyond the curriculum. It expands the conversation in the classroom.

As for the original rant, I'm not fond of rants, but there are a few valid concerns on both sides. We can't NOT teach evolution and expect to stay competitive in a science based global economy, so only a select few isolated public schools will find it feasible to skip the teaching of evolution. And I am glad for that; I believe it is sound science. But, at the same time, with the amount of detail my son learns about all sorts of world faiths, past and present, you'd think they could work in a little bit of, "the Christian Bible teaches" without harming anything. At least the more religious families could feel they get fair play. We've got Mohammed in our textbooks but not Jesus or Saint Paul? It is out of balance.

It would actually be REALLY good if the schools put alternative hypotheses in front of students and turned them loose on data. It is so much better to learn how to find the answers than to be told what to put in the blank on the test.

Yeah, I always thought it would be really good if schools thaught the alternative hollow earth and flat earth hypothesis, so the students can make up their minds on their own

Last edited by blunnet on 23 Jul 2011, 10:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I was referring to there being no realistic alternatives to public school. If they aren't wealthy enough for private school, or if there are no parents during the day to supervise the children, then compulsory attendance laws force the children into public schools.

The very last thing I would do is attempt to ban homeschoolers.

Awesome.