 If you think this happened, you get an A in Texas |
Don’t penalize Texas students for any belief about science, bill says | State | Star-Telegram.com — This is actually worse than the headline indicates. Students in Texas can believe anything they want and it’s just peachy.
Don’t believe in the theory of relativity?
Students wouldn’t have to and could not be penalized for it in school under proposed legislation filed Friday.
Teachers could not be penalized, either, if they reject plate tectonics or the kinetic theory of gases.
The bill says that neither student nor teacher could be penalized for subscribing to any particular position on any scientific theories or hypotheses.
“Students could claim they believe anything they wanted in anything in science and if that’s what they say, the teacher would be forced to give that student an A,” said Steven Schafersman, president of Texas Citizens for Science. “That’s how bad this bill is written.”
But Rep. Wayne Christian, R-Center, who filed the bill, said it is not an out for students, because they must still be evaluated on course materials taught.
“They can be lazy if they want to . . . but teachers are still in charge of the grading system,” Christian said.
The bill does not address evolution specifically, but that seems to be its target. Its goal is to reintroduce the ability to teach “weaknesses” of scientific theories. After two days of heated debate, the State Board of Education narrowly voted this winter to remove a requirement that Texas public schools teach weaknesses in the theory of evolution.
left out of John’s Quote
FTA;
“If students have every opportunity to learn about every idea, it empowers students to have a better ability to debate,” he said. “If they are exposed to and know the other side of things, they will be able to come back and debate that side.”
IMO there is a difference between theory and fact. And the problem with today’s science/education is that it is teaching theory AS fact.
Seems like Anti-Education to me. A handicap that will surely have a Darwinian effect on that state’s population.
I agree with Jim W. that we are taught theory as fact and that has been true for at least 50 years.
Ya’ gotta “lurve”, those wacky Texaranians.
“After two days of heated debate, the State Board of Education narrowly voted this winter to remove a requirement that Texas public schools teach weaknesses in the theory of evolution.? //// Huh? The weakness in any/every theory MUST be taught in order to properly evaluate the theory especially in regards to other completing theories.
In this case, it is most important for the Theory of Evolution as espoused by Darwin will not cure the world of f&cktard religious dimwits who will argue that theory is being taught as facts.
Our kiddies must be armed to combat these dingbat loons.
#1
ROFLMAO at your ignorance. For all intents and purposes a “theory” in scientific terms is a fact.
To a scientist a “theory” is an explanation of the available evidence, it is not a debatable issue until there is contradictory evidence, and the “theory” is revised and made stronger to support more evidence.
I went to a parochial school with nuns as teachers. In 1970 or so we were taught both creationism and evolution.
When asked which was definitively correct, we were told that we could believe whichever we wanted, or even a hybrid approach: that the Book of Genesis was storytelling by the early Israelites to describe prehistory, because frankly, they didn’t really know how everything came to be… the “a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day” fit pretty well with six days to make a planet and all its accoutrements.
#6–Oven==have you ever figured out just how WRONG those nuns were/are?
Not yet?
Jim W., I suggest that you learn what a “theory” is. Of course there is a difference between theory and fact. Scientific theories contain facts, usually a very high percentage of factual information. If a theory is 95% explained by fact, it’s still a theory. The fact’s however are STILL facts. Teaching those facts within a theory is perfectly legitimate.
Creationism, on the other hand, cannot be tested. The ONLY fact of Creationism, is that it is a religious belief… which is about as fact-free as you can get. That belief cannot stand up to the scrutiny of the scientific method… the collection of data through observation and experiment, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses… which is the only way to establish facts.
So to teach Creationism over science is to supplant facts with fanciful thought. Absurd!
Would you like Obama to rely on fanciful thoughts, or facts to run our country? Do you flap your arms and try to fly? Are you planning an excursion to the edge of the Earth?
Did I say “no”? I’m 50 now. I did learn to think for myself;)
I believe that the essence, beauty and practically of special relativity is primarily Lorentz invariance and that Henri Poincaré is the true father of the theory of relativity. I don’t have any faith in dark matter. Consequently, I believe general relativity is simply an excellent generalization of Newtonian gravity and that something else is required to explain galactic rotation curves. I claim that Einstein’s version of special relativity is an occult science.
Pondering… hmmm, actually not a bad idea. I should organize an excursion to the edge of the earth. pick up a junker, fresh coat of paint, advertise for fanciful thinkers… might get $10,000 a head to see the edge of the earth… take them down the Niagara river… no… send them down the Niagara River… I’ll make one of them captain for an extra fee….
#11 – Behold the power of darkness, two examples:
http://tinyurl.com/cvffsy
http://tinyurl.com/p8gaq
JimR: Facts do not explain theories. Quite the opposite… theories explain facts. The word has a number of meanings, but in the present case a theory is the simplest explanation of facts/observations. Creationism is a much more complicated explanation (“god did it, god is too complicated to be understood so back off, OK”) and therefore is cut by Occam’s razor.
Creationism is more of an anti-theory. Creation scientists spend their time trying to debunk evolution, not (for obvious reasons) trying to prove their idea.
JimR said;
“Teaching those facts within a theory is perfectly legitimate.”
And I agree with that. The problem I have is that nobody is teaching that last 5%. A 5% that may have additional facts that contradict the other 95% of the theory and cause the theory to fall apart.
Teaching that last 5% is what this bill is all about according to its author.
Alan, I should have used the word “proven” instead of “explained”.
However theories do not explain facts. Facts without theories are still facts, but theories don’t exist without facts.
Nice: because it takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to have faith in god. Evolution has (no) scientific backing..it is another fairy tale perpetrated on the public.
#17–tech==”q[w3p3rjl;adsnf; oaeri;lvm;lcma dfrptlmtnhjnsd filgusfog olretpo’mcvv[poiw4-earwt- [0pokvrpoawe-0oifegpoperpoktlkroi[]-vonb=
e];,retporep[ktl-ibp;oskg;mapoirru yt]th,;sergk[p rky iyj
[Bobbo, wash your mouth out with soap! – ed.]
“Teaching that last 5% is what this bill is all about according to its author.”
Jim, I see you received a traditional Texas education.
If you’re going to rail on about the problems with evolution and science then please GTFO the internet and go back to pushing mud around with a stick. If you believe so much in sticking to faith in lieu of what science can provide then put your money where your mouth is stick to God, maybe he can provide medications, automobiles, telephones, and all the other things you supposedly don’t believe in. Hypocrite.
RE: Jim W., “The problem I have is that nobody is teaching that last 5%”
Of course they are. They teach it as speculation. Dark matter is speculation, but fits for the moment while we discover more and more through science. We’ll we’ll fill in the blanks eventually, we always do… but it’s extremely remote that it will be God. God gets trounced by science on a daily basis… hasn’t won one scientific discovery of a new fact… ever… even though science could discover God if he were real, if he WERE a fact. And yet there are still religious diehards that are betting on the dwindling frontier of the unknown as science eats it up piece by piece. Don’t you get it yet?
Look at the facts. Science has been dismantling the basis of Creationism and even Christianity for hundreds of years. There is no secular historical document of Jesus. With all those miracles, you would expect something. Instead we discover that the stories of the bible go back 5000 years. Fact. The names change, but the plot and story is the same. People wondered about the sun, the heavens (heaven) and the seasons. They explained them away with fanciful thinking (myths).
It was inevitable that eventually someone took advantage of that particularly stubborn ignorance and put together the Bible.
Wake up Jim W.
I have to agree with Bobbo #18 in his reply to that SDIQ who posted #17. Bobbo was much more succinct and sensible in his arguments.
Re: bobbo: “e];,retporep[ktl-ibp;oskg;mapoirru yt]th,;sergk[p rky iyj”
Too complicated to understand… therefore it’s written in Gods language.
… bobbo is God.
JimW: “Teaching those facts within a theory is perfectly legitimate.
And I agree with that. The problem I have is that nobody is teaching that last 5%. A 5% that may have additional facts that contradict the other 95% of the theory and cause the theory to fall apart.”
Except for one little thing. That last 5% also proves that evolution is correct.
Face it Jim: The Bible might be a source of morality if you want to use it that way, but it’s not a source of scientific information at all. No deluge, no garden of eden, and maybe not even evidence that Jesus existed.
I’d bet a little child’s life that the schools never taught the weaknesses in the theory of global warming.
What’s the mathematical symbol for “and magic happens” ?
It could really be helpful in passing those engineering exams.
I’d hire you in a minute if I saw that you had an “A” in Creationism. I mean, who wouldn’t want someone who is willing to look at all the facts and science before they made a decision?
Why does Rep. Wayne Christian, R-Center hate his own students? Is he really that stupid?? SDIQ, all the way…
I have no problem with the teaching of creationism; just not as science. Teaching creationism as science is like teaching Swahili as math.
Creationism in any of its forms is not science, should not be treated as science and does not belong in a science class. However, there is nothing wrong with teaching it as religion or philosophy. As long as the students are clear that they are not in the realm of science when they discuss creationism, then go ahead and teach it. Most universities will throw out grades for religion classes anyway.
“Most universities will throw out grades for religion classes anyway.”
Are you sure about that?
The American educational “system” is already graduating kids who can’t read, can’t perform simple mathematics, can’t balance a checkbook, and can’t find the United States on a globe. We tell them that laziness is “okay” and in fact reward it with the disaster that is called “no child left behind”. It’s no wonder that we are falling behind the rest of the world in technically educated people. It’s okay though, as the liberal welfare state will take care of the great uneducated masses leaving our educational system…can you say “CHANGE”?
So, um, when did Kansas rename itself ‘Texas’?