Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(108,010 posts)
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:16 PM Feb 2013

Oklahoma: Insist That People Coexisted With Dinosaurs…and Get an A in Science Class!

Intelligence is so elitist.

In biology class, public school students can't generally argue that dinosaurs and people ran around Earth at the same time, at least not without risking a big fat F. But that could soon change for kids in Oklahoma: On Tuesday, the Oklahoma Common Education committee is expected to consider a House bill that would forbid teachers from penalizing students who turn in papers attempting to debunk almost universally accepted scientific theories such as biological evolution and anthropogenic (human-driven) climate change.

Gus Blackwell, the Republican state representative who introduced the bill, insists that his legislation has nothing to do with religion; it simply encourages scientific exploration. "I proposed this bill because there are teachers and students who may be afraid of going against what they see in their textbooks," says Blackwell, who previously spent 20 years working for the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma. "A student has the freedom to write a paper that points out that highly complex life may not be explained by chance mutations."

Stated another way, students could make untestable, faith-based claims in science classes without fear of receiving a poor mark.

HB 1674 is the latest in an ongoing series of "academic freedom" bills aimed at watering down the teaching of science on highly charged topics. Instead of requiring that teachers and textbooks include creationism—see the bill proposed by Missouri state Rep. Rick Brattin—HB 1674's crafters say it merely encourages teachers and students to question, as the bill puts it, the "scientific strengths and weaknesses" of topics that "cause controversy," including "biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning."


http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/02/oklahoma-hr1674-science-evolution-climate-change

127 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Oklahoma: Insist That People Coexisted With Dinosaurs…and Get an A in Science Class! (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Feb 2013 OP
Is Blackwell even aware that some OK students would eventually like to get into good colleges? nt MrScorpio Feb 2013 #1
They can't all go to Liberty University, can they?...nt SidDithers Feb 2013 #3
Problem solved, locally: naaman fletcher Feb 2013 #71
seems like he's far more interested in making sure they attend an approved church 0rganism Feb 2013 #86
He doesn't want them in good colleges. ballaratocker Feb 2013 #98
Dumbasses...` SidDithers Feb 2013 #2
Post removed Post removed Feb 2013 #4
No. A science paper is graded on the understanding of the science in the paper... SidDithers Feb 2013 #8
Court has ruled in the Dover case that creationism isn't science Tempest Feb 2013 #78
Dover was a great ruling... SidDithers Feb 2013 #79
The Courts TriEssent May 2013 #124
IWell Creationism is not science and I say this as a Chrisian. As for the courts they are there for hrmjustin May 2013 #125
Did you really just write that? trumad Feb 2013 #9
I also said, "Well supported". Being well-articulate alone isn't enough. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #13
"well-supported" trumad Feb 2013 #16
"Well supported" as in: "Derrrrr ... Gawd done sed it in the book he done rited!" Arugula Latte Feb 2013 #18
I love arguing with Creationist.... trumad Feb 2013 #20
Also a wee bit depressing. Arugula Latte Feb 2013 #21
Sigh is the right expression for sure. trumad Feb 2013 #23
I think that was the point, gejohnston Feb 2013 #97
That's what I got from the message. xmas74 Feb 2013 #104
Do you understand there is a difference between Scientific Theory and common theory Bandit Feb 2013 #26
Gravity is Just a Theory kiri Feb 2013 #68
Gravity consisntently kills those that don't believe in it. And many that do. Ikonoklast Feb 2013 #80
Newtowian mechanics explained gravity quite well for hundreds of years before Einstein xtraxritical Feb 2013 #89
Einsteins's theory of gravity did NOT replace Newton's theory, it includes Newton's theory. nt Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2013 #109
It is impossible to make a scientifically "well supported" argument for BeeBee Feb 2013 #31
There is no evidence to support creationism. Apophis Feb 2013 #50
If they can pull it off, forget the grade, they will be looking at a Nobel Prize n/t Demo_Chris Feb 2013 #58
Even Behe, ON THE STAND under oath admitted creationism isn't science. AtheistCrusader Feb 2013 #73
anyone who wastes a science teacher's time with 7 pages of creationist wank deserves an F 0rganism Feb 2013 #88
Well, then that student can get an F+ instead of an F... JHB Feb 2013 #100
If creationism is to be taught side by side Shadowflash Feb 2013 #106
Even "professional" creationists skepticscott Feb 2013 #119
Creationist douchebaggery, no matter how well articulated or written jpak Feb 2013 #11
That's not how science works TrogL Feb 2013 #12
former Priest midwest irish Feb 2013 #116
Good luck finding a scientifically supported case for creationism in a high school science report LonePirate Feb 2013 #15
My daughter asked me what "imaginary numbers" were Nevernose Feb 2013 #53
Somebody brought that up in an argument in favour of Biblical literalism TrogL Feb 2013 #122
OR for an English Professor. Volaris Feb 2013 #76
"Evolutionist view" ... Uh, you mean "the view" of 99.99999999999 percent of all legit scientists? Arugula Latte Feb 2013 #17
You're comparing apples and oranges. n/t. OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #25
"Apples" as in the apple that the first woman on the planet ate, you know, 4,000-6,000 Arugula Latte Feb 2013 #34
LOL dlwickham Feb 2013 #45
bzzzt. gigantic fail. Science is fact based and fantasy cali Feb 2013 #24
You gotta be kidding me... nadinbrzezinski Feb 2013 #33
This has to be sarcasm! Walk away Feb 2013 #35
You're joking, right? GoneOffShore Feb 2013 #38
"Academic freedom" = the right to be ignorant. The Stupid Party strikes again! LeftinOH Feb 2013 #5
Remember about 7 or 8 years ago midwest irish Feb 2013 #117
The ignorant Oklahoma Legislature redstatebluegirl Feb 2013 #6
and apples are the fruit of the devil Angry Dragon Feb 2013 #7
The great scientists of our past looked outside the theories and laws of their times. backtoblue Feb 2013 #10
But how can you support evidence that does not exist? trumad Feb 2013 #19
Very true backtoblue Feb 2013 #29
You belittle them by giving them an F for bullshit. trumad Feb 2013 #30
You really need to take a science class Blecht Feb 2013 #62
I believe that Pi = 3, as stated in the Bible. Ikonoklast Feb 2013 #82
Is that in the Book of Armaments? Throckmorton Feb 2013 #102
It's a theory about evolution called "natural selection" thru mutation. xtraxritical Feb 2013 #90
That totally backwards. Anyone who can "prove their thoughts" pro creationism deserves a Nobel prize Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2013 #110
I didn't say that they could prove it. I said they should try to if that's what they believe. backtoblue Feb 2013 #112
They can try all they want. They will still get a richly deserved F. Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2013 #113
I believe rainbow-sparkle unicorns exist. My source? My own ass. I pulled that theory out of it. Arugula Latte Feb 2013 #36
Evolution is Not a religion kiri Feb 2013 #69
You should make this it's own post! Marrah_G Feb 2013 #75
ALEC sponsored legislation...they're doing it in other states...phuckers...knr joeybee12 Feb 2013 #14
This is just more batshit insane legislation that doesn't stand a chance. cali Feb 2013 #22
I don't have an issue with students not accepting everything they're being taught in science class hughee99 Feb 2013 #27
Creationism is not not not a scientific viewpoint. Occulus Feb 2013 #43
If a student wants to bang his head against the wall trying to prove creationism hughee99 Feb 2013 #48
No, creationism has an invisible deity as a component, which is by definition unprovable. Occulus Feb 2013 #49
Then let the student realize that for themselves. hughee99 Feb 2013 #56
When did the American Taliban take over our schools? Initech Feb 2013 #28
Sure, why the fuck not!?!?! Rex Feb 2013 #32
Let's not forget Vampires and werewolves Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Feb 2013 #41
A kick for more eyes on OK and its craziness. nt riderinthestorm Feb 2013 #37
If this is science education in Oklahoma, better check to see where your Doctor is from--the SOONER kairos12 Feb 2013 #39
Not to nitpick with the thread title, OceanEcosystem Feb 2013 #40
They should be getting F's for advocating "creationism" GoneOffShore Feb 2013 #42
Well, in a biology course, they should... Blue_Tires Feb 2013 #44
Creationism is completely and utterly unverifiable nonsense based on a fictional work kestrel91316 Feb 2013 #46
in a Science Class it should JI7 Feb 2013 #47
Wow... just...wow. Apophis Feb 2013 #51
Actually the Democrats in Congress are trying to coexist with dinosaurs, but the dinosaurs are an still_one Feb 2013 #52
If only a targeted meteorite would take them out ... Arugula Latte Feb 2013 #54
There is plenty of photographic evidence proving this theory. Nye Bevan Feb 2013 #55
Gee I wish I could have received an A for whatever I believed was a correct answer on exams. Lint Head Feb 2013 #57
That's like giving students an A in "Abstinence Only" class, for having sex on a desk. Warren DeMontague Feb 2013 #59
If this passes you will see some hillarious "science" papers. n/t Demo_Chris Feb 2013 #60
lol Notafraidtoo Feb 2013 #61
They are encouraging and rewarding MynameisBlarney Feb 2013 #63
Of course humans and dinosaurs co-existed. I have proof. Fla Dem Feb 2013 #64
More proof? Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2013 #65
Jesus said: "Let the little Sinosauropteryx and Microceratops come to me, and forbid them not, Arugula Latte Feb 2013 #83
He also said..... trusty elf Feb 2013 #99
Flintstones - who's the green guy???? Manifestor_of_Light Feb 2013 #85
That's the Great Gazoo LibertyLover Feb 2013 #87
Where Oklahoma Common Education Committee fits into the grand scheme of things: Bernardo de La Paz Feb 2013 #66
It's pasta, all the way down IDemo Feb 2013 #67
RAmen! n/t RoccoR5955 Feb 2013 #94
Will they be able to use episodes of "The Flintstones" or Jim Henson's "Dinosaurs" as references? rwsanders Feb 2013 #70
They probably got their ideas from the Ica stones of Peru.... OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #72
If I were A Kid in an Oklahoma History Class Wolf Frankula Feb 2013 #74
"...afraid of going against what they see in their textbooks" Ezlivin Feb 2013 #77
k & r stuntcat Feb 2013 #81
Lewis Black on creationism: Manifestor_of_Light Feb 2013 #84
oklahoma: blkmusclmachine Feb 2013 #91
Well, I'm moving to Oklahoma! Stonepounder Feb 2013 #92
Academic freedom doesn't mean a student can put wrong answers on a test and still get credit. yellowcanine Feb 2013 #93
Once again another state attempts to prove that ignorance can be taught Major Nikon Feb 2013 #95
Oh the Humanity! triplepoint Feb 2013 #96
That's what made the Dark Ages bearable Turbineguy Feb 2013 #101
This is child abuse. mwb970 Feb 2013 #103
Careful...on the religion board skepticscott Feb 2013 #120
Does electricity still flow from positive to negative? nt. MrYikes Feb 2013 #105
Technically the "holes" do intaglio May 2013 #127
Welcome to Costco damnedifIknow Feb 2013 #107
I guess the GOP didn't get Jindal's memo... iandhr Feb 2013 #108
Have you read the Louisiana Science Education Act exboyfil May 2013 #126
Sharing far and wide. thanks for letting us know about this. Unbe-effing-believable. nt stevenleser Feb 2013 #111
It would do less damage to these kids if they just stopped teaching altogether. nt Ed Suspicious Feb 2013 #114
Let'em watch The Flinstones for their science, it would be right up their alley,,,, benld74 Feb 2013 #115
What really weirds me out about this is... fromwyoming Feb 2013 #118
The earth is flat and the sun revolves around it The Flaming Red Head Feb 2013 #121
Yet more evidence of fundamentalism's danger to education.. YoungDemCA Feb 2013 #123

0rganism

(23,956 posts)
86. seems like he's far more interested in making sure they attend an approved church
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 05:13 PM
Feb 2013

but if that's who the Good People of Oklahoma choose for their leadership, then they, and their children, will be left to reap the whirlwind.

ballaratocker

(126 posts)
98. He doesn't want them in good colleges.
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 01:27 AM
Feb 2013

He wants them to stay in the same bubble they have always lived in so they don't get to see what the outside world is like. Then they can keep voting Republican and he can stay in office.

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
2. Dumbasses...`
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:19 PM
Feb 2013

Hope they get their heads handed to them, like the Intelligent Designers did in Dover, PA.

Thanks for posting.

Sid

Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
8. No. A science paper is graded on the understanding of the science in the paper...
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:27 PM
Feb 2013

"Gawd did it" isn't science.

Sid

Tempest

(14,591 posts)
78. Court has ruled in the Dover case that creationism isn't science
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 04:04 PM
Feb 2013

An F would be an appropriate grade.

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
79. Dover was a great ruling...
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 04:08 PM
Feb 2013

and even better is the fact that Michael Behe got his ass handed to him by both the attorney for the plaintiff, and the judge.



Sid

TriEssent

(2 posts)
124. The Courts
Tue May 28, 2013, 10:26 PM
May 2013

So..do you really think that the court is the best qualified to pass judgement on what IS science? Because the court says so....it must be?

D

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
125. IWell Creationism is not science and I say this as a Chrisian. As for the courts they are there for
Tue May 28, 2013, 10:51 PM
May 2013

the hard choices. Welcome to Du.

 

trumad

(41,692 posts)
9. Did you really just write that?
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:27 PM
Feb 2013

So if it is articulated that Fred rode Dino---and it was written in an articulate way, that student should get a good grade?

Is that what you are saying?

 

OceanEcosystem

(275 posts)
13. I also said, "Well supported". Being well-articulate alone isn't enough.
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:30 PM
Feb 2013

A student who can make a convincing, well-supported, insightful, observant and well-reasoned argument for creationism in a 7-page paper should deserve a better grade than a student who writes one sentence, for instance, "Evolution is correct because my friends tell me so" and leaves it at that.

xmas74

(29,674 posts)
104. That's what I got from the message.
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 08:32 AM
Feb 2013

If the student could write a well articulated paper, if they could offer valid sources, if, if, if. It's a losing battle but a student is welcome to try.

The lawmakers, otoh, are full of it.

Bandit

(21,475 posts)
26. Do you understand there is a difference between Scientific Theory and common theory
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:42 PM
Feb 2013

Once Science has determined something to be Theory, it is considered Fact...Theories are not just some abstract thinking.. To become a Theory there has to be one hypothesis after another that is subject to peer review and this is done until there is NO One in the Scientific Community that can refute the hypothesis. Once that has happened which usually takes years and years the hypothesis is elevated to Theory and there it will remain until proven false.. Another "Theory" does not prove it false.. It just does not work that way..When you are being taught Science, you are being taught truth as is understood by the Entire scientific community. Science class is not the place to introduce untested Theory...It just does not work that way..

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
80. Gravity consisntently kills those that don't believe in it. And many that do.
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 04:17 PM
Feb 2013

Or those who try to defy it.



I fear Gravity more than some random deity.

 

xtraxritical

(3,576 posts)
89. Newtowian mechanics explained gravity quite well for hundreds of years before Einstein
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 05:55 PM
Feb 2013

came along and it was replaced with Einstein's theory. Einsteins theory may be improved upon with String Theory. How do you put a saddle on a dinosaur? Very carefully.

 

Apophis

(1,407 posts)
50. There is no evidence to support creationism.
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 12:55 AM
Feb 2013

Any paper that is written to support creationism in a science class deserves an "F" grade.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
73. Even Behe, ON THE STAND under oath admitted creationism isn't science.
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 02:53 PM
Feb 2013

Full stop. There it is. Debate over.

You can't 'well support' complete fucking gibberish that has not a goddamn thing to do with science, in a science-related paper.

0rganism

(23,956 posts)
88. anyone who wastes a science teacher's time with 7 pages of creationist wank deserves an F
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 05:19 PM
Feb 2013

The student who writes, "Evolution is correct because my friends tell me so" is possibly still teachable.

The student who writes 7 pages of "well-reasoned" creationism has been trained by their religion to stop learning science.

JHB

(37,160 posts)
100. Well, then that student can get an F+ instead of an F...
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 07:03 AM
Feb 2013

...for the tweet masquerading as a paper.

Shadowflash

(1,536 posts)
106. If creationism is to be taught side by side
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 11:19 AM
Feb 2013

With evolution in a SCIENCE class, how far away is teaching biological reproduction side by side with the alternative 'Stork theory'?

 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
119. Even "professional" creationists
Fri Feb 22, 2013, 09:05 AM
Feb 2013

Can't make "well-supported" arguments with affirmative evidence for creationism. All they ever do is try to poke teensy (and meaningless) little holes in evolutionary science, and even that always, always falls apart under a moment's scrutiny from people who know what they're talking about.

You really need to go back to Science 101...if you were ever there. But now I suppose you're going to tell us all about your extensive scientific training, and how it taught you to be "open-minded" and not "dogmatic"? The usual creationist woo-woo?

jpak

(41,758 posts)
11. Creationist douchebaggery, no matter how well articulated or written
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:29 PM
Feb 2013

deserves a F in science class.

yup

TrogL

(32,822 posts)
12. That's not how science works
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:29 PM
Feb 2013

They were giving Fs to evolutionists 150 years ago (were they?) because they weren't teaching science.

I still like one of my former Priest's take on it. "In the beginning God created the heavens, the earth and all the creatures on it. The methodology He used was evolution. Where is the problem?"

 

midwest irish

(155 posts)
116. former Priest
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 06:54 PM
Feb 2013

That's the problem. The catholic church accepts evolution as compatible with scriptures and their theology. Evangelical protestants (the one's making a fuss about this) do not accept it at all. They believe in a literal, word for word, interpretation of the Bible. Of course if you ask them about some parts they will says its an allegory or not to be taken literally. However when it comes to creationism they have drawn their line in the evolutionary sand. Heck, many think that Catholics aren't christian and that the pope is the anti-christ. They have explicitly rejected the idea that God used evolution.

What your Priest said versus what evangelicals believe is like night and day.

LonePirate

(13,424 posts)
15. Good luck finding a scientifically supported case for creationism in a high school science report
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:31 PM
Feb 2013

If a student puts wrong information on their math test, they will fail. I don't see how putting scientifically unsubstantiated hogwash in a science paper is any different. The student is not writing a paper for their theology class.

Nevernose

(13,081 posts)
53. My daughter asked me what "imaginary numbers" were
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 12:58 AM
Feb 2013

I said, "Honey, I'm an English teacher. If you have a question about proto-feminist poets of early Victorian England, I can help, but I am essentially innumerate. So if you're asking me to explain imaginary numbers, go in the backyard and count the number of unicorns you see. That's the best I've got."

So we hired a math tutor...

(Sorry for the brain droppings!)

TrogL

(32,822 posts)
122. Somebody brought that up in an argument in favour of Biblical literalism
Fri Feb 22, 2013, 12:34 PM
Feb 2013

Apparently he thinks "imaginary numbers" are taken on faith.

I pointed out that those "imaginary" numbers are very real. If they didn't exist, neither would your cell phone.

It's the same logic by people saying that "E=mc^2" doesn't exist. I ask them to please explain the following:


Volaris

(10,272 posts)
76. OR for an English Professor.
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 03:36 PM
Feb 2013

By the logic and standards of thi bill, Physics Instructors might as well just make students watch re-runs of Star Trek, and turn in papers on that. (And just because it would probably breed a better generation of Science Majors than re-runs of The Flintstones, DOES NOT make this a good idea.)

 

Arugula Latte

(50,566 posts)
17. "Evolutionist view" ... Uh, you mean "the view" of 99.99999999999 percent of all legit scientists?
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:32 PM
Feb 2013

Evolution, the very foundation of biology -- Is that what you're talking about? The "theory" that is "controversial" among the non-stupid in the way the "theory" that the Earth is more spherical than flat is controversial? The thing that is NOT based on silly hallucinogenic desert mythology from 2,000 years ago? The thing that is rooted in fact and observation, not fiction, and should be taught in a SCIENCE class? That evolution?

 

Arugula Latte

(50,566 posts)
34. "Apples" as in the apple that the first woman on the planet ate, you know, 4,000-6,000
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:49 PM
Feb 2013

years ago, before she apparently had incestuous relations with her sons to populate the planet and before the bearded dude put two of all the animals on the big boat? Wow, think about that -- because there are about 400,000 species of beetles on the planet, and, of course God must have made them all "as is," right?, wow, old Noah must have had to have made a shitload of cargo space just for beetles!

Yes, I'm sure there are plenty of peer-reviewed scientific sources to support that version of things!

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
24. bzzzt. gigantic fail. Science is fact based and fantasy
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:39 PM
Feb 2013

has no fucking place in science class. EVER.

Walk away

(9,494 posts)
35. This has to be sarcasm!
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:50 PM
Feb 2013

No one in their right mind considers creationism a viable theory. Graduating from a school that teaches Dino sciences should disqualify a student from a degree in the Sciences unless they are evaluated by a board of real scientists from real schools.

GoneOffShore

(17,340 posts)
38. You're joking, right?
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:58 PM
Feb 2013

And if you're not, then you really don't have an understanding of what science does.

But I suspect you may not be joking which is really unfortunate.



And no matter how well articulated that paper may be, it would still be based on a faulty premise.

 

midwest irish

(155 posts)
117. Remember about 7 or 8 years ago
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 07:01 PM
Feb 2013

when there was legislation in Ohio saying professors had to include the conservative version of things in their curriculum because colleges were "just too liberal." It failed but it was frightening that it was even proposed.

redstatebluegirl

(12,265 posts)
6. The ignorant Oklahoma Legislature
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:24 PM
Feb 2013

will not stop until they get this approved. We tried to have a scientific conversation with one elected official regarding my husband's research. All he was concerned with was if it was "against the teachings of the bible".

We have to work down here to reestablish the Democratic party and challenge these folks. It can be done, I know it can. I think it will be a lot of work fighting organized religion who press politics from the pulpit but I really believe if we work at it we can convince people that their interests are not being served by these people. I know, it may not be possible, but I think we have to at least try rather than throw in the towel!

Angry Dragon

(36,693 posts)
7. and apples are the fruit of the devil
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:25 PM
Feb 2013

snakes could talk at one time
six people populated the world

the things one can learn in school

backtoblue

(11,343 posts)
10. The great scientists of our past looked outside the theories and laws of their times.
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:28 PM
Feb 2013

I personally don't agree with creationism, but as long as evolution is taught and studied, students should have the right to do research and try to elaborate on their findings.


Study what your science teachers are teaching, memorize it and get good grades, then you can write your own thesis and present your supporting evidence.


Please don't yell at me for my thoughts.

backtoblue

(11,343 posts)
29. Very true
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:44 PM
Feb 2013

If one truly believes in something, then I encourage that person to do the research necessary to prove their thoughts.

Teach what we know to be true in the classroom, but encourage broader participation and don't belittle another's beliefs.

Keep evolution as our theory(law) of existance. I believe in the science evolution. There are many people who do not. I just think that pushing those to do the research and provide results is how we've gotten this far in science today. We didn't get the information we have today by denying anyone their beliefs.

 

xtraxritical

(3,576 posts)
90. It's a theory about evolution called "natural selection" thru mutation.
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 06:05 PM
Feb 2013

Mendelson did it with peas, first. It's been established by scientists in many species.

Bernardo de La Paz

(49,002 posts)
110. That totally backwards. Anyone who can "prove their thoughts" pro creationism deserves a Nobel prize
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 03:00 PM
Feb 2013

If you knew the most fundamental thing about science you would understand that science is not about belief.

 

Arugula Latte

(50,566 posts)
36. I believe rainbow-sparkle unicorns exist. My source? My own ass. I pulled that theory out of it.
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:52 PM
Feb 2013

Give me my "A" now, please!!!

kiri

(794 posts)
69. Evolution is Not a religion
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 12:53 PM
Feb 2013
http://concordareahumanists.org/blog/201301/evolution-religion
Is Evolution a Religion?
By Ellery Schempp

IDists claim that there is an "intelligent design" view and that
evolution is "an equal religion". They usually say "Darwinism". Of
course, there is no such thing as "Darwinism", this is a word made up
by IDists to label those who do not accept their views. Let's
consider what characterizes traditional religions and whether
evolution is a religion. The historical record shows numerous
distinctions.

The Theory of Evolution is not a religion.

Evolution has no priests, pastors, ministers, preachers, bishops,
ayatollahs, imams, mullahs, prophets (or televangelical profits). No
holy books or sacred scriptures. It has no holidays, no feast days,
no canonized saints. It depends on no miracles. It gets no tax
exemptions.

Evolution has no alter boys, no prayers, no church establishments, no
edifices with crosses, stars or crescents, no churches or temples, no
coming-of-age rituals like Bar Mitzvah or confirmation.

Evolution has no banned books, no warnings about heresy or blasphemy,
no record of burning witches or heretics, no public displays of piety
or prayer, no holy book supposed to contain "All Truth", no creed to
be ritually recited. Evolution does not define pagans or infidels.
There are no mythological beliefs or transubstantiations.

Evolution has no history of torturing non-believers, has never
started a war, never burned an opponent at the stake. The idea of
evolution has no record of sex scandals. No record of financial
fraud. No record of trying to get a passport stamped for entry into
heaven. Evolution offers no condemnations to hell nor promises of an
after-life.

Evolution does not support occult beliefs. The scientific theory of
evolution has no dependence on a supernatural deity or pixies; no
prayer rituals, no burial rituals, no sacraments. There are no
invisible beings, gods, deities, devils, demons, ghosts, satans,
angels, spirits, cherubim, seraphim, faeries, or a soul. Evolution
recognizes no destructions as "acts of God" nor acts of violence
as "acts of Satan or an anti-christ."

Evolution does not depend on blind faith; it offers no argument from
authority; no conclusion first, facts second. There is no body
of "apologetics" from the theory of evolution.

The above are evidences of religion. The idea of evolution, which is
based on observation of the natural world as we see it, does not have
any of the attributes of religion. Indeed, evolution is the
opposite, it welcomes energetic inquiries and thoughtful inputs.

Evolution looks not to miracles to understand the world around us.
Evolution, as all science, looks to evidence that we can see and
understand and test. Neither evolution nor any scientific construct
claims to offer moral or political guidance.

Evolution is consistent with a democratic outlook in which the rights
of the people are derived from the people. Evolution is not
consistent with the view that the natural world is only revealed by
authorities or a view that rights derive from authorities, especially
not from authorities anointed under a doctrine of the Divine Right of
Kings or one or another "holy scripture". It is the natural world as all can see and understand, and it
depends on no revelations, no sacred texts.

The Theory of Evolution, the Theory of Gravity, the Germ Theory of
Disease are not religion and not religious. Just because you think
something is true does not make it a religion.

The theory of evolution is the antithesis of traditional religions;
it champions the free mind, and the spirit of free inquiry to see
where facts, observations, and the power of reason as the human mind
leads.
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
22. This is just more batshit insane legislation that doesn't stand a chance.
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:37 PM
Feb 2013

Republicans catering to their batshit crazy constituents. I'm beginning to think this is a deliberate tactic: First propose something totally batshit to soften things up, then propose something less batshit, but still crazy and hope that has a chance.

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
27. I don't have an issue with students not accepting everything they're being taught in science class
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:42 PM
Feb 2013

provided they can make their argument using the scientific method. I'm not in favor or anyone getting an A for opposing a scientific position based on faith, though.

Look at older models of the atom and (going back further) the solar system... or even phlogiston. At one time, and even today, I'm sure students are being presented with science that is inaccurate due to our incomplete understanding of how things work. I don't want to discourage them from thinking on their own, but I don't think they should be rewarded for arguing a scientific viewpoint that they can't support using science.

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
48. If a student wants to bang his head against the wall trying to prove creationism
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 09:58 PM
Feb 2013

using scientific method, I'm all for it. Sometimes the best way to convince someone of something is to let them figure it out for themselves. If a student wants to try to prove that cinder blocks can fly on their own power, by they time the go through the study, I think they'll be convinced that they're wrong.

Occulus

(20,599 posts)
49. No, creationism has an invisible deity as a component, which is by definition unprovable.
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 12:49 AM
Feb 2013

If faith could be proven, it would be science. It's not. It's faith, and has no place being allowed serious discussion in a science classroom.

hughee99

(16,113 posts)
56. Then let the student realize that for themselves.
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 01:20 AM
Feb 2013

I'm not proposing they spend class time on it, but if a student wants to write a paper on it, make them use the scientific method and prove their assertions.

Yes, I realize they won't be able to. That's the point. Let them learn the hard way if necessary.

Frankly, I wouldn't have an issue if, on day one, the professor gave an "on your own time" assignment "Prove god exists" using scientific method, and then not discuss creationism again until someone shows actual scientific proof. "If you want to discuss it as science, show proof, until then, we'll dedicate our time to provable scientific study and leave the study of faith to others".

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
32. Sure, why the fuck not!?!?!
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:49 PM
Feb 2013

Hell can we also throw in Alien ancestors? How about ZOMBIES? Virus zombies, of course, not the religious kind...unless someone is game?


BRAWNDO! ITS GOT WHAT PLANTS CRAVE!

kairos12

(12,862 posts)
39. If this is science education in Oklahoma, better check to see where your Doctor is from--the SOONER
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 07:01 PM
Feb 2013

the better.

 

OceanEcosystem

(275 posts)
40. Not to nitpick with the thread title,
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 07:04 PM
Feb 2013

but I don't think the proposal is that students get A's for advocating creationism, but rather, that they won't get F's solely for doing so.

GoneOffShore

(17,340 posts)
42. They should be getting F's for advocating "creationism"
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 07:21 PM
Feb 2013

Or as the AIG folks would style it "Intelligent Design".

The Dover, PA case made if very clear that "ID"/"Creationism" is religious at its base and that base is that "Gawd did it!". It has no place in science class. And anyone trying to make a case for it is deserving of ridicule and failing grades.

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
44. Well, in a biology course, they should...
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 07:33 PM
Feb 2013

keep the creationism in a world religions or mythology class or something...

 

kestrel91316

(51,666 posts)
46. Creationism is completely and utterly unverifiable nonsense based on a fictional work
Tue Feb 19, 2013, 07:42 PM
Feb 2013

known as the "bible". It has ZERO basis in science. Students who argue in favor of it deserve an F because it demonstrates that they have learned absolutely nothing in their science class.

 

Apophis

(1,407 posts)
51. Wow... just...wow.
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 12:58 AM
Feb 2013


Anyone who writes a paper in science class that presents creationism as fact deserves an F in the class.

still_one

(92,216 posts)
52. Actually the Democrats in Congress are trying to coexist with dinosaurs, but the dinosaurs are an
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 12:58 AM
Feb 2013

Extremely bigoted group

 

Arugula Latte

(50,566 posts)
54. If only a targeted meteorite would take them out ...
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 01:04 AM
Feb 2013

Is it possible to get a benevolently evil or evilly benevolent scientist to harness and direct a meteor directly into the next large RNC meeting?

Hmmm, a girl can dream, can't she?

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
59. That's like giving students an A in "Abstinence Only" class, for having sex on a desk.
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 02:24 AM
Feb 2013

I mean, it's a valid alternate viewpoint, right?

Fla Dem

(23,688 posts)
64. Of course humans and dinosaurs co-existed. I have proof.
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 11:25 AM
Feb 2013

What more do you need to believe it? The Flintstones had one as a pet.

 

Arugula Latte

(50,566 posts)
83. Jesus said: "Let the little Sinosauropteryx and Microceratops come to me, and forbid them not,
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 04:26 PM
Feb 2013

for such is the Kingdom of Fred and Wilma." Amen.

OldDem2012

(3,526 posts)
72. They probably got their ideas from the Ica stones of Peru....
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 02:27 PM
Feb 2013


....and....



....and a temple carving from Cambodia....




Hey, can I turn this in for distance learning credits?

Wolf Frankula

(3,601 posts)
74. If I were A Kid in an Oklahoma History Class
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 03:23 PM
Feb 2013

And I claimed Jesus prevented Columbus from sailing off the edge of a flat world, could I get an A?

Supposed I claimed Gitchee Manitou created everything?

Wolf

Ezlivin

(8,153 posts)
77. "...afraid of going against what they see in their textbooks"
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 03:42 PM
Feb 2013

How far are they willing to go with this line of "reasoning"?

stuntcat

(12,022 posts)
81. k & r
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 04:20 PM
Feb 2013

This is #humanity .
Sure some scientists and poets and artists are fantastic, but as a mass just look at this shyt.. we are a sad failure who'll burn and ruin our way through the rest of this century.

Stonepounder

(4,033 posts)
92. Well, I'm moving to Oklahoma!
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 10:39 PM
Feb 2013

My kid sincerely believes that 2+2=5 and I'll be dammed if I will allow any teacher to mark him down for his sincerely held belief!

yellowcanine

(35,699 posts)
93. Academic freedom doesn't mean a student can put wrong answers on a test and still get credit.
Wed Feb 20, 2013, 10:44 PM
Feb 2013

Dumbass. If that law passes and I were a teacher in Oklahoma I would make up tests with two choices for answers:
"Please indicate the correct answer by circling it. In the space next to the question indicate what you and the Oklahoma legislature would LIKE to be the answer."

Turbineguy

(37,338 posts)
101. That's what made the Dark Ages bearable
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 07:09 AM
Feb 2013

The ignorance! Sure, life was brutish and short, but it was normal. Republicans may be doing us a favor. You can't like their policies unless you are stupid, so..... make everybody stupid and their ideas will seem like good ideas.

mwb970

(11,360 posts)
103. This is child abuse.
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 08:13 AM
Feb 2013

These poor kids will be left behind in the quest for good jobs by people who were taught facts instead of fantasy in school. It reminds me of what Jindal did to the kids in Louisiana, and what Texas is trying to do to its children. How terrible it must be to live in a backwards, right-wing "red state"!

 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
120. Careful...on the religion board
Fri Feb 22, 2013, 10:39 AM
Feb 2013

saying that will get you branded as a bigot by the knicker-twisted apologists.

exboyfil

(17,863 posts)
126. Have you read the Louisiana Science Education Act
Tue May 28, 2013, 11:35 PM
May 2013

which Jindahl supports? Getting past the fact that it is hogwash, it is not even consistent.

"...that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning."

Human cloning and the origins of life are not scientific theories. Human cloning is a process. No reputable scientist claims that we have a theory of the origins of life. We have several hypothesis that are working their way to the testable stage, but no "scientific" theories. Global warming again is not a theory - it is either happening or is not happening (a fact). The scientific theory would be that global warming occurs through introducing higher levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases than what has been seen throughout human history (Anthropogenic Global Warming). Evolution is the only scientific theory even on the list.


fromwyoming

(11 posts)
118. What really weirds me out about this is...
Fri Feb 22, 2013, 01:15 AM
Feb 2013

...the phrase in the first paragraph that says "...students who turn in papers attempting to debunk almost universally accepted scientific theories such as biological evolution ..." What is the word "almost" doing in that sentence? I really want to slip in a reference to Norse mythology here, but the "journalist" who slipped in the word "almost" made it clear that oblique references or metaphors are unwelcome. Where is it not clear in the thinking universe that "scientific theories such as biological evolution and anthropogenic (human-driven) climate change" are universally accepted by the scientific community? Not "almost universally accepted." Sometimes it is really hard to live in a reality based world.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Oklahoma: Insist That Peo...