Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I go by the belief that God created evolution. That it is all his work. I'm all for evolution, doesn't mean God isn't behind it. I also don't take the Bible literally.

Melissia wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:My thoughts echo the title, I have no idea how this could even be debated. Would you consider not teaching kids about gravity in school? How about the earth orbiting the sun?

These are the same people that want to change the mathematical constant of π to 3, essentially desiring to alter the fundamental laws of geometry because they invariably suck at math and science and want to impose their religious views on others even when it is directly contradicted by reality.

Now that is just stupid, on the other hand replacing 2π with τ is something I can get behind.

There are some good reasons not to teach evolution in schools. None of them have anything to do with religion.

biccat wrote:There are some good reasons not to teach evolution in schools. None of them have anything to do with religion.

Care to name some?

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:

biccat wrote:There are some good reasons not to teach evolution in schools. None of them have anything to do with religion.

Care to name some?

Evolution is too complicated of a concept to be teaching grade school kids.

Most professions don't need a working knowledge of the theory of evolution.

There are better things to spend time teaching children. Like math, or writing.

That's not saying that there's no value in teaching evolution, or any other subject, rather that schools have a limited amount of time in the day and there might be value in reducing the subjects students study from day-to-day.

LOL!

There is nothing about evolution that's 'theory' anymore, and I love how they keep talking about how they should 'avoid the theory' part.This isn't the 19th century, evolution is nothing new.

Dunno why I'm stating what everyone already knows on a wargaming forum. I'm sure we're all thinking the exact same thing.

Schools run from 9 to 3 here with 1 hour break for approximately 190 days a year from ages 5 to 16, that's around 10,000 hours in total.

Does it really take that long to teach kids nothing more than functional maths and writing?

corpsesarefun wrote:Schools run from 9 to 3 here with 1 hour break for approximately 190 days a year from ages 5 to 16, that's around 10,000 hours in total.

Does it really take that long to teach kids nothing more than functional maths and writing?

I don't know about you, but I spent that 9-3 period of time during my school years horsing around in the back of the class with my friends, and the vast majority of kids in my classes were doing the same, or at least not paying attention. Grade school is nothing more than day care for children.

You were unable to write and use basic maths at 16?

Is the american education system really THAT bad?

Horst wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:Schools run from 9 to 3 here with 1 hour break for approximately 190 days a year from ages 5 to 16, that's around 10,000 hours in total.

Does it really take that long to teach kids nothing more than functional maths and writing?

I don't know about you, but I spent that 9-3 period of time during my school years horsing around in the back of the class with my friends, and the vast majority of kids in my classes were doing the same, or at least not paying attention. Grade school is nothing more than day care for children.

And you refusing to learn is the school's fault how?

Horst wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:Schools run from 9 to 3 here with 1 hour break for approximately 190 days a year from ages 5 to 16, that's around 10,000 hours in total.

Does it really take that long to teach kids nothing more than functional maths and writing?

I don't know about you, but I spent that 9-3 period of time during my school years horsing around in the back of the class with my friends, and the vast majority of kids in my classes were doing the same, or at least not paying attention. Grade school is nothing more than day care for children.

You spent 5 hours doing bugger all for 5 days a week for 13 years?
I'm gonna assume you meant just primary school (assuming grade school=primary school). Little point to teaching evolution to anyone under 10 years of age. Save it for secondary school...

I agree that evolution is best left to the over tens but if children without learning disabilities have reached the age of ten and are unable to do basic maths, read or write then something has fethed up bigtime.

corpsesarefun wrote:I agree that evolution is best left to the over tens but if children without learning disabilities have reached the age of ten and are unable to do basic maths, read or write then something has fethed up bigtime.

True...
That said if you can't do that you are probably gonna be put into the lowest groups in secondary school...

Math is unnecessary beyond basic statistics, algebra and geometry. I wasted two whole years on trigonometry and advanced algebra, and more or less was just happy to be rid of it. For any profession that requires math, the required skills will be taught to you.

English is also important. One must be able to competently read and write to hold a job, unless they expect to be earning minimum wage the rest of their life.

Beyond that, I think science and history are the most important things to teach children. They teach perspective, and generally keep ignorance at bay. I learned the basics of government and foreign policy my sophomore year of high school, and I thought that was great. I also spent a whole year learning about biology, which really made me think differently about the natural world, and I'm glad I took it. Of course, some people just have 0 aptitude for science. Some people have 0 aptitude for anything. Clearly there is no all encompassing teaching method.

If the goal of teaching was simply to help students get and keep jobs, we could just send them off to work in internships and apprenticeships and have them learn about financial responsibility and job skills.

I learned Evolution in school at a very early age (about 3rd grade), and even before that, I knew the general idea of it. It wasn't shocking to anyone in the class, and the only real objection we got to it was "Aye, I ain't no monkey, hurdurr" sort of statements. Even if you don't believe it, it's nice to keep an open mind.

corpsesarefun wrote:Schools run from 9 to 3 here with 1 hour break for approximately 190 days a year from ages 5 to 16, that's around 10,000 hours in total.

Does it really take that long to teach kids nothing more than functional maths and writing?

Dunno, I'm not an educator.

I'm just saying that there are reasons why some things don't get taught.

For example, I don't know why everyone shouldn't learn calculus and basic economics, but apparently these aren't required in most schools.

Samus_aran115 wrote:
Beyond that, I think science and history are the most important things to teach children.

I don't know about the most important, but certainly important. History in particular is fairly crucial in terms of inculcating children with some form of national identity.

Science is probably more important than history in terms of work related skills, though we teach it so poorly, focusing on the wrong things, that it hardly matters.

biccat wrote:
For example, I don't know why everyone shouldn't learn calculus and basic economics, but apparently these aren't required in most schools.

Much of it has to do with finding teachers that can actually teach the subject matter, at least in the better districts.

biccat wrote:Evolution is too complicated of a concept to be teaching grade school kids.

I learned far more complex things than evolution in grade school. And why should one study biology without studying its basic principles? That'd be like studying algebra without first understanding how to multiply non-representative numbers.

biccat wrote:Most professions don't need a working knowledge of the theory of evolution.

An understanding of science and basic scientific laws/theories (as well as the difference between a scientific theorem and a theory in the common language, IE a hypothesis) is extremely valuable to anyone, as it helps them with critical thinking skills.

biccat wrote:There are better things to spend time teaching children. Like math, or writing.

... which can be taught alongside evolution and the sciences. In fact, most sciences use math.

As for writing... it's much less useful of a skill. If you mean English (or another primary language depending on the nation), then perhaps, but that's already being taught.

A nation where children are not taught science is a nation that will stagnate and die. See the decline of intellectuality in the Islamic world circa 1100 AD.

Melissia wrote:I learned far more complex things than evolution in grade school. And why should one study biology without studying its basic principles?

I don't know, evolution is pretty complicated. To the point where college educated adults, even those with advanced degrees, seem to struggle with it.

I also don't think its a basic principle of biology (to the extent that I think there are basic principles).

Of course, to the extent that school in the United States is about a generalist education, I think it should certainly be taught. After all, we teach kids, really young kids, about all kinds of things they're too young to fully understand or appreciate. One of them being the English language.

corpsesarefun wrote:You were unable to write and use basic maths at 16?

Is the american education system really THAT bad?

Sometimes.

I actually watched this with my wife today; she was a 2nd grade teacher, and now is the Librarian at the same school and teaches research skills as a college librarian...adjunct faculty is kind of a gak job even if it pays well BTW.

As we were watching it she just kept saying, "where DON'T they teach evolution?"

I actually skipped through this the first time after I got the gist. When the one said "they should teach the bible view next to evolution" or somesuch I wanted to reach through the computer and strangle her. You want your goddamned kids taught fairy tales send them to parochial school, but not a Jesuit one, they teach evolution. fething backwards twits. There are days I literally thank God I wasn't born into one of these idiot families/region tha spouts this nonsense.

AustonT wrote:...adjunct faculty is kind of a gak job even if it pays well BTW.

Our department liaison librarian used to say "She'll do it for you." was the most common description of her among professors. She wasn't joking.

Do what, sorry I'm just not on the same page.

Track down document X, find such and such book, create your search terms, or even staple those copies.

Our department treated her like crap, which was sad because she had been a member of it as an undergrad.

Hmm that sounds nothing like my wife's experience...her description makes her job sound managerial...plus teaching the odd class when scheduled.
But when she was a grad student getting her Libby masters she got the gak stick like that plenty


Automatically Appended Next Post:
She's mostly bored to tears, we are hoping when we move there is a childrens or law library she can move into, rather than academia.

This can be a point of contention because a hell of a lot of scientific issues get turned into culture war issues in the United States. Evolution, climate change, alternative energy research...scientific evidence simply doesn't matter to these people.

I really don't think evolution is too difficult to teach kids. School education is more than what you need for a job in later life. You don't need to know a lot of History, or barely anything about Chemistry, you certainly don't need Art but you still study these in school or you'll turn out pig ignorant. The point of education is not to merely produce number crunching drones or people who can type out documents.

Most things taught at school level are taught in a simple manner. Degree level evolution teaching is far more complex than that at high school, but it builds upon the previous teaching and the general ideas laid down there. Also, without any exposure to a range of topics, how will you know what you like and want to study further? You can't really go from ignorance about a subject straight into degree level learning, you need a basis and that comes in school. Similarly with genetics and DNA. That is taught in school so that people grasp simple concepts of inheritance. But obviously it can be far far more complicated and even at degree level, you are not taught to the same level of complexity as you will encounter at post-graduate level.

Actually I think evolution and general concepts like survival-of-the-fittest are far easier to impart to a room of kids than the complexities of genetic inheritance (though Mendel's pea plants) and many chemical reactions in Chemistry class which just looks like a scrawl of gobbledegook with letters, numbers and arrows.

Both my parents and my wife are teachers (11 years to 18 years) and my mum teaches biology, and my wife teaches chemistry (with some biology); both teach evolution to various years as pupils go through their education. Like any complex subject, like atomic structure, or calculus, you start early with the basics and the "simple lies to children" that will form the basis of their understanding, and gradually build up closer to the truth.

For example, "atoms" start off as single chunks of small stuff that stick together. Then you learn that they have components; a nucleus and electrons that go round it like planets around the sun. Then you learn about protons and neutrons, electron shells, energy levels, etc, etc, etc.

This continues all the way up through education; simple versions of reality to help aid understanding being replaced with more complex versions that are closer to the truth. It is the same with evolution. There is absolutely no reason it should not be taught from almost the first years of "proper" teaching (ie after you have got through the part of school which is essentially all colouring things in and playing in the sand pit and learning the basics of language and maths).

Horst wrote:Actually, I have uncovered new evidence. Evolution SHOULD NOT BE TAUGHT IN SCHOOLS!

Here is proof that evolution is wrong. This guy is a true christian.

Spoiler:

Wow Horst i really have to thank you for posting that vid. I laughed my arse off at it. His explanation as to why creatures are buried in the earth was just wonderful. Fish and squid drowning? Lulzy. And WTF is with the Pasta?? I wasnt aware that pasta was a prehistoric creature.
Thanks bud.

Likely a subtle reference to pastafarianism, which exists to mock other religions.

Also cause it must appear in every one of these threads.

See the problem with what hes saying is that hes not necessarily wrong. Sure he's not totally right either. But yes it "could" happen, life could one day spring forth from a jar of peanut butter. The thing is though its just that it wont happen. Its like the Large Hadron Collider. Yeah sure the collider could create a black hole that destroys the earth and life as we know it. But the fact of the matter is that the chances of it happening are so insignicantly small that its not going to happen. I mean sure its not quite as simple as that but that is it in its most basic form.

So in the end it boils down to crushed legumes and a 27km long tube.

*sigh*

Most christians are not against evolution or science. Its representative of a few who have extremist views, like branding all muslims terrorists because the people who flew into the WTC were muslims.

Evolution should be taught not just because its a scientific view, but also because both religion and science agree on it. It's a little thing called not taking the bible literally and applying it for issues within our times. Just sometimes people take it too far.