Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8898 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-26-2019 5:58 AM
24 online now:
PaulK, Porkncheese, Pressie, vimesey (4 members, 20 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,657 Year: 3,694/19,786 Month: 689/1,087 Week: 58/221 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
4567
8
9Next
Author Topic:   New Tennessee Monkey Law!
Taq
Member
Posts: 7673
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 106 of 126 (660410)
04-25-2012 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Artemis Entreri
04-19-2012 11:34 AM


Re: staying on topic
why should it concern me that people in NYC are denied their 2nd amendment rights?

If someone can violate the rights of a New Yorker then they can violate your rights as well. I personally think that is a problem. I don't live on the Island of Taq where I am the only citizen. What happens to others within the rule of law also affects me.

oddly none of that is stated in the law. don't be like stubby you are 10X the poster that he is.

Odd, isn't it? It's almost like they are trying to hide the intent of the law. Wonder why? Could it be that the intent of the law is to circumvent the 2nd Ammendment?

really!?! according to you guys a scientist would NEVER teach religion.

When I attended university many of the professors in the science department attended the same Methodist church. I would strongly suspect that they taught religion within the context of Sunday school or church services, but these lessons were [sarcasm]oddly[/sarcasm] missing from lectures in my genetics, cell bio, histology, etc. classes. I don't doubt that there are scientists out there that teach in other Sunday School's. That is not the point.

The point is that it is a violation of the 2nd Ammendment to indoctrinate students into religious beliefs as part of the curriculum in a public, government funded school. When this happens people can bring complaints to the justic system. The Tennessee law gives shelter to teachers who want to bring in creationist arguments against evolution. That is the intent of the law which is obvious to just about everyone.

Just read up on the Dover trial.

{WRONG AMMENDMENT - SEE BELOW - BUT NO MORE 2ND AMMENDMENT COMMENTS - ADMINNEMOOSEUS}

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : In red.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Artemis Entreri, posted 04-19-2012 11:34 AM Artemis Entreri has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-25-2012 2:08 PM Taq has responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 107 of 126 (660423)
04-25-2012 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by Taq
04-25-2012 11:50 AM


Re: staying on topic
2nd Ammendment

Wrong amendment... that one's about guns.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Taq, posted 04-25-2012 11:50 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by hooah212002, posted 04-25-2012 2:18 PM New Cat's Eye has acknowledged this reply
 Message 110 by Taq, posted 04-26-2012 11:36 AM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 108 of 126 (660425)
04-25-2012 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by New Cat's Eye
04-25-2012 2:08 PM


Re: staying on topic
No, it's about Bear Arms

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.


"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-25-2012 2:08 PM New Cat's Eye has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by Panda, posted 04-25-2012 6:08 PM hooah212002 has not yet responded

    
Panda
Member (Idle past 1793 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 109 of 126 (660441)
04-25-2012 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by hooah212002
04-25-2012 2:18 PM


Re: staying on topic
I thought it was the right to arm bears...

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.


Tradition and heritage are all dead people's baggage. Stop carrying it!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by hooah212002, posted 04-25-2012 2:18 PM hooah212002 has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7673
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 110 of 126 (660494)
04-26-2012 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by New Cat's Eye
04-25-2012 2:08 PM


Re: staying on topic
Wrong amendment... that one's about guns.

Hehe, I am getting my discussions mixed up. Was discussing 2nd Ammend. rights with someone else a few nights ago.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-25-2012 2:08 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1372 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 111 of 126 (660621)
04-27-2012 3:16 PM


Anyway, going back to the topic, how's this bill coming along?
Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by subbie, posted 04-27-2012 3:33 PM Taz has not yet responded
 Message 113 by dwise1, posted 04-27-2012 3:43 PM Taz has not yet responded

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 40 days)
Posts: 3508
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 112 of 126 (660623)
04-27-2012 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Taz
04-27-2012 3:16 PM


It passed, the gutless governor didn't veto it, but didn't sign it either. Thus, he stands firmly astride the fence.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Taz, posted 04-27-2012 3:16 PM Taz has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by NoNukes, posted 04-28-2012 6:42 AM subbie has acknowledged this reply

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3310
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 113 of 126 (660628)
04-27-2012 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Taz
04-27-2012 3:16 PM


Anyway, going back to the topic, how's this bill coming along?

"Bill"? The bill is long-gone, since it became a law on 10 April 2012, the day before this topic started. It became a law automatically when Gov. Bill Haslam neither signed it nor vetoed it. It is the law in Tennessee.

What's happening now is that the ACLU is waiting for the inevitable outcome (from What next in Tennessee? at ncse.com):

quote:
Hedy Weinberg, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, told the newspaper that her group is in touch with concerned parents across the state, "waiting for one to report First Amendment violations teachers could make under the mistaken notion that they now have full protection."

What's the likelihood of that happening? It already is (from the same article):
quote:
Gary Nixon, executive director of the Tennessee State Board of Education, was sanguine, saying, "We have some very solid science standards to be taught, and we expect those to be taught." But the Tennessean noted that the state's science standards received a grade of D in the Fordham Foundation's latest evaluation of state science standards, with the life science section faring poorest. Tennessee is committed, however, to adopting the Next Generation Science Standards, due later in the year, in which evolution is emphasized as one of the "disciplinary core ideas" of the life sciences.

What's in the standards and what's in the classroom are not necessarily the same. Mike Kohut, a researcher at Vanderbilt University studying evolution education in Tennessee, found in his interviews of students and teachers that "one director of schools admitted he knew teachers taught creationism in the classroom. A teacher said he was offended he is forced to teach evolution. A science coordinator said teaching evolution was a good way to get fired in her district." Kohut regarded it as likely that teachers who wish to introduce intelligent design would understand the law allowing them to do so.

Confirmation that evolution may already be ignored or disparaged in Tennessee classrooms came from the Chattanooga Times Free Press (April 15, 2012), which quoted one teacher as saying, "We don't even call it evolution. We call it genetic change," and contending, "[Evolution] has nothing to do with whether man was once a monkey." Becky Ashe, president of the Tennessee Science Teachers Association, told the Times Free Press that she (like Kohut) feared that teachers, especially in small rural districts, might take the law as license to teach creationism to their students.


So start up the popcorn and sit back for the show to start. Even though it's the same old plot all over again, and again, and again -- we can even already recite from memory most of the "new" dialogue, having seen it used so many times before.

The NCSE's other articles on Tennessee are available here. And you can find news on what's going on in the other states at the NCSE's home page at http://ncse.com/.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Taz, posted 04-27-2012 3:16 PM Taz has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 114 of 126 (660660)
04-28-2012 6:42 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by subbie
04-27-2012 3:33 PM


It passed, the gutless governor didn't veto it, but didn't sign it either. Thus, he stands firmly astride the fence.

I don't think not vetoing the bill was gutless. The bill was passed by a 3:1 margin in the legislature, making a veto quixotic.

However the governor could have made some stronger statements regarding the impact of the bill. Instead he spouted thusly (gutlessly):

quote:
I do not believe that this legislation changes the scientific standards that are taught in our schools or the curriculum that is used by our teachers. However, I also dont believe that it accomplishes anything that isnt already acceptable in our schools. The bill received strong bipartisan support, passing the House and Senate by a three-to-one margin, but good legislation should bring clarity and not confusion. My concern is that this bill has not met this objective. For that reason, I will not sign the bill but will allow it to become law without my signature.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by subbie, posted 04-27-2012 3:33 PM subbie has acknowledged this reply

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 115 of 126 (660697)
04-28-2012 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by dwise1
04-11-2012 3:09 AM


Re: Governor's Inaction
dwise writes:

What? Nobody was monitoring this one? The Governor ignored this one and it automatically became a law.

Likely the good governor ignored this one on purpose so as to balance out the educational agenda regarding evolution vs creationism. It's about time some fairness and balance should be guaranteed in the educational arena, unlike EvC where members like me simply get banned from science debates so as for evolution to be the required science agenda debated/discussed. Only non-effective, easily refuted creationists allowed in the science fora.

"Monkey bill" enacted in Tennessee

dwise writes:

Governor Bill Haslam allowed Tennessee's House Bill 368 to become law without his signature on April 10, 2012, according to the Memphis Commercial Appeal (April 10, 2012). The law encourages teachers to present the "scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses" of topics that arouse "debate and disputation" such as "biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning."

Pray tell, Dwise, what's wrong with presenting strengths and scientific weaknesses of both creationism and evolution?

dwise writes:

This is the first bill in the Governor's 15 months in office that he allowed to be passed by being ignored.

Kudos to him. Now the students can learn both POVs so as to make up their minds rationally and objectively.

dwise writes:

The bill ... er, law, purports to defend a teacher from repercussions for presenting negative evidence of certain scientific ideas. The bill ... er, law, only specifies science classes to be subject to this law, not other classes. The law specifically targets evolution, climate change, and human cloning. The sponsor of the bill, the aforementioned former state senator, works for a very specifically religious organization. Furthermore, the only "negative evidence of said scientific ideas" can be found amongst creationists and IDists. And a scientist and wife of a high school science teacher interviewed on the afore-linked-to NPR program, "Which Way, LA?", pointed out that teachers have always been allowed to present opposing scientific ideas into their classrooms, so that law is totally unnecessary. The only purpose that the law could possibly serve would be to allow teachers to bring in religious creationist materials.

It only applies to science because like EvC, science is the only subject that is not fair and balanced ideologically. Now, at least students and their parents are guaranteed fair an balanced science education to be taught.

Edited by Buzsaw, : Tidy up spelling, etc


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool." :)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by dwise1, posted 04-11-2012 3:09 AM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Rrhain, posted 04-28-2012 3:34 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 117 by jar, posted 04-28-2012 4:03 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 118 by Coyote, posted 04-28-2012 5:05 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 119 by dwise1, posted 04-28-2012 5:26 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 120 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-28-2012 6:57 PM Buzsaw has responded

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 116 of 126 (660698)
04-28-2012 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Buzsaw
04-28-2012 3:26 PM


Buzsaw writes:

quote:
Pray tell, Dwise, what wrong with presenting strengths and scientifice weaknesses of both creationism and evolution?

Because it's wasting time. Suppose the law were this:

The law encourages teachers to present the "mathematical strengths and weaknesses" of topics that arouse "debate and disputation" such as "addition, multiplication, fractions, and logarithms."

What, exactly, do you expect to have happen here? Time spent in class should be wasted covering why one and one do not equal three? That since a significant proportion of the population find fractions "icky" and "boring," we should recognize their opinion that it's all bogus and teach about how fractions mean anything you want them to mean?

There is nothing wrong with presenting the strengths and weaknesses of science.

The problem is that there is no debate here.

How about this: Every year, we will do a survey of all the biology journals that have been published in the last 10 years. We will then divide the classroom time based upon the number of articles in support of creationism compared to the number of articles in support of evolution. If we can find that 20% of the articles out there bring evolution into question and suggest some sort of divine hand at work, then we'll spend 20% of the time in class discussing that.

Would that satisfy you?


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Buzsaw, posted 04-28-2012 3:26 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 117 of 126 (660701)
04-28-2012 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Buzsaw
04-28-2012 3:26 PM


Re: Governor's Inaction
Buz writes:

It only applies to science because like EvC, science is the only subject that is not fair and balance as to ideology. Now, at least students and their parents are guaranteed fair an balanced science education to be taught.

Science has nothing to do with ideology. There is no such thing as "fair and balanced science" except in parents that want there kids to grow up uneducated.

Any teacher that stoops to teaching Creationism or Intelligent design is not fit to be a teacher and should be fired.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Buzsaw, posted 04-28-2012 3:26 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 186 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 118 of 126 (660706)
04-28-2012 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Buzsaw
04-28-2012 3:26 PM


Re: Governor's Inaction
Likely the good governor ignored this one on purpose so as to balance out the educational agenda regarding evolution vs creationism. It's about time some fairness and balance should be guaranteed in the educational arena

What is the proper balance between evidence-based rationality and belief-based superstition?


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Buzsaw, posted 04-28-2012 3:26 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3310
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.1


(4)
Message 119 of 126 (660709)
04-28-2012 5:26 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Buzsaw
04-28-2012 3:26 PM


Re: Governor's Inaction
Pray tell, Dwise, what wrong with presenting strengths and scientifice weaknesses of both creationism and evolution?

In principle, nothing. However, both the principle and its practical application require that those strengths and weaknesses be presented with complete truthfulness and honesty. For more than four decades, creationists have demonstrated consistently and persistently that truthfulness and honesty is anathema to their creationist theology. Including creationist materials and claims would only serve to introduce lies and deception into the science classroom. What pedagogic purpose could that possibly serve?

But, you might say, that's not what you're talking about, but it is even if you don't realize it yet. When I as first starting to study "creation science" 30 years ago, there was a joke: "Creationism is a book with two chapters; Chapter One is 'Evolution' and Chapter Two is 'Everything that's Wrong with Chapter One.'" The thing is that that was no joke. "Creation science" claimed to have a "creation model" and to have mountains of evidence for creation, but they would never present their "creation model" nor any of that evidence for creation, but rather all they would present was lies and misrepresentations about what evolution is and false claims and "evidence" against evolution. All creationism consists of are lies about science and evolution and false claims against science and evolution.

When creationists would fail to get "creation science" included in the science classroom under the smokescreen of "balanced treatment", they would then offer a "compromise" that, instead of creationism, the "scientific weaknesses of evolution" be presented in science class. But as we have already seen, that is all that "creation science" is, so accepting that "compromise" would be exactly the same as including creationism; ie, that is no compromise, but rather a creationist deception.

And the "scientific weaknesses of evolution" that you want to be included come straight out of "creation science" and are only to be found in creationism and they have been refuted as being false repeatedly for decades; IOW, they are PRATTs. What pedagogic purpose could including those lies possibly serve?.

Now let's look at your question from another perspective. Why present the non-existent scientific strengths and multitude of weaknesses of creationism? What pedagogic purpose could that possibly serve? Not only would that be introducing religion into the science classroom, but it would also, if done honestly and truthfully, be taken by the religious students and community as a direct attack on their religious beliefs. What pedagogic purpose could that possibly serve? And on top of all that, it would waste valuable class time that should instead be spent teaching the curriculum; and as the teachers cited pointed out, there's not enough time to teach what they're supposed to teach, so there's none that they can afford to waste on creationism.

I should also point out that the purpose of education, and of science education in particular, is for the students to learn and understand the material; compelling belief in what's taught is explicitly contrary to the purpose of education. As we have learned from creationist teaching materials, the purpose of creationism is to compel belief, which includes blatant attempts to convert the students at the end of the lessons.

And, yes, the strengths and weaknesses of any scientific law or theory should be presented and be open for discussion in the science classroom. Actual scientific weaknesses, not creationist lies.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Buzsaw, posted 04-28-2012 3:26 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2000
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.0


(1)
Message 120 of 126 (660719)
04-28-2012 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Buzsaw
04-28-2012 3:26 PM


Re: Governor's Inaction
Buz writes:

what's wrong with presenting strengths and scientific weaknesses of both creationism and evolution?

You are a funny guy, Buz. We all know you would be madder than hell if the strengths and weaknesses of creationism were taught. There are no strengths to be found in creationism.....NOT ONE!

There are no weaknesses in the ToE..... NOT ONE!

science is the only subject that is not fair and balanced ideologically.

You're right, but not because of what you think. Science has nothing to do with ideology. Contrary to what you think, science is not a right wing conspiracy.

Enjoy


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Buzsaw, posted 04-28-2012 3:26 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Buzsaw, posted 04-28-2012 8:48 PM Tanypteryx has responded

    
Prev1
...
4567
8
9Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019