4th Grade "Science" Quiz - Were you there?

[Derideo_Te]

snopes.com: 4th Grade Science Quiz

Assuming that this is genuine (still pending verification) is this right or wrong for children to be taught in schools as "science"?

(Note that attacks on Snopes will be considered to be a deflection under the assumption that this is genuine.)

Is this the "science education" you want for your own 4th grader? What is the purpose of handicapping American children by giving them false information rather than a fact based education? Religion belongs in the home and places of worship. Schools are where children are supposed to learn about the real world so that one day they will know enough in order to survive.

So the question is a simple one. Is this what you want your own children to be taught in school? Yes or no?

You did read in the Snopes evaluation that this is a test put out by a very small fundamentalist Christian School in which the parents agree to strict, fundamentalist Bible teaching when they enroll their kids? I don't object to the religious content but do feel sad when incorrect science is taught. But it is their right by our Constitution to profess and believe what they wish and there is no provision for the State to do anythng about that.

I was educated in a very super religious, conservative part of the country in public schools, but we celebrated Easter and Christmas and Thanksgiving as a religious holidy. The choir performed Handel's Messiah and other traditional religious Christmas music in the Christmas concert, we had student led prayers to begin every student assembly and every sporting event, a Bible reading for show and tell was perfectly acceptable, and all us seniors attended a Baccalaureate service as part of the graduation traditions.

And I got an excellent science education. Things were only a tad more secular in the public schools my kids attended and they also got excellent science educations. I would not put my kids in public school now because I believe they would be taught incorrect science based on secular liberal doctrines rather than honest science. The other extreme and all that.

Nice to see you again Foxy

Since you had the benefit of an excellent science education you must have some legitimate factual basis for your current concerns about public school science education. Would you care to share those facts? It would be interesting to discover what they are and discuss them here.

 

[Foxfyre]

Assuming that this is genuine (still pending verification) is this right or wrong for children to be taught in schools as "science"?

(Note that attacks on Snopes will be considered to be a deflection under the assumption that this is genuine.)

Is this the "science education" you want for your own 4th grader? What is the purpose of handicapping American children by giving them false information rather than a fact based education? Religion belongs in the home and places of worship. Schools are where children are supposed to learn about the real world so that one day they will know enough in order to survive.

So the question is a simple one. Is this what you want your own children to be taught in school? Yes or no?

You did read in the Snopes evaluation that this is a test put out by a very small fundamentalist Christian School in which the parents agree to strict, fundamentalist Bible teaching when they enroll their kids? I don't object to the religious content but do feel sad when incorrect science is taught. But it is their right by our Constitution to profess and believe what they wish and there is no provision for the State to do anythng about that.

I was educated in a very super religious, conservative part of the country in public schools, but we celebrated Easter and Christmas and Thanksgiving as a religious holidy. The choir performed Handel's Messiah and other traditional religious Christmas music in the Christmas concert, we had student led prayers to begin every student assembly and every sporting event, a Bible reading for show and tell was perfectly acceptable, and all us seniors attended a Baccalaureate service as part of the graduation traditions.

And I got an excellent science education. Things were only a tad more secular in the public schools my kids attended and they also got excellent science educations. I would not put my kids in public school now because I believe they would be taught incorrect science based on secular liberal doctrines rather than honest science. The other extreme and all that.

Nice to see you again Foxy

Since you had the benefit of an excellent science education you must have some legitimate factual basis for your current concerns about public school science education. Would you care to share those facts? It would be interesting to discover what they are and discuss them here.

Sure. Just in the last three months I tutored students who:
1. Were told that anthropogenic global warming is settled science. (It isn't)
2. Were told that electric cars are 100% green energy. (They aren't.)
3. Were told that the silvery minnow would not survive without human help. (Funny how they seemed to survive before anybody was regulating the rivers around here.)
4. Were told that introduction of domestic cattle is causing desertification. There is considerable question about that. Allan Savory to Reverse Desertification, Solve Global Warming, Feed World?s Poor | Singularity Hub
5. Were told there is no evidence of intelligent design. (Einstein would have strongly disagreed with that though he would agree that there is no scientifically testable evidence of intelligent design at this time.)

 

[Oldguy]

If only humanity has an "immortal soul" then you are essentially stating that all other living things on this planet are soulless. There are a great many pet owners who would disagree with you on that point. Putting that aside you open up the next question as to when does the "immortal soul" arrive and depart the physical body? Perhaps the most interesting question of all is are Near Death Experiences examples of the "immortal soul" getting a "sneak peak" at "heaven"? Lastly is there only a single way in which this "immortal soul" is going to end up in "heaven"? Just my 2 cents worth of food for thought.

Yep, those are good questions which I've thought about.

But, for now, I'll simply answer the last one. Yes, there is but one way to heaven that's by faith in Jesus Christ. "No man cometh unto the Father but by me."

So how do you explain life long Atheists who have had NDE's and also end up reporting that they were in "heaven"?

The mind does tricky things when deprived of oxygen. Frankly, I'm more than a little leery of all NDE's, atheist's or not. And, especially those where they meet "Jesus" and He tells them there's been a mistake and they're going back.

However, since I've never had one, I'll not pass judgment on them.

 

[Flopper]

Just because Adam was the first man created in God's image does not necessarily mean he was the first humanoid. Much depends upon what it means to be created in God's image.

It couldn't mean that he was created to look like God physically because God is Spirit. He doesn't have a body to copy (or, didn't until Christ), so that's out.

What it means is that Adam was the first man to receive an immortal soul, a breath of God's own immortality. He was set apart from every other creature on earth in order to have an eternal relationship with the eternal God. He may have been an entirely new creation, or he may have been simply the first humanoid to have a soul. Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal may have been his physical ancestors, but HE was different and brand new because of that soul.

If that were true, it would eliminate an awful lot of the disagreements between creation and evolution, wouldn't it?

Just food for thought.

Cain went to the land of Nod, took a wife, bore a son and build a city, so there must have been another race or tribe of people there.

In my opinion, the Bible describes how we should live our lives and our relationship with God. It was never intended to be a book of science or history. The Bible does not go into details that are irrelevant to this purpose such who lived in the land of Nod or the length of a day during creation. Therefore there is plenty of room for scientific theories such as evolution unless you take the Bible literally, which is ridiculous since it's been edited, translated, and interpreted for two thousand years. Today there are over 50 known versions of the Bible, most of which are available today.

In Genisis 4:16:
Then Cain went out from the presence of the Lord and dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden. 17 And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he built a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son—Enoch.

Most of the Bible can be taken literally, but not all of it. Even Jesus spoke in parables, which aren't literally true unless there really was a guy who built his house on sand, etc. The key to interpreting the Scriptures (or, rightly dividing the truth as it's called) is the presence of the Holy Spirit. Among other things the Spirit does, He guides and directs our understanding of the Word of God. And, the only way to obtain the indwelling Spirit is by professing Jesus Christ.

In other words, just as the Bible says, the Scriptures are gibberish to unbelievers. If you really want to cut through the chaff and get to the core of the Bible, you've got to believe first.

Personally, I believe the Genesis account of creation is part literal and part allegory, but that seems to be a minority position in Christianity. So be it. If Genesis is literal, it must mean the Cain went out and married some sister of his which the Bible does not reveal was born yet. I've seen some of the most convoluted "biblical" reasonings to explain that which can be imagined.

There are many details that are left out of the Bible, simply because it is not relevant to message. Only if we try to use the Bible as a book of science, history, or anthropology do we miss it.

 

[Flopper]

You did read in the Snopes evaluation that this is a test put out by a very small fundamentalist Christian School in which the parents agree to strict, fundamentalist Bible teaching when they enroll their kids? I don't object to the religious content but do feel sad when incorrect science is taught. But it is their right by our Constitution to profess and believe what they wish and there is no provision for the State to do anythng about that.

I was educated in a very super religious, conservative part of the country in public schools, but we celebrated Easter and Christmas and Thanksgiving as a religious holidy. The choir performed Handel's Messiah and other traditional religious Christmas music in the Christmas concert, we had student led prayers to begin every student assembly and every sporting event, a Bible reading for show and tell was perfectly acceptable, and all us seniors attended a Baccalaureate service as part of the graduation traditions.

And I got an excellent science education. Things were only a tad more secular in the public schools my kids attended and they also got excellent science educations. I would not put my kids in public school now because I believe they would be taught incorrect science based on secular liberal doctrines rather than honest science. The other extreme and all that.

Nice to see you again Foxy

Since you had the benefit of an excellent science education you must have some legitimate factual basis for your current concerns about public school science education. Would you care to share those facts? It would be interesting to discover what they are and discuss them here.

Sure. Just in the last three months I tutored students who:
1. Were told that anthropogenic global warming is settled science. (It isn't)
2. Were told that electric cars are 100% green energy. (They aren't.)
3. Were told that the silvery minnow would not survive without human help. (Funny how they seemed to survive before anybody was regulating the rivers around here.)
4. Were told that introduction of domestic cattle is causing desertification. There is considerable question about that. Allan Savory to Reverse Desertification, Solve Global Warming, Feed World?s Poor | Singularity Hub
5. Were told there is no evidence of intelligent design. (Einstein would have strongly disagreed with that though he would agree that there is no scientifically testable evidence of intelligent design at this time.)

The underlying topics of your points, Global Warming, Alternative Energy, and Evolution, are hotly debated and have strong political as well as religious overtones. Many teachers just like everyone else have strong views on controversial subjects and their opinions and interpretations will always find their way into the classroom. I think most teachers do a pretty good job of keeping their personal biases out the classroom and sticking to the curriculum.

 

[numan]

'

Evolution may be hotly debated, but it certainly is not in doubt -- at least, by anyone who is not mentally defective.
.

 

[FA_Q2]

If there is no such thing as indisputable in science then I dispute it. This of course means it is not fact AKA theory and by your own admission subject to being corrected and out right wrong.

Evidence should lead to theory but in evolutions case the theory has lead to millions of dollars of research proving the so called theory' s so called evidence. Whats wrong with that? No scientist would dare challenge such a profitable venture. The theory is so entrenched in the scientific community and been bought wholesale by every teaching institution anything suggesting it's incorrect is unthinkable and anyone challenging it would be laughed out of the scientific community. Now would you expect to find impartial findings coming from such a community? No because major credibility would be lost along with the cash. So that alone makes the theory about as questionable as any piece of legislation in Washington.

While the commonalities doesn't disprove it, neither does it prove it, the same as you can't disprove creationism or AAT.

Ah, you dispute it. That is fine, there are a lot of disputes against it. There are many problems as well that the theory of evolution is not able t tackle at this moment BUT tat was not really the challenge was it. These are just basic realities but you evaded the CORE of what you need to do in order to put up your opposing ideas against evolution:

So, what repeatable experiment have you designed to test alien theory and creationism? What are your scientific predictions to the outcome of those experiments?

Go on, show us how you possibly fit your round faith peg into a square science hole….

You have to accomplish the above first. BTW: this is the SECOND time that you have mentions ‘disproving’ creationism. This is also the second time that I have to tell you that is simply impossible. You are focusing on that idea because you want to avoid the above.

If science can't prove a theory than its just an Idea,mythology,fairy tail,dogma, and absolutely no different than a faith based theory. There is no question that the earth travels around the sun. But there are big questions about evolution that quite frankly for myself and for many others take FAITH to believe in it.

Already addressed. There are a ton of experiments that evolution has shown but they are not the point of this particular line of reasoning. You have yet to show that your ‘theories’ have any remote chance of being called science. I repeat, where are your testable and repeatable experiments?

I want to know if we are evolving where is it today? Homo Sapiens have been around for how long? Where's the new changes?

All over the place. The human race is changing all the time BUT you seem to think that we have been here awhile. We have not. Not nearly long enough for evolution. There is what, less than 6000 years of recorded history? Even more than that, we have had a BASIC understanding of life and the possibilities of evolution for a scant few hundred years. We are talking not ten times that, not 100 times that, not even a thousand times that. We are talking numbers far larger, hundreds of millions of years for sweeping changes. Evolution does not happen quickly.

I also expect better evidence then whats been presented before I stop believing in creationism and AAT.

I do genealogy and even that has a much higher rate of proof than evolution. That's sad. In genealogy if you can't prove direct descent your not considered related. Evolution has not proven an unbroken direct descent between humans and apes. I doubt that it ever will. But the evidence presented so far is spotty at best. Your evidence really isn't any less questionable than the evidence that a higher intelligence created us. This evidence is quite simply,if we can clone,grow human trachea' s,in vitro fertilization,transplant surgery,what could a higher intelligence do? The evidence for creationism is our own technology which can be 100% proven by tangible results.

What you believe is irrelevant. What is rooted in science is. Where is your verifiable, repeatable experiment?

 

[westwall]

Nice to see you again Foxy

Since you had the benefit of an excellent science education you must have some legitimate factual basis for your current concerns about public school science education. Would you care to share those facts? It would be interesting to discover what they are and discuss them here.

Sure. Just in the last three months I tutored students who:
1. Were told that anthropogenic global warming is settled science. (It isn't)
2. Were told that electric cars are 100% green energy. (They aren't.)
3. Were told that the silvery minnow would not survive without human help. (Funny how they seemed to survive before anybody was regulating the rivers around here.)
4. Were told that introduction of domestic cattle is causing desertification. There is considerable question about that. Allan Savory to Reverse Desertification, Solve Global Warming, Feed World?s Poor | Singularity Hub
5. Were told there is no evidence of intelligent design. (Einstein would have strongly disagreed with that though he would agree that there is no scientifically testable evidence of intelligent design at this time.)

The underlying topics of your points, Global Warming, Alternative Energy, and Evolution, are hotly debated and have strong political as well as religious overtones. Many teachers just like everyone else have strong views on controversial subjects and their opinions and interpretations will always find their way into the classroom. I think most teachers do a pretty good job of keeping their personal biases out the classroom and sticking to the curriculum.

Political yes, religious no. Except for operatives who attempt to besmirch those who disagree with them. They allways try and make the sceptics on the AGW side out to be religious fanatics when it is exactly the opposite.

Alternative energy is a lie as it currently works. Allmost all the energy to run the EV's is coming from fossil fuel sources. Add to that the actual manufacturing of those EVs and they are anything but green.

Sceptics don't want to deny the research into alternatives no matter how hard the green propagandists would wish you to believe it. What we want is that the research that is funded by public monies be transparent, checkable, and most importantly not granted to friends of the administration unless their projects are indeed the best.

This last round of government giveaways went to friends of Obama. All but one of the projects that were funded....and went bankrupt within two years were friends of Barack.

That is a level of corruption that this country can't afford any longer.

 

[Derideo_Te]

You did read in the Snopes evaluation that this is a test put out by a very small fundamentalist Christian School in which the parents agree to strict, fundamentalist Bible teaching when they enroll their kids? I don't object to the religious content but do feel sad when incorrect science is taught. But it is their right by our Constitution to profess and believe what they wish and there is no provision for the State to do anythng about that.

I was educated in a very super religious, conservative part of the country in public schools, but we celebrated Easter and Christmas and Thanksgiving as a religious holidy. The choir performed Handel's Messiah and other traditional religious Christmas music in the Christmas concert, we had student led prayers to begin every student assembly and every sporting event, a Bible reading for show and tell was perfectly acceptable, and all us seniors attended a Baccalaureate service as part of the graduation traditions.

And I got an excellent science education. Things were only a tad more secular in the public schools my kids attended and they also got excellent science educations. I would not put my kids in public school now because I believe they would be taught incorrect science based on secular liberal doctrines rather than honest science. The other extreme and all that.

Nice to see you again Foxy

Since you had the benefit of an excellent science education you must have some legitimate factual basis for your current concerns about public school science education. Would you care to share those facts? It would be interesting to discover what they are and discuss them here.

Sure. Just in the last three months I tutored students who:
1. Were told that anthropogenic global warming is settled science. (It isn't)
2. Were told that electric cars are 100% green energy. (They aren't.)
3. Were told that the silvery minnow would not survive without human help. (Funny how they seemed to survive before anybody was regulating the rivers around here.)
4. Were told that introduction of domestic cattle is causing desertification. There is considerable question about that. Allan Savory to Reverse Desertification, Solve Global Warming, Feed World?s Poor | Singularity Hub
5. Were told there is no evidence of intelligent design. (Einstein would have strongly disagreed with that though he would agree that there is no scientifically testable evidence of intelligent design at this time.)

So you are basing this on what you have heard. Is it not possible that this is coming from only the science teacher(s) in your immediate vicinity rather than being something that is happening nationwide? Not trying to diminish any of this but this sounds more like opinion than anything that would be found in a science text book. Certainly teachers are entitled to their opinions but good ones do not allow them to influence the material. If you can provide documents like the ones in the OP it would be worth confronting any teacher(s) who were failing to do their jobs properly.

 

[Foxfyre]

Nice to see you again Foxy

Since you had the benefit of an excellent science education you must have some legitimate factual basis for your current concerns about public school science education. Would you care to share those facts? It would be interesting to discover what they are and discuss them here.

Sure. Just in the last three months I tutored students who:
1. Were told that anthropogenic global warming is settled science. (It isn't)
2. Were told that electric cars are 100% green energy. (They aren't.)
3. Were told that the silvery minnow would not survive without human help. (Funny how they seemed to survive before anybody was regulating the rivers around here.)
4. Were told that introduction of domestic cattle is causing desertification. There is considerable question about that. Allan Savory to Reverse Desertification, Solve Global Warming, Feed World?s Poor | Singularity Hub
5. Were told there is no evidence of intelligent design. (Einstein would have strongly disagreed with that though he would agree that there is no scientifically testable evidence of intelligent design at this time.)

So you are basing this on what you have heard. Is it not possible that this is coming from only the science teacher(s) in your immediate vicinity rather than being something that is happening nationwide? Not trying to diminish any of this but this sounds more like opinion than anything that would be found in a science text book. Certainly teachers are entitled to their opinions but good ones do not allow them to influence the material. If you can provide documents like the ones in the OP it would be worth confronting any teacher(s) who were failing to do their jobs properly.

I trust the kids I tutor to tell it like it is. Most especially when I try to steer them to correct their 'wrong answer', and they object knowing that their teacher will count it as correct. It is only logical that political correctness and a leftwing agenda would affect academics heavily populated by those of liberal/progressive leanings. It isn't only in science that you see it, but in all aspects of the curriculum and in dealing with all aspects of the kids' behavior.

Most of the kids I tutor do have conservative parents, however, and they aren't getting a totally one sided perspective on this stuff, but it still rankles me that the politically correct version gets pushed and any different opinions or theories not so much.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Sure. Just in the last three months I tutored students who:
1. Were told that anthropogenic global warming is settled science. (It isn't)
2. Were told that electric cars are 100% green energy. (They aren't.)
3. Were told that the silvery minnow would not survive without human help. (Funny how they seemed to survive before anybody was regulating the rivers around here.)
4. Were told that introduction of domestic cattle is causing desertification. There is considerable question about that. Allan Savory to Reverse Desertification, Solve Global Warming, Feed World?s Poor | Singularity Hub
5. Were told there is no evidence of intelligent design. (Einstein would have strongly disagreed with that though he would agree that there is no scientifically testable evidence of intelligent design at this time.)

So you are basing this on what you have heard. Is it not possible that this is coming from only the science teacher(s) in your immediate vicinity rather than being something that is happening nationwide? Not trying to diminish any of this but this sounds more like opinion than anything that would be found in a science text book. Certainly teachers are entitled to their opinions but good ones do not allow them to influence the material. If you can provide documents like the ones in the OP it would be worth confronting any teacher(s) who were failing to do their jobs properly.

I trust the kids I tutor to tell it like it is. Most especially when I try to steer them to correct their 'wrong answer', and they object knowing that their teacher will count it as correct. It is only logical that political correctness and a leftwing agenda would affect academics heavily populated by those of liberal/progressive leanings. It isn't only in science that you see it, but in all aspects of the curriculum and in dealing with all aspects of the kids' behavior.

Most of the kids I tutor do have conservative parents, however, and they aren't getting a totally one sided perspective on this stuff, but it still rankles me that the politically correct version gets pushed and any different opinions or theories not so much.

You should be trusting what the kids are telling you. It is just that you would stand a better chance of dealing with the issue if you had something beyond what they are saying to corroborate it. Then you can take action and make sure that all of the kids are being taught properly and without any politically correct bias.

 

[Foxfyre]

So you are basing this on what you have heard. Is it not possible that this is coming from only the science teacher(s) in your immediate vicinity rather than being something that is happening nationwide? Not trying to diminish any of this but this sounds more like opinion than anything that would be found in a science text book. Certainly teachers are entitled to their opinions but good ones do not allow them to influence the material. If you can provide documents like the ones in the OP it would be worth confronting any teacher(s) who were failing to do their jobs properly.

I trust the kids I tutor to tell it like it is. Most especially when I try to steer them to correct their 'wrong answer', and they object knowing that their teacher will count it as correct. It is only logical that political correctness and a leftwing agenda would affect academics heavily populated by those of liberal/progressive leanings. It isn't only in science that you see it, but in all aspects of the curriculum and in dealing with all aspects of the kids' behavior.

Most of the kids I tutor do have conservative parents, however, and they aren't getting a totally one sided perspective on this stuff, but it still rankles me that the politically correct version gets pushed and any different opinions or theories not so much.

You should be trusting what the kids are telling you. It is just that you would stand a better chance of dealing with the issue if you had something beyond what they are saying to corroborate it. Then you can take action and make sure that all of the kids are being taught properly and without any politically correct bias.

I wish I had that power. But I do not. I am one voice railing against political correctness that in my opinion is the single greatest threat to American culture and values. I do what I can, but it takes many to push back a tide. All I can do is to keep punching and hope that enough will come to their senses that we can all make a difference. As it is now, the only option for many parents is to try to get their kids into the good private or parochial schools all with long waiting lists. Or to homeschool.

 

[LittleNipper]

I trust the kids I tutor to tell it like it is. Most especially when I try to steer them to correct their 'wrong answer', and they object knowing that their teacher will count it as correct. It is only logical that political correctness and a leftwing agenda would affect academics heavily populated by those of liberal/progressive leanings. It isn't only in science that you see it, but in all aspects of the curriculum and in dealing with all aspects of the kids' behavior.

Most of the kids I tutor do have conservative parents, however, and they aren't getting a totally one sided perspective on this stuff, but it still rankles me that the politically correct version gets pushed and any different opinions or theories not so much.

You should be trusting what the kids are telling you. It is just that you would stand a better chance of dealing with the issue if you had something beyond what they are saying to corroborate it. Then you can take action and make sure that all of the kids are being taught properly and without any politically correct bias.

I wish I had that power. But I do not. I am one voice railing against political correctness that in my opinion is the single greatest threat to American culture and values. I do what I can, but it takes many to push back a tide. All I can do is to keep punching and hope that enough will come to their senses that we can all make a difference. As it is now, the only option for many parents is to try to get their kids into the good private or parochial schools all with long waiting lists. Or to homeschool.

And now it seems that even private and home schooling is threatened, just like in Nazi Germany. The government knows what is best for the children to be taught. And you can bet, it isn't Creationism, or that homosexuality is a corruption, or abortion is inherently wrong, or that motherhood is a worthy commitment, or that a search for God is important...

 

[rightwinger]

You should be trusting what the kids are telling you. It is just that you would stand a better chance of dealing with the issue if you had something beyond what they are saying to corroborate it. Then you can take action and make sure that all of the kids are being taught properly and without any politically correct bias.

I wish I had that power. But I do not. I am one voice railing against political correctness that in my opinion is the single greatest threat to American culture and values. I do what I can, but it takes many to push back a tide. All I can do is to keep punching and hope that enough will come to their senses that we can all make a difference. As it is now, the only option for many parents is to try to get their kids into the good private or parochial schools all with long waiting lists. Or to homeschool.

And now it seems that even private and home schooling is threatened, just like in Nazi Germany. The government knows what is best for the children to be taught. And you can bet, it isn't Creationism, or that homosexuality is a corruption, or abortion is inherently wrong, or that motherhood is a worthy commitment, or that a search for God is important...

Creationism belongs in religious classes not our schools. Do you want your child to be taught a version of creationism that is contrary to your beliefs?

Abortion is a legal procedure in this country. Its morality is something for parents and churches to discuss

I have never seen a school speak out against motherhood

Your parents and church should teach you that a search for God is important. NOT your school

 

[Oldguy]

You should be trusting what the kids are telling you. It is just that you would stand a better chance of dealing with the issue if you had something beyond what they are saying to corroborate it. Then you can take action and make sure that all of the kids are being taught properly and without any politically correct bias.

I wish I had that power. But I do not. I am one voice railing against political correctness that in my opinion is the single greatest threat to American culture and values. I do what I can, but it takes many to push back a tide. All I can do is to keep punching and hope that enough will come to their senses that we can all make a difference. As it is now, the only option for many parents is to try to get their kids into the good private or parochial schools all with long waiting lists. Or to homeschool.

And now it seems that even private and home schooling is threatened, just like in Nazi Germany. The government knows what is best for the children to be taught. And you can bet, it isn't Creationism, or that homosexuality is a corruption, or abortion is inherently wrong, or that motherhood is a worthy commitment, or that a search for God is important...

Which version of creation do you want taught? The Hindu version? The native American version? The old Chinese version? (I briefly outlined those in a previous post).

Or, just the Christian version?

 

[dilloduck]

Assuming that this is genuine (still pending verification) is this right or wrong for children to be taught in schools as "science"?

(Note that attacks on Snopes will be considered to be a deflection under the assumption that this is genuine.)

Is this the "science education" you want for your own 4th grader? What is the purpose of handicapping American children by giving them false information rather than a fact based education? Religion belongs in the home and places of worship. Schools are where children are supposed to learn about the real world so that one day they will know enough in order to survive.

So the question is a simple one. Is this what you want your own children to be taught in school? Yes or no?

A religion that isn't based on truth isn't worth anything. I see nothing wrong with the belief that God created. And it is impossible for scientists to determine how or when God created. There are CLEARLY assumptions being made based on what is expected of natural processes; however, no one has determined that nature came about on its own. So, the proof of anything is relative to what one is willing to assume and accept.

Scientists can't determine something that never happened. It is you that is making the assumption that there was a "creation event". There is no evidence that the universe was "created". The laws of physics state that the universe must always have existed and will always exist in some form or another.

If the current laws of physics prove to be inaccurate we can always change them to fit reality. It's the great thing about science. You can swear it's the truth one day and calmly say you were wrong the next day. No harm no foul.

 

[Foxfyre]

I wish I had that power. But I do not. I am one voice railing against political correctness that in my opinion is the single greatest threat to American culture and values. I do what I can, but it takes many to push back a tide. All I can do is to keep punching and hope that enough will come to their senses that we can all make a difference. As it is now, the only option for many parents is to try to get their kids into the good private or parochial schools all with long waiting lists. Or to homeschool.

And now it seems that even private and home schooling is threatened, just like in Nazi Germany. The government knows what is best for the children to be taught. And you can bet, it isn't Creationism, or that homosexuality is a corruption, or abortion is inherently wrong, or that motherhood is a worthy commitment, or that a search for God is important...

Creationism belongs in religious classes not our schools. Do you want your child to be taught a version of creationism that is contrary to your beliefs?

Abortion is a legal procedure in this country. Its morality is something for parents and churches to discuss

I have never seen a school speak out against motherhood

Your parents and church should teach you that a search for God is important. NOT your school

Freedom means the right to believe what we believe, profess what we profess, and value what we value regardless of anybody else's opinion about that or whether you or I think it is right or wrong. And when the federal government assumes the right to tell us what can and cannot be taught in the schools, what we must believe, profess, value, or accept, the federal government can do anything to us that it chooses to do and we have no freedoms.

Certainly we hope our local school boards will choose good curriculum for the public schools and will hire teachers who teach the kids good basic curriculum and teaches them to think and reason and who do not indoctrinate them in what their view of the world should be. It is our responsibility to see that we put people in those positions who do choose honest curriculum and who teach ideas, principles, concepts, theory, possibilities, and how to analyze and conceptualize and reason.

Those who trust the federal government to do that are fools.

 

[Oldguy]

I see the proponents of teaching creation in school are still avoiding the question of which version of creation should be taught.

 

[Flopper]

I see the proponents of teaching creation in school are still avoiding the question of which version of creation should be taught.

When you're teaching a fairy tale, does the version really matter?

 

[FA_Q2]

Freedom means the right to believe what we believe, profess what we profess, and value what we value regardless of anybody else's opinion about that or whether you or I think it is right or wrong. And when the federal government assumes the right to tell us what can and cannot be taught in the schools, what we must believe, profess, value, or accept, the federal government can do anything to us that it chooses to do and we have no freedoms.

True. When you ask that creationism be taught as an ‘alternative’ theory though, you are not referring to freedom that you are outlining so well here. Instead, you are demanding that others be handed competing ‘theories’ when one is clearly not scientific or based in anything other than religious preference. IOW, that is not an appeal to freedom but rather an appeal to make your own personal beliefs required teachings. Such is completely wrong.

The freedom to have your child educated in such a way still exists. You are completely capable of teaching them this at home for example. Homeschool is a strong and preferable answer to this. You are also capable of enrolling them in a private institution that teaches the curriculum that you believe in. That is your option and should always be your option but interjecting personal belief system or convictions does not belong in a public school.

I will conceded on one point though, the practice of requiring you to pay for a public institution that does not adhere to your standards of education is outright wrong and that is why I support vouchers to enable more people to choose the education for their children that they find meets the standards that they want. I think that is the only real hole here, the government taking your money and then not offering the decisions that you want in your own school.

Certainly we hope our local school boards will choose good curriculum for the public schools and will hire teachers who teach the kids good basic curriculum and teaches them to think and reason and who do not indoctrinate them in what their view of the world should be. It is our responsibility to see that we put people in those positions who do choose honest curriculum and who teach ideas, principles, concepts, theory, possibilities, and how to analyze and conceptualize and reason.

Those who trust the federal government to do that are fools.

Always true.