Arizona State Superintendent puts Creationist on panel to review standards on teaching of Evolution

[TheComebackKid]

hindu beliefs should be allowed in too. maybe evolution is fake and we all came from the belly of a giant god.

keep science in science class. you can tear it all down in sunday school if you want to later.

I don't have a problem exploring and learning about Hindu based scientific research and experimentation. Do you?

 

[ocean size]

I think its about time Christians get some representation in our schools science curriculum.

How did anyone like this post? Even if you want Christianity taught how is science class the place to do it?

 

[ndwolfwood]

Like if you would like the government to change the name of public school to "marxist academy"

 

[JonnyRingo84]

I don't have a problem exploring and learning about Hindu based scientific research and experimentation. Do you?

i love learning about religion, and i think that kids should. they should not learn about it in science class, just like id not demand that evolution be taught in a religion and philosophy class. science is based around empiricism. faith is not, and thats OK.

 

[ShinkanPo]

We should also teach the dangers of moonlight in physics and the specifics of luciferian pansexuals in gender studies class.

This I will attend that Luna light physics class.

 

[Fawlty]

They put him on a panel to help decide how evolution is taught.

That is a good thing. It does not mean he gets to choose what is in the curriculum, it just means that he is there to have input into how evolution can be taught in a way that is not insensitive or insulting to creationists.

If he attempts to change the curriculum to learn towards something unscientific, then it is a problem.

"He also is president of the Arizona Origin Science Association "

He's not just some guy.

He is there to push unscientific, religious claims.

 

[ShinkanPo]

If you didn't know any better, one might find it kind of peculiar that far fewer people tend to raise any objection to two of the other major scientific theories of the 19th century: Germ Theory of Disease as demonstrated by Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch in identifying pathogenic microorganisms as the cause of specific illnesses which largely established the field of Microbiology in the process; and the often mentioned (by me) Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field by James Clerk Maxwell, the classical foundation of electromagnetism which underpins all electric, radio and optical technologies.

There's a nearly endless number of individual discoveries and things which are known and verified, there's physical constants, there's principles and general laws which are ascribed and hold to a specific set of conditions, but an established scientific theory? In the modern sense, that's an entire framework of knowledge and explanation of some aspect of the natural world based on a body of facts which are repeatedly confirmed by observation and experiment with the capability of bringing new discoveries to light. Achievements in human endeavor probably don't get any greater.

I do think some unnecessary confusion does come with terminology when things such as "superstring theory" are thrown around because it isn't, it's a hypothesis albeit a rather educated and elaborate one. Amusingly, if it was called the Law of Evolution (or say, Law of General Relativity) people would probably perceive them as being more authoritative and of a higher degree of seriousness FFS. As the definitions actually are, that would be totally nonsensical. They're levels above, describe and account for a lot more than laws do which is deliciously ironic given the "only a theory" mantra.

Have you also heard about another pseudo science concept called the electric universe?

 

[nac386]

"He also is president of the Arizona Origin Science Association "

He's not just some guy.

He is there to push unscientific, religious claims.

Well the rest of the panel should have the backbone to deny him if he wants to put unscientific claims in a science book. It should be pretty easy to do.

 

[TheComebackKid]

i love learning about religion, and i think that kids should. they should not learn about it in science class, just like id not demand that evolution be taught in a religion and philosophy class. science is based around empiricism. faith is not, and thats OK.

I said scientific research not religion. I don't have a problem exploring and learning about scientific research conducted by Hindus, do you?

 

[Fawlty]

Well the rest of the panel should have the backbone to deny him if he wants to put unscientific claims in a science book. It should be pretty easy to do.

I agree that it's likely that the panel will withstand the completely unnecessary attack on science that they have been subjected to.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

I said scientific research not religion. I don't have a problem exploring and learning about scientific research conducted by Hindus, do you?

of course not.

if you can empirically research creation, then that might be a good activity in a science class. it would start a shit storm from both sides though. and i have my doubts as to whether you could come up with any empirical research related to creation that is falsifiable.

 

[Seano]

Splendid! This means we should put a Satanist and a Bisexual reptilian on the board too.

If they represent a large enough faction of the population, then yes. Absolutely their opinion should be given consideration.

In the states, we don't censor people we don't agree with. Thats the point of a "board." This isn't one person making the decision.

 

[TheComebackKid]

of course not.

if you can empirically research creation, then that might be a good activity in a science class. it would start a shit storm from both sides though. and i have my doubts as to whether you could come up with any empirical research related to creation that is falsifiable.

You can most certainly research creation theories in a scientific way, especially the one shared by the vast majority of people that have ever lived. You can then present the different arguments, experiments, debates, and conclusions regarding the science of it in a balanced, non-religious, inclusive way.

 

[Prutfis]

If they represent a large enough faction of the population, then yes. Absolutely their opinion should be given consideration.

In the states, we don't censor people we don't agree with. Thats the point of a "board." This isn't one person making the decision.

No it doesn't. Just because retards reach a certain number doesn't mean they should have a say in anything

 

[Seano]

No it doesn't. Just because retards reach a certain number doesn't mean they should have a say in anything

It does actually but tell yourself what you want to feel superior.

 

[NoDak]

Have you also heard about another pseudo science concept called the electric universe?

 

[JonnyRingo84]

You can most certainly research creation theories in a scientific way, especially the one shared by the vast majority of people that have ever lived.

according to the process that is science, experimentation must be falsifiable. how could a person DISPROVE god pulling the universe out of his top hat? if it cannot be disproven, then whats the point in attempting empirical research with it?

You can then present the different arguments, experiments, debates, and conclusions regarding the science of it in a balanced, non-religious, inclusive way.

thats great, but this is a philosophy class. a very important set of activities that all people should learn to do, but this is not science. that doesnt make it any less valuable. its like saying literature is not math.

 

[Falsedawn]

I agree with this if he's willing to provide verifiable evidence of his views in the natural world.

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

I think its about time Christians get some representation in our schools science curriculum.

Christian's get representation in dictating curriculum in schools already. They are called private Christian academies.

Keep all religion out of public schools.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Kezele is a creationist and beleives that Dinos were on the Ark and earth is 6000 years old

Lol at thinking an ark could hold a T-rex