RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation)

RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

kdsub -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/8/2013 7:12:05 PM)
quote: So, Butch, suppose a History teacher raised the issue of the Oil embargo the US and UK placed on Japan in the late 1930s and claimed that was a cause of the War in the Pacific. That Japan was forced to attack. Assume it was not in the State curricula. Would you censure or fire that teacher? It depends on how history is being presented. If the subject is the reasons for the Japeneze attack on Pearl Harbour and entrance into the world war then the oil embargo would not be outside the subject and not prohibited. But to say this forced Japan to attack would be wrong and not true to history. To say they chose to attack would. Personal opinion should never be a part of a school curriculum…the facts are enough and history is history…of the winners anyway. Butch

leonine -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 8:59:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cordeliasub quote: Just wondering...if public schools who teach the science of evolution are required to present the alternative intelligent design...will parochial schools that teach intelligent design be required to present the alternative evolution? Wouldn't that be a kick in the ass to the fanatics that can't keep religion in the home and church and out of public schools? This^^^ I am a Christian, but it kills me that people don't get this. It's like those people who scream for prayer in schools...do they really think it would just be the prayers they hear at their local baptist church??? If you want your child to believe a certain tenet of faith, then teach it to YOUR child - do not make it a public school's job to do so. There's a guy who does fake Chick-tracts with Pagan themes. He did a wonderful one with a bunch of Asatro coming into a school board's office and saying they're all in favour of prayer in school, and they've got some real great prayers to propose...

leonine -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 9:05:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Yeah, we should fight for the ability to teach our youth BOTH sides of the issue until we gain acceptance for our side of the issue then, we should completely bar the other side from teaching children anything. I mean, who the fuck wants to give our children as much information as possible and then, let the children decide as they grow into adulthood. What the fuck is wrong with us? Peace and comfort, Michael ^5 DITTO 5^ So, in the interests of free speech you should require astronomy lessons to teach both the heliocentric and the geocentric theories? How about teaching Lysenko's theory of evolution alongside Darwin's and the Gospel's? Or the phlogiston theory of heat? Once you start deciding that there's no such thing as scientific truth, everyone's opinion is equal, then who decides what's fact? The School Board? Congress? The Supreme Court? Oops, sorry: Ottertail already said that better. Memo to self: read to the end of the thread before replying to anything.

vincentML -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 12:38:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: So, Butch, suppose a History teacher raised the issue of the Oil embargo the US and UK placed on Japan in the late 1930s and claimed that was a cause of the War in the Pacific. That Japan was forced to attack. Assume it was not in the State curricula. Would you censure or fire that teacher? It depends on how history is being presented. If the subject is the reasons for the Japeneze attack on Pearl Harbour and entrance into the world war then the oil embargo would not be outside the subject and not prohibited. But to say this forced Japan to attack would be wrong and not true to history. To say they chose to attack would. Personal opinion should never be a part of a school curriculum…the facts are enough and history is history…of the winners anyway. Butch History is always written from personal opinion, Butch. The historian looks at sources, reads others' accounts, and then writes from her own perception. Why? For the simple reason that for the most part historians are not eye-witnesses to the events they report on. It is impossible not to write history without personal bias. The same is true of teaching history. The teacher uses sources: textbooks, others' accounts, and then makes a presentation which cannot be free of personal opinion. It is not like teaching mathematical operations. Neither is science free from opinions. Because there are shades of interpretation. Inserting personal opinion is the essence of academic freedom. Oil shale sourcing for natural gas for example may be taught from the pov of energy needs and the pov of environmental protection. The teacher is certainly free to insert her opinion. Intelligent Design is a pseudoscience. That would be my opinion in the classroom. I would be able to state why I think so. A teacher may have an opinion that ID is valid. She would need to be able to support that position without invoking god. My [sm=2cents.gif]

Moonhead -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 12:41:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML A teacher may have an opinion that ID is valid. She would need to be able to support that position without invoking god. My [sm=2cents.gif] God luck finding anybody who's ever managed that one. [;)] These people are still insisting that there no skeletons of transitory species in evidence, which was already drivel in the '50s and looks even more ridiculous now.

vincentML -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 12:51:42 PM)
quote: So, in the interests of free speech you should require astronomy lessons to teach both the heliocentric and the geocentric theories? How about teaching Lysenko's theory of evolution alongside Darwin's and the Gospel's? Or the phlogiston theory of heat? Once you start deciding that there's no such thing as scientific truth, everyone's opinion is equal, then who decides what's fact? The School Board? Congress? The Supreme Court? @ leonine Scinetific "truth" changes with time. I always thought it quite helpful for students to understand the precursor "truths" and how they were replaced by current or recent scientific "truths." I disagree that the Biblical version of creation should be taught in a science classroom by state mandate. But, I think an individual teacher should, if she wishes, open the issue when discussing Darwin. It is an area of natural curiosity for students. It is an excellent opportunity to introduce the subject of abiogenesis for which science has no preeminent model. To ignore it does more harm than good, imo. It makes science into a rather smug endeavor.

vincentML -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 12:53:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML A teacher may have an opinion that ID is valid. She would need to be able to support that position without invoking god. My [sm=2cents.gif] God luck finding anybody who's ever managed that one. [;)] These people are still insisting that there no skeletons of transitory species in evidence, which was already drivel in the '50s and looks even more ridiculous now. I agree. I think ID is crap. But, I am defending academic freedom here. . . . while holding my nose.

Moonhead -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 12:54:59 PM)
I just don't buy that it's academic freedom teaching this nonsense: they don't teach the fucking phlostigon theory in physics classes, do they?

Phydeaux -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 12:55:56 PM)
Lets see.. the lead reviewer for the IPCC says that global warming is a hoax. Michael Mann admits to falsifying data. Oh yeah.. and mean temperatures haven't gone up in the last 11 years while global emissions have tripled. Yeah. maybe thats because global warming IS a hoax.

vincentML -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 1:08:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead I just don't buy that it's academic freedom teaching this nonsense: they don't teach the fucking phlostigon theory in physics classes, do they? I taught about phlogiston in Chemistry class. I also discussed Ptolemy's geocentric model in General Science class. What's the problem? They are part of the history of science, which is humankind's on going effort to understand nature.

Moonhead -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 1:11:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead I just don't buy that it's academic freedom teaching this nonsense: they don't teach the fucking phlostigon theory in physics classes, do they? I taught about phlogiston in Chemistry class. I also discussed Ptolemy's geocentric model in General Science class. What's the problem? They are part of the history of science, which is humankind's on going effort to understand nature. The problem is that neither theory has been current for a while, and both have been disproven. They're fine as a historical context, but they're bullshit as living science. Just like intelligent design. [;)]

vincentML -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 1:17:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Lets see.. the lead reviewer for the IPCC says that global warming is a hoax. Michael Mann admits to falsifying data. Oh yeah.. and mean temperatures haven't gone up in the last 11 years while global emissions have tripled. Yeah. maybe thats because global warming IS a hoax. The mean temperature of the Earth has risen and fallen periodically before the Age of Industrialization. What's your point? Maybe GW scientists have taken a correlation and turned into cause and effect. Maybe their predictions are wrong. Maybe climate is a chaotic reality that defies prediction through data input into supercomputers. Maybe the models are lacking in some small fashion that distorts the linear outcome like the flutter of butterfly wings in Malaysia effects Nature in Argentina. How do we know what we think we know? Is science to be orthodoxy? Then, it ceases to be science.

vincentML -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 1:24:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead I just don't buy that it's academic freedom teaching this nonsense: they don't teach the fucking phlostigon theory in physics classes, do they? I taught about phlogiston in Chemistry class. I also discussed Ptolemy's geocentric model in General Science class. What's the problem? They are part of the history of science, which is humankind's on going effort to understand nature. The problem is that neither theory has been current for a while, and both have been disproven. They're fine as a historical context, but they're bullshit as living science. Just like intelligent design. [;)] Student raises his hand (they still did back in the day) "But why is Intelligent Design bullshit, Mr. Teacher?" Or, "My pastor told me Intelligent Design was more accurate, Mr Teacher." Then what?

Moonhead -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 2:53:28 PM)
Then you explain that there's a fossil record and ask what proof their pastor has to suggest that id is any way accurate.

cordeliasub -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/9/2013 2:58:06 PM)
If I were teaching a class in which a student told me that their pastor said X....I would respond by telling them that this was a science class and not a church, and then go on with the scientific lesson. Now, if they said "my Mom and Dad said X"....I would tread more carefully by telling them that I would not disrespect their parents by getting into a debate, but that if they would allow me to continue the lesson, it might help to answer their questions. I say that because I once observed a teacher telling a 13 year old boy, in essense, that his parents were idiots - and THAT is highly unprofessional and NOT the job of any teacher anywhere.

vincentML -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/10/2013 5:20:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead Then you explain that there's a fossil record and ask what proof their pastor has to suggest that id is any way accurate. Challenging the pastor will most likely be offensive to the kid. Immediately, it is an attack on his religion and family beliefs. No need to go there. Creationsists already have a counter to the fossil record. They show a photo of human footprints along side of Dino footprints. Really! Better to explain what ID is and why it's in error before the question is asked, imo. It's not very complicated. It is a god of the gaps thing dealing with allegedly missing proteins. You don't have to be a rocket scientist. Even teachers can do it. Kids are mainly shy. Especially within a large group of their peers. So, the question will most often remain unasked. It is a teachable moment and can be done without mentioning religion.

Moonhead -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/10/2013 5:44:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Challenging the pastor will most likely be offensive to the kid. And mentioning a layman who blathers from a standpoint of ignorance is offensive in a science class. Part of an education is learning not to open cans of worms unless you're prepared for the possibility of having to eat them.

cordeliasub -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/10/2013 5:48:07 AM)
One of the most important soft skills a good teacher develops is learning to deal with both students and parents who don't agree with them in a tactful manner. More than a few teachers who know their content backwards and forward have lost jobs because they decided to be an ass. I'd probably take the high road (speaking from 15 years' teaching experience here).

leonine -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/10/2013 8:15:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: So, in the interests of free speech you should require astronomy lessons to teach both the heliocentric and the geocentric theories? How about teaching Lysenko's theory of evolution alongside Darwin's and the Gospel's? Or the phlogiston theory of heat? Once you start deciding that there's no such thing as scientific truth, everyone's opinion is equal, then who decides what's fact? The School Board? Congress? The Supreme Court? @ leonine Scinetific "truth" changes with time. I always thought it quite helpful for students to understand the precursor "truths" and how they were replaced by current or recent scientific "truths." I disagree that the Biblical version of creation should be taught in a science classroom by state mandate. But, I think an individual teacher should, if she wishes, open the issue when discussing Darwin. It is an area of natural curiosity for students. It is an excellent opportunity to introduce the subject of abiogenesis for which science has no preeminent model. To ignore it does more harm than good, imo. It makes science into a rather smug endeavor. A good teacher will mention Genesis when introducing the subject of evolution, in exactly the same way that they will mention the geocentric theory when introducing astronomy. But there's all the difference in the world between mentioning an older belief in the course of describing what science teaches now, and suggesting that the other belief is of equal scientific validity, which is what IDists want. There have been other nations that believed they could dictate scientific truth for political reasons, and they have paid the price. Nazi Germany might have had the atom bomb (or at least radar) before the Allies, if they hadn't forbidden their scientists to use "Jewish science" like relativity and quantum mechanics. Plant breeding research in the USSR came to a standstill when Stalin ordered that Lysenko's theories of genetics must used, and didn't recover till the '60s. (Stalin may have learnt his lesson when the Soviet rocket program began. It is said that his spies told him the scientists were using relativity theory in their work - which was also proscribed in the USSR as "bourgeois science" - and he said "Leave them to it, we can always shoot them later.")

leonine -> RE: AZ Bill would allow teachers to dismiss global warming (and other antiscience legislation) (2/10/2013 8:35:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Lets see.. the lead reviewer for the IPCC says that global warming is a hoax. Michael Mann admits to falsifying data. Oh yeah.. and mean temperatures haven't gone up in the last 11 years while global emissions have tripled. Yeah. maybe thats because global warming IS a hoax. The mean temperature of the Earth has risen and fallen periodically before the Age of Industrialization. What's your point? Maybe GW scientists have taken a correlation and turned into cause and effect. Maybe their predictions are wrong. Maybe climate is a chaotic reality that defies prediction through data input into supercomputers. Maybe the models are lacking in some small fashion that distorts the linear outcome like the flutter of butterfly wings in Malaysia effects Nature in Argentina. How do we know what we think we know? Is science to be orthodoxy? Then, it ceases to be science. Guys, there are plenty of threads where you can get educated about the hard facts of climate change and why Fox News is not a science channel. Can you take this argument to one of those, and let the rest of us accept the premise of the OP for purposes of argument? I'm sure most people don't want this thread hopelessly derailed with claims that all the world's meteorologists, climatologists, geographers, naturalists and oceanographers, not to mention NASA and the Pentagon, are in an anti-American conspiracy to fake 300 years' worth of data.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.882813E-02