S4: Athiests are our friends act (failed)

[JustinTimeCuber]

Ben right now

[Wisconsin+17]

I'm enjoying the discussion, actually.

Just wish you had better arguments...

[JustinTimeCuber]

Dude your whole argument is that 17 year olds are too stupid to understand evolution.

[fhtagn]

I'm willing to open the floor back up for debate to give Ben the chance to argue his reasoning for the bill and to allow for real discussion on the contents.

And just to throw this out again, are we sure we don't want to include stoning?

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And I'm being thoroughly rebutted here..

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And I'm being thoroughly rebutted here..

17 year olds are too stupid for evolution but 19 year olds aren't?
huh? really?
this is stupid

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As an educator, the question becomes, "what should our children be learning in biology class?"

Anatomy and physiology is a very broad, detailed and extensive class. It would also benefit students to spend more time on it, particularly those interested in pursuing a field in medical sciences.

If we take evolution out of the curriculum we can put more time in here. It's not about taking things away but using time effectively.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Explain the title of the bill.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What, you don't like atheists?

Atheists are our friends.

[fhtagn]

Atheists are our friends. Not food

[JustinTimeCuber]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What, you don't like atheists?

Atheists are our friends.

poor attempt at trolling

Atheists are our friends. Not food

kek

[Wisconsin+17]

Who's trolling?

Sheesh, Cuber. You're paranoid. Here I put out a bill that explicitly says "Atheists are our friends", and you call it trolling.

Couldn't I just be expressing that yes, I believe Atheists to be my friends??

[fhtagn]

soooo does this mean Biblical punishment is not on the table?

SAD!

[NeverAgain]

The way we got to now and our evolutionary process is central to biology... Anatomy is fine and good, but if you don't have the concept of how that anatomy plays into all living things, and the connections between all living creatures, it is not a full education on that subject. These issues and facts are all a part of each other.

I will say, on this issue, I find it almost insulting that there is a pushing of anti-evolutionist ideals towards a sole creationist agenda. My personal belief is that it was only through intelligent design that evolution could have been occurred, but how ever it was done, it is a fact, and it should be taught, not because it is just a fact, but because it is central to both our biological past, but also our future.

[diptheriadan]

I'm sorry, but how is teaching evolution or that humans do climate change practical to the everyday lives of kids? I mean, we can and regularly do work around it.

[JustinTimeCuber]

I'm sorry, but how is teaching the beginning of anything practical to the everyday lives of kids? I mean, we can and regularly do work around it.

yeah so let's also stop teaching 8th and 9th graders algebra because it doesn't currently have much of a purpose in their everyday life... not like many jobs require knowledge of at least basic algebra.

Same with evolution.

[diptheriadan]

I'm sorry, but how is teaching the beginning of anything practical to the everyday lives of kids? I mean, we can and regularly do work around it.

yeah so let's also stop teaching 8th and 9th graders algebra because it doesn't currently have much of a purpose in their everyday life... not like many jobs require knowledge of at least basic algebra.

Same with evolution.

Knowing evolution is not a requirement for "most" jobs. Besides, we already do teach evolution in school, it's just not specifically called evolution.

[JustinTimeCuber]

I'm sorry, but how is teaching the beginning of anything practical to the everyday lives of kids? I mean, we can and regularly do work around it.

yeah so let's also stop teaching 8th and 9th graders algebra because it doesn't currently have much of a purpose in their everyday life... not like many jobs require knowledge of at least basic algebra.

Same with evolution.

Knowing evolution is not a requirement for "most" jobs. Besides, we already do teach evolution in school, it's just not specifically called evolution.

Not an argument to ban teaching evolution

[diptheriadan]

Not an argument to ban teaching evolution

I'm not arguing for banning teaching evolution. I'm arguing that it doesn't matter since we already do, we just don't call it evolution specifically. It's the difference between saying that 2+2 is 4 and teaching kids how to add 2+2.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Not an argument to ban teaching evolution

I'm not arguing for banning teaching evolution. I'm arguing that it doesn't matter since we already do, we just don't call it evolution specifically. It's the difference between saying that 2+2 is 4 and teaching kids how to add 2+2.

Evolution isn't like a math fact, it's a whole concept. Teach evolution, call it evolution, and teach WHY.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The problem is we don't have the facts as to how we got to now. We have theories, we have conjectures. But we also have some quite broad gaps. There are quite a few sections of the theory that we simply don't have an concrete evidence to prove that these things happened in this way.

We also don't even know the full structure of human evolution, let alone the evolution of other species. How do all the pieces fit together? We don't know. We make the hypothesis that there was a straight line from A to B to C, but again - we cannot prove that this is the path that things took.

It used to be that every dig was it's own species. Don't believe me? Look it up. We had a 'man' for every dig. It suggests to me that what we don't know about what actually happened with evolution is greater than the knowledge we do have.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Who is arguing for creationism to be taught in schools? It's not a scientific theory and does not belong in a biology class.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, there is very little in biology that requires the acceptance of the theory of evolution in order to understand. Much of the conjecture that certain features of our anatomy can be explained in this fashion have been quite laughably wrong. The problem is we don't have the evidence to support these conjectures, whereas we do have pretty good understanding of anatomy and physiology, how the body actually works. 

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Does evolution make testable predictions? Using math, I can make all sorts of predictions and have them be exactly correct.

[diptheriadan]

Not an argument to ban teaching evolution

I'm not arguing for banning teaching evolution. I'm arguing that it doesn't matter since we already do, we just don't call it evolution specifically. It's the difference between saying that 2+2 is 4 and teaching kids how to add 2+2.

Evolution isn't like a math fact, it's a whole concept. Teach evolution, call it evolution, and teach WHY.

*sigh* You didn't get my analogy. Alright. I'll try again. Imagine a world where saying that 2+2=4 is outlawed. It is hated. It is banned. If you say it, you will be lynched. As a teacher, you would want kids to know the truth of things, right? The truth is that 2+2=4, but you can't teach that 2+2=4. How do you get around this? Do you throw up your arms and give up or do you teach basic math. Obviously, you teach basic math. While you don't specifically say that 2+2=4, you do teach how to add two numbers.

It's no different in our world. The various concepts under the umbrella of evolution is banned and (somewhat) hated. Teachers work around this by just teaching what these concepts are. They don't do it in one big lesson or a series of lessons, but they do teach them. They just don't call it evolution.

[JustinTimeCuber]

Not an argument to ban teaching evolution

I'm not arguing for banning teaching evolution. I'm arguing that it doesn't matter since we already do, we just don't call it evolution specifically. It's the difference between saying that 2+2 is 4 and teaching kids how to add 2+2.

Evolution isn't like a math fact, it's a whole concept. Teach evolution, call it evolution, and teach WHY.

*sigh* You didn't get my analogy. Alright. I'll try again. Imagine a world where saying that 2+2=4 is outlawed. It is hated. It is banned. If you say it, you will be lynched. As a teacher, you would want kids to know the truth of things, right? The truth is that 2+2=4, but you can't teach that 2+2=4. How do you get around this? Do you throw up your arms and give up or do you teach basic math. Obviously, you teach basic math. While you don't specifically say that 2+2=4, you do teach how to add two numbers.

It's no different in our world. The various concepts under the umbrella of evolution is banned and (somewhat) hated. Teachers work around this by just teaching what these concepts are. They don't do it in one big lesson or a series of lessons, but they do teach them. They just don't call it evolution.

Okay, makes sense.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Does evolution make testable predictions? Using math, I can make all sorts of predictions and have them be exactly correct.

Evolution doesn't make exact predictions, no, but it importantly explains where we came from.

IF WE CAMED FROM MOMKIEZ, THEN WHYS THERE SILL MONNKEES??!?!

Also​, it appears to me that Ben needs to learn the definition of theory.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Diptheriadan, what would you conclude are the core concepts behind evolution that must be taught in a biology class?