All Forums > SimLeague Football > NFL > Makes me sick...
2/6/2013 12:49 PM
Sometimes it's better to wait for what comes along.

Is there some reason an 8 y/o NEEDS to be taught evolution?
2/6/2013 12:50 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Jtpsops on 2/6/2013 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 11:26:00 AM (view original):
I wouldn't want my kids being taught creationism as an alternative to evolution in school.  I'd have a huge problem with that.
And this is what weakens the evolutionist position. If your system was "fact" you'd have no problem with it standing next to another theory. But you're afraid it won't hold up, so you cry "NO!"

If it was indeed fact, you could confidently sit back and watch the other theories fall apart beside it.
I'm talking about elementary school age children.  They're not mentally developed enough to distinguish between the validity of competing theories.

If you "teach" a bunch of first graders that the moon is made out of cheese, many of them are going to believe it.

Is that the kind of educational system you're advocating?
Then why teach either?

Math is math.   Reading, and the things that go with it, is reading.

Why teach anything if there is a competing theory?  
"Math is math".

What if tomorrow, somebody "proved" that sometimes 2 + 2 does not always = 4.

Should we then stop teaching math?
2/6/2013 12:51 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 2/6/2013 12:48:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Jtpsops on 2/6/2013 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 11:26:00 AM (view original):
I wouldn't want my kids being taught creationism as an alternative to evolution in school.  I'd have a huge problem with that.
And this is what weakens the evolutionist position. If your system was "fact" you'd have no problem with it standing next to another theory. But you're afraid it won't hold up, so you cry "NO!"

If it was indeed fact, you could confidently sit back and watch the other theories fall apart beside it.
I'm talking about elementary school age children.  They're not mentally developed enough to distinguish between the validity of competing theories.

If you "teach" a bunch of first graders that the moon is made out of cheese, many of them are going to believe it.

Is that the kind of educational system you're advocating?
Then why teach either?

Math is math.   Reading, and the things that go with it, is reading.

Why teach anything if there is a competing theory?  
There is no competing scientific theory. Creationism isn't science.
2/6/2013 12:52 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:50:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Jtpsops on 2/6/2013 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 11:26:00 AM (view original):
I wouldn't want my kids being taught creationism as an alternative to evolution in school.  I'd have a huge problem with that.
And this is what weakens the evolutionist position. If your system was "fact" you'd have no problem with it standing next to another theory. But you're afraid it won't hold up, so you cry "NO!"

If it was indeed fact, you could confidently sit back and watch the other theories fall apart beside it.
I'm talking about elementary school age children.  They're not mentally developed enough to distinguish between the validity of competing theories.

If you "teach" a bunch of first graders that the moon is made out of cheese, many of them are going to believe it.

Is that the kind of educational system you're advocating?
Then why teach either?

Math is math.   Reading, and the things that go with it, is reading.

Why teach anything if there is a competing theory?  
"Math is math".

What if tomorrow, somebody "proved" that sometimes 2 + 2 does not always = 4.

Should we then stop teaching math?
Are you saying math is the same as evolution?

Are there millions of people who believe in a different system of math?    Some culture that believes 2+2=22?
2/6/2013 12:53 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Sometimes it's better to wait for what comes along.

Is there some reason an 8 y/o NEEDS to be taught evolution?
Do you have kids?

My six year old asks questions all the time about dinosaurs, cavemen, planets, etc., etc. Kids are interested in this stuff. We should teach them science in science class. If you want them to learn religion, send them to religion class.

Creationism isn't science until there is evidence of creation. It needs to stay out of science class regardless of the age of the students.
2/6/2013 12:53 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Sometimes it's better to wait for what comes along.

Is there some reason an 8 y/o NEEDS to be taught evolution?
No.  Not at all.

We can just sit back, scrap the education system in America, and let the Chinese surpass us in all the sciences.

Our kids will have more free time to play video games in the meantime.
2/6/2013 12:54 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/6/2013 12:48:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Jtpsops on 2/6/2013 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 11:26:00 AM (view original):
I wouldn't want my kids being taught creationism as an alternative to evolution in school.  I'd have a huge problem with that.
And this is what weakens the evolutionist position. If your system was "fact" you'd have no problem with it standing next to another theory. But you're afraid it won't hold up, so you cry "NO!"

If it was indeed fact, you could confidently sit back and watch the other theories fall apart beside it.
I'm talking about elementary school age children.  They're not mentally developed enough to distinguish between the validity of competing theories.

If you "teach" a bunch of first graders that the moon is made out of cheese, many of them are going to believe it.

Is that the kind of educational system you're advocating?
Then why teach either?

Math is math.   Reading, and the things that go with it, is reading.

Why teach anything if there is a competing theory?  
There is no competing scientific theory. Creationism isn't science.
Exactly. Creationism isn't science.
2/6/2013 12:55 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 2/6/2013 12:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/6/2013 12:48:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Jtpsops on 2/6/2013 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 11:26:00 AM (view original):
I wouldn't want my kids being taught creationism as an alternative to evolution in school.  I'd have a huge problem with that.
And this is what weakens the evolutionist position. If your system was "fact" you'd have no problem with it standing next to another theory. But you're afraid it won't hold up, so you cry "NO!"

If it was indeed fact, you could confidently sit back and watch the other theories fall apart beside it.
I'm talking about elementary school age children.  They're not mentally developed enough to distinguish between the validity of competing theories.

If you "teach" a bunch of first graders that the moon is made out of cheese, many of them are going to believe it.

Is that the kind of educational system you're advocating?
Then why teach either?

Math is math.   Reading, and the things that go with it, is reading.

Why teach anything if there is a competing theory?  
There is no competing scientific theory. Creationism isn't science.
Exactly. Creationism isn't science.
2/6/2013 12:56 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Sometimes it's better to wait for what comes along.

Is there some reason an 8 y/o NEEDS to be taught evolution?
No.  Not at all.

We can just sit back, scrap the education system in America, and let the Chinese surpass us in all the sciences.

Our kids will have more free time to play video games in the meantime.
I think the Chinese kick our *** in math not evolution.
2/6/2013 12:59 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:50:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by Jtpsops on 2/6/2013 11:41:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 11:26:00 AM (view original):
I wouldn't want my kids being taught creationism as an alternative to evolution in school.  I'd have a huge problem with that.
And this is what weakens the evolutionist position. If your system was "fact" you'd have no problem with it standing next to another theory. But you're afraid it won't hold up, so you cry "NO!"

If it was indeed fact, you could confidently sit back and watch the other theories fall apart beside it.
I'm talking about elementary school age children.  They're not mentally developed enough to distinguish between the validity of competing theories.

If you "teach" a bunch of first graders that the moon is made out of cheese, many of them are going to believe it.

Is that the kind of educational system you're advocating?
Then why teach either?

Math is math.   Reading, and the things that go with it, is reading.

Why teach anything if there is a competing theory?  
"Math is math".

What if tomorrow, somebody "proved" that sometimes 2 + 2 does not always = 4.

Should we then stop teaching math?
Are you saying math is the same as evolution?

Are there millions of people who believe in a different system of math?    Some culture that believes 2+2=22?
You seem to be arguing that math is an absolute, that other "theories" of math, if they exist or should happen to come into existance in the future, should be disregarded.

Yet evolution, which is backed by a preponderance of credible scientific evidence should be tought side by side with a highly dubitable, religious/faith based theory of creationism.

That's interesting.  You don't see any conflict in that?
2/6/2013 1:00 PM
You like that picture, huh? Is he related to you or something?

Yes, when teaching science, teach science. You can explain, if you want, other scientific theories that were disproven if you want. Explain that nothing is concrete. But teach science.

If you're going to teach religion, ok. But don't call it science. Explain that there are people who don't believe in this scientific theory if you want. But don't teach that there's just as much validity, based on evidence, in creationism. That's all.
2/6/2013 1:01 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Sometimes it's better to wait for what comes along.

Is there some reason an 8 y/o NEEDS to be taught evolution?
No.  Not at all.

We can just sit back, scrap the education system in America, and let the Chinese surpass us in all the sciences.

Our kids will have more free time to play video games in the meantime.
I think the Chinese kick our *** in math not evolution.
You treat evolution like it is just one little piece of science. It's the cornerstone of biology. Which is the cornerstone of medicine.

Everything we know about life stems from what we know about evolution.
2/6/2013 1:01 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Sometimes it's better to wait for what comes along.

Is there some reason an 8 y/o NEEDS to be taught evolution?
No.  Not at all.

We can just sit back, scrap the education system in America, and let the Chinese surpass us in all the sciences.

Our kids will have more free time to play video games in the meantime.
I think the Chinese kick our *** in math not evolution.
Maybe we should just stick our heads in the sand and forego all branches of science?
2/6/2013 1:01 PM
FWIW, I'm about the least religious person who actually believes in some sort of higher power.    I was married 6-7 years before my wife realized I wasn't an athiest.   So, when somebody starts pounding the pulpit, I'm less than interested.   But, if that's what gets my good buddy jtpops thru the day, there's no reason for me to dismiss his faith.     I don't know why the "SCIENCE!!!!" ******* feel the need to crap on religious beliefs.

2/6/2013 1:02 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 2/6/2013 1:01:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/6/2013 12:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2013 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Sometimes it's better to wait for what comes along.

Is there some reason an 8 y/o NEEDS to be taught evolution?
No.  Not at all.

We can just sit back, scrap the education system in America, and let the Chinese surpass us in all the sciences.

Our kids will have more free time to play video games in the meantime.
I think the Chinese kick our *** in math not evolution.
You treat evolution like it is just one little piece of science. It's the cornerstone of biology. Which is the cornerstone of medicine.

Everything we know about life stems from what we know about evolution.
of 60
All Forums > SimLeague Football > NFL > Makes me sick...

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.