Posted on 07/30/2011 9:55:01 PM PDT by Dominic01
Teaching origins in public school is a complete waste of time, and wholly unnecessary for equipping students with the facts of science they need to prepare them for college.
As I understand it, the theory of evolution doesn’t address the issue of origins.
It depends on who is teaching these subjects. Evolution is true in nature over time, but as you say it does not threaten creation. A week or two of discussion on the subject in this era, however, and we know what the outcome will be. Public schools use to be quite Christian and trusted, but now indoctrination is wide open and in your face. Parents are too pooped to do a damn thing about it and that silence has our candidates sounding crickets on the issue also.
The Toeist use to be all about claiming eons ago one single cell got all hot and bothered and reproduced itself all by itself. But since they cannot discover, replicate/reproduce this hot steaming pot of primordial sludge it 'the origin' of TOE has been quietly laid as if to rest. But any evolution show played on the tube will as if proved and evidenced by the 'facts' of a 'theory', casually note the so called origins.
TOE is a fairy tail of reproduction. (Yes, I know there are two different spellings of the word tail/tale, and I know what each one means, note for the nose picker troop)
Unfortunately, most of the idiots running our Institutions, especially Education, don't know their asses from a hole in the ground.
To them, it's just those crazy Christians who believe in a Higher Power, which is funny considering the way they look at Obama.
Evolution is real. As an amateur paleontologist, I have seen the changes over millions of years of species of sharks, Oysters, clams, etc. The British ammonoids in their vertical shale formations are definitive proof of evolution.
However, I’m not opposed to also teaching or presenting a well-written exposition of “creationism”, in the public schools.
What people do in private schools is their business.
Fossils don’t lie. Also, archaeology (I was involved in that too) has proven a lot of biblical stories as real so if one has a truely scientific mind, they can accept both the world of biblical history and evolution as proven events without having to debate how long a “Genesis” day was.
Wow, thats a long time. I don't have that kind of attention span.
Done, voted for evolution.
Schools should teach evolution in history class.
Creationism or Evolution? Its a false choice. Both are hokum. Its like choosing between Barry Soetoro and Juan McCain.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123777413372910705.html
This fight is not about “forbidding” the teaching of evolution, but it concerns the teaching of evolution and other theories, as well as textbook content.
Every libriary (inluding public schools and colleges) should have a copy of: “Inspiration vs Evolution” by W.B. Riley, copywrite 1923. It tells what will happen if evolution is taught as a fact. [and it has, and is happening]
The founder of Harvard (John Harvard) said: “All knowledge without Christ is vain.”
Dr. Benjamin Rush,(1715-1813) our nations first Treasurer, the youngest signer of the Constitution, wrote our first Chemistry texbook, also wrote a tract: “Why the Bible must be read and taught in our Public Schools.”
Martin Luther (1483-1546), said: “I am much afraid that schools will prove to be the great gates of hell unless we diligently labor in explaining the Holy Scriptures, engraving them in the hearts of youth.”
So the title is misleading, no surprise.
It certainly addresses the origins of man and life on this planet, though no one was there to observe the events. However you wish to bandy about the issue, the fact remains that time in public classrooms can be better spent teaching material that provides students with practical, scientific information. Freshman biology classes are filled with empty noggins that have spent countless hours listening to half-witted science teachers droll on about evolution while they know nothing about the complexities of cells, or basic chemistry, botany, zoology, ecology (apart from apocalyptic visions of rapid climate change), and we won’t mention mathematics. Taxpayers deserve better.
Monkey business.
Rush certainly must have been a careful chemist to live to 98 years old given the technology of the time.
“I’ll answer it but you might not like my answer.”
Same here.
Creationism is as much a science as man-made global warming - you begin with dogma and then you only look for evidence that supports your dogma and ignore everything else.
Evolution mostly, with a mention about other theories, including creationism. I’ve got no problem with that.
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.