Please Help Me

Well, Dyno, if you're still reading this thread, I can help you, but probably not how you want.You don't have a chance, you're going to get killed in a debate like that. Let me tell you how I know.Exactly nine years ago, I got on CompuServe's religion forum as a young earth creationist, armed with all the young earth info I could find. I am not the best debater around, but I am very good and tests say I'm really super at logic. I got slaughtered on the forum by the evolutionists--really slaughtered.I like to win all my debates, so if I lose, I generally switch to the winning side so that I can get back to winning. I did in this case, too. Now, here's the kicker.About a month after switching to the evolution side, a graduate of ICR's college showed up, prepared to defend young earth creationism. With one month of reading on my side, I answered all his questions and begged him to come up with something that would allow me to stay a young earth creationists. He told me I was biased like all evolutionists, that I wouldn't listen, and then he didn't even answer me!!! A graduate of ICR's creationist school! He couldn't compete with an evolutionist with one month worth of knowledge!Give it up, buddy, you don't have a chance. Take ae's advice and figure out that you don't need a literal Genesis One to believe in God, because the creation did not happen in seven literal days. Sorry.By the way, I still believe, and I live in a wonderful community of disciples of Christ who have all had to face the fact that facts are facts. Evolution happened. You can't win the debate you're in.

Now, having said what I said in post 17, I will tell you how I was the only debater on the creationist side to win a debate at our school last year (out of six debates--I was one of the teachers, and my students all took the evolution side, because I didn't want them to have to debate on the side of what's not true).The way I won was to make a long list of scientists, along with their credentials, who disagreed with evolution. I found a quote about John Baumgardner, a scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, that said he was a great scientist, written by an evolutionist, along with another couple references to good scientists who don't believe in evolution, and then I argued that if even scientists doubted it, how could us laymen trust it.Then, when my students would bring up evidence, I would try real hard to get them off the subject of their evidence by bringing up some point of mine, so the evidence for evolution was barely discussed at all.It was sneaky and dishonest, but, on the other hand, it was good training for the students, as I showed them later how I got them off subject and taught them how to remember what they want to say, not just get stuck answering what the other guy wants to say. I also didn't have to tell any lies, because it's hard to find evidence for young earth creationism that isn't made up or misleading. However, there are scientists, universally motivated by religion (which I avoided discussing), who don't believe in evolution.

Ages 14 through 17. They were irritated they lost, but those kids are my friends as well, so it's not like some bad experience. yes I was the last two years, but not this year. I am, however, what would be the equivalent of the youth pastor for that age group, if we had such a thing here. I recognize the term pedagogue, and I looked it up at dictionary.com to make sure I was thinking the right word. However, I can't say I know what issues you are referring to. The class was an attempt to cover a specific (though wide) science topic--evolution--and add some debate to the class. Overall, they were pretty pleased with themselves. One or two of the twelve in the class were pretty skeptical about evolution at the start of the class, but I made them express and defend what they were learning the whole year. No one got to learn silently. I've been told by others that I did a good job teaching them to learn and to think, and I hope that's true. I try very hard with all my kids to give them a passion for learning, and I also pressed honesty on them. I think if a person loves to learn, can be brutally honest, and can read, then they have no limits.My turn:I have noticed you on the boards for the first time this last week. You must be a scientist of some sort yourself, I would guess, and your posts are straightforward, reasonable, and readable (even for me! ). Are you a scientist, and what's your interest in the evolution-creation debate?

That's okay, great info. I'm glad to hear Sylas was ok with it.I'm feeling pretty good now about recognizing quality. I told my three co-workers who now lurk here that that Sylas guy's posts are consistently awesome: clear and relevant.I'm afraid, however, that my students could have had a better science teacher. I figured since it wasn't really directly a science class, part debate, I would do well just to teach them how to learn, and then they could learn from real science teachers on their own, even as the mostly home schoolers they are.

Well, I'm off topic, and my last post was pushing that a bit, but if I can briefly says this on the science of teaching: My goal was to teach them to recognize the difference between quality information and gobbledy-gook, opinions, and lies. I think I did a good job at that. People I respect on this forum have told me my posts are consistently balanced, and people I respect in the village here have told me my students are noticeably sharp thinkers.I'm actually pretty proud of that, though that may be bad (edit: meaning the pride). Those who know me well have told me I'm one of the most honest people they've ever met, and that sometimes I come off really arrogant. Hopefully, I'm learning from both statements.[This message has been edited by truthlover, 02-25-2004]