• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Biology teachers don't support evolution...

I'll choose NCSE over PZ any day. PZ insists science and faith are incompatible, a notion which seems adequately falsified by the existence of scientists like Francis Collins.
 
bokonon said:
I'll choose NCSE over PZ any day. PZ insists science and faith are incompatible, a notion which seems adequately falsified by the existence of scientists like Francis Collins.
Click to expand...

No, Francis Collins is a prime example of compartmentalization, where two completely incompatible mindsets are walled off from each other arbitrarily. The only way that religion can be preserved is to block it from any rational inquiry. People won't disprove what they refuse to examine.
 
jayh said:
No, Francis Collins is a prime example of compartmentalization, where two completely incompatible mindsets are walled off from each other arbitrarily. The only way that religion can be preserved is to block it from any rational inquiry. People won't disprove what they refuse to examine.
Click to expand...
You seem to have some firm opinions about the internal mental processes of a man I presume you've never met. Is this wall erected between left brain and right brain? Does Collins never think, as Newton did, that by investigating the rules by which the universe operates, he is exploring the mind of God?

You may regard them as "completely incompatible," but they obviously co-exist quite comfortably in the minds of people like Collins, who has arguably contributed more to scientific progress than PZ ever will. Whether that's the result of some hypothetical and unproven "compartmentalization" or not, it seems that science has been the beneficiary of people like Collins and Newton who didn't believe that doing good science required them to disprove their religious beliefs.

If confrontationists like Myers ever succeed in purging the religious from the ranks of practicing scientists, science will surely be the poorer for it. I hope accommodationists like AAAS and NCSE continue to advocate a more inclusive philosophy, so that science can continue to benefit from the talents of people like Newton and Collins, rather than erecting unnecessary and counterproductive ideological barriers to their participation.
 
Mahaha said:
Back to the OP...
It's funny that here in Italy, home of the Cahtolic Church, we have no such problem. There is no consistent creationist voice, and there has never been a case of people getting mad because of teachers talking about evolution, which is a standar high-school subject.
Click to expand...

The Catholic Church does not hold the bible out as the inerrant word of God on all matters. It is rather a longer discussion than warranted here, but they dealt with the logical problems of the bible centuries ago and distanced themselves from such a view very early on.

I think that in America there are more pools of extremism. Let me clarify, before anyone gets offended: you have more people than us, and you have been taught more than us that any belief is fine, and I think that this led to having some isolated groups to hold on to absurd beliefs.
Click to expand...

No offense taken. We are the home of Scientology and Mormonism. You are being too kind, if anything.

For contrast here in Italy we have an entire generation of really dull people who never ask questions.
Click to expand...

That may be one of the weaknesses of the Catholic culture. Outside of the Jesuits, there seems to be a very negative view of inquiry in Catholic culture. "The Church knows and will tell you when you need to know. Now move along."

Do you think I'm completely off the mark?
Click to expand...

You seem to be right on the mark.
 
The Shrike said:
Could you elaborate?
Click to expand...

A book is not "appropriate" for a certain age, instead it is "reviewed and recommended for this age group."

It is a matter of sidestepping the value judgment inherent in the word "appropriate" and getting to the actual criteria used to determine which books should be in the collection.

An odd thing is that when she recommends that parents read the same books their children are reading to get a better understanding of what their children like she gets tremendous push back from conservative parents and lots of interest from more liberal parents. (Anecdotal, I know.)

I love reading what my kids are reading, especially now that my younger is getting out of the princess phase. It is terrific to talk to them about something a bit more substantive than lunch.
 
I just had an idea.................



i have always liked the idea that if "in the beginning' used the terms atoms and energy, versus adam and eve........... then perhaps the 'beginning' can be mathematically described

i already know an evolution would be easier to comprehend.


For example; the old 3000 yr old genesis book claims, god took a rib from adam and made and eve

but in biology a single cell must give a portion of itself in a cell division to make the next generation. So could the evolution be, that a life must give a portion of itself to continue into the next generation?

Would it also fit the biblical ideology of adam giving up a rib to make an eve? (but with a biological foundation, that ANY AND ALL can sustain?)

then in that 'tree of life' (the drawing in the book ON the Orgins of Species), would that very 'cell division' be required? I mean, is there a single life within the list of 'species' that came from "nuttin' or did it all come from a previously living species and mutate?

ie..... cell division is PROOF POSITIVE of the basics of how 'evolution' occurs, 'in the beginning'.
 
Last edited:
My high school biology teacher told us that evolution wasn't true. I didn't learn a whole lot in that class either. I'm hoping that when I take biology next semester in college that it goes much smoother
 
Valkyrie144 said:
My high school biology teacher told us that evolution wasn't true. I didn't learn a whole lot in that class either. I'm hoping that when I take biology next semester in college that it goes much smoother
Click to expand...
That's really unconscionable. I know you have other things to do, but I'd have a hard time getting out of that class without trying to have the teacher shifted to another subject (maybe auto shop), if not removed from teaching altogether.

If you're serious about learning biology, there are plenty of books in the library, and plenty of resources on the internet. You don't need to depend on someone who's clearly not competent for the job.
 
Valkyrie144 said:
My high school biology teacher told us that evolution wasn't true. I didn't learn a whole lot in that class either. I'm hoping that when I take biology next semester in college that it goes much smoother
Click to expand...

That is outrageous, particularly in this day. I attended high school almost fifty years ago in a white collar suburban area. Mid-way through biology class our teacher told us that for the next part of the course we would be studying evolution and Darwin. He told all of us right up front that if anyone or his/her parents objected to the teaching of evolution they could bring a note from home and they'd be excused from that part of the class. But he also said that evolution was a key part of biology and that it WOULD be covered on the mid-term exam. (No students in our class opted out of this portion of biology.)
 
The New York Times said:
Researchers found that only 28 percent of biology teachers consistently follow the recommendations of the National Research Council to describe straightforwardly the evidence for evolution and explain the ways in which it is a unifying theme in all of biology.
Click to expand...

Yet the National Research Council doesn't create the standards or core curriculum for high school science in any state. I would love to see the actual survey that these 900 teachers took. Did it take into consideration that many of these biology (it's not even called biology anymore in New York State, it's Living Environment) classes conclude with a high-stakes test so alot of information has to be taught in just a few months, not just evolution. There simply isn't time to spend weeks and weeks on evolution or any other important subject.
 
Valkyrie144 said:
My high school biology teacher told us that evolution wasn't true. I didn't learn a whole lot in that class either. I'm hoping that when I take biology next semester in college that it goes much smoother
Click to expand...

Sorry to read that, many people express opinions that don't belong in public school.
 
Hamradioguy said:
That is outrageous, particularly in this day. I attended high school almost fifty years ago in a white collar suburban area. Mid-way through biology class our teacher told us that for the next part of the course we would be studying evolution and Darwin. He told all of us right up front that if anyone or his/her parents objected to the teaching of evolution they could bring a note from home and they'd be excused from that part of the class. But he also said that evolution was a key part of biology and that it WOULD be covered on the mid-term exam. (No students in our class opted out of this portion of biology.)
Click to expand...

I like that approach, even if it isn't "ideal" - you can opt out of it, but you still face the consequence of denying/ignoring the facts and the well-established theory, instead of living in a bubble where "Creationism/ID is just as valid as your theory". They'd still hear that rhetoric from parents, but see that society isn't as lenient, which would be a good lesson to learn.
 
nvidiot said:
Even if the courts have consistently ruled in favour of evolution and against creationism in teaching, it's difficult to be too upset at high school biology teachers wanting to keep their jobs and avoid long drawn out court fights with fools.
Click to expand...

If they can't, or won't perform their job, we shouldn't be handing them excuses, they should go find a job they can or will do
 
Dancing David said:
Sorry to read that, many people express opinions that don't belong in public school.
Click to expand...

Too true. A few years back, some moron in my school's history department kept teaching students that we didn't really ever send humans to the Moon. I found out about it and informed my students of Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy takedown of the Apollo Moon Hoax nutwads, and a number of my kids who had this clown for history took him down a few pegs the next time he brought it up. He ended up looking like a complete fool in front of his own classes.

The capper is that he got let go from the job before he acquired tenure :)
 
MattusMaximus said:
Too true. A few years back, some moron in my school's history department kept teaching students that we didn't really ever send humans to the Moon. I found out about it and informed my students of Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy takedown of the Apollo Moon Hoax nutwads, and a number of my kids who had this clown for history took him down a few pegs the next time he brought it up. He ended up looking like a complete fool in front of his own classes.

The capper is that he got let go from the job before he acquired tenure :)
Click to expand...

I love happy endings! (Good for you!)
 
MattusMaximus said:
Too true. A few years back, some moron in my school's history department kept teaching students that we didn't really ever send humans to the Moon. I found out about it and informed my students of Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy takedown of the Apollo Moon Hoax nutwads, and a number of my kids who had this clown for history took him down a few pegs the next time he brought it up. He ended up looking like a complete fool in front of his own classes.

The capper is that he got let go from the job before he acquired tenure :)
Click to expand...

That's a great story!

Do you know if the experience changed the moron's mind?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom