Jump to content
Evolution Fairytale Forum
piasan

In One Science Classroom

Recommended Posts

There are often claims made about what is taught in public school science classes.  The purpose of this topic is to discuss what is actually taught in (at least one) science class.

My comments are based on my 20 years teaching high school science.

18 hours ago, Blitzking said:

But that wont stop you from shoving lies down the throats of 15 years old biology students... I already asked you to PRETEND that I am one of your ignorant, gullible, naive 15 year old biology students and just PRESENT THE EVIDENCE... But you dont want to spread your dirty laundry which exposes what you have been doing to kids do you.... 

The problem is, you already know that I am WELL AWARE of what is being shoved down kids throats as "evidence" that man S L O W L Y evolved from sea sponges and is related to cockroaches and bananas.. .. ALL OF IT... 

I dont blame you.. I just wish you would be honest about it...

OK .... here you have it ...  let's discuss "shoving lies down the throats of 15 years old biology students."  I'll be completely honest about what I taught and how I taught it.  It's not like I need to worry about my job .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, Time to display your scientific evidence to support S L O W Microbe to Microbiologist evolution ... You know, the insane fairytale where all flora and fauna on planet Earth evolved from the same microbial common ancestor over the course of 3 billion years?

You have been showing 15 year olds that it is a reasonable, logical and probably true scientific theory have you not? 

Or am I to assume that the link you provided from Bezerkely is the evidence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blitzking said:

OK, Time to display your scientific evidence to support S L O W Microbe to Microbiologist evolution ... You know, the insane fairytale where all flora and fauna on planet Earth evolved from the same microbial common ancestor over the course of 3 billion years?

You have been showing 15 year olds that it is a reasonable, logical and probably true scientific theory have you not?

I never taught human evolution or abiogenesis.

In the textbook I used, evolution began with chapter 14.  I usually covered a chapter every two weeks, so I'd reach evolution somewhere around spring break.   Chapter outlines were:

Chapter 14  Origin of life.  14.1 Biogenesis; 14.2 Earth's History; 14.3 The first life forms.   I did not cover 14.1 

Chapter 15  Evolution:  Evidence and Theory.   15.1 The Fossil record; 15.2 Theories of evolution; 15.3 Evolution in process. 

Chapter 16 The evolution of populations and speciation.  16.1 Genetic equilibrium; 16.2 Disruption of genetic equilibrium; 16.3 Formation of Species

Chapter 17  Human Evolution   not covered.

Chapter 18  Classification ..... never got that far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blitzking said:

Or am I to assume that the link you provided from Bezerkely is the evidence?

You may assume the link from Berkeley is the response to your rigged challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, piasan said:

I never taught human evolution or abiogenesis.

In the textbook I used, evolution began with chapter 14.  I usually covered a chapter every two weeks, so I'd reach evolution somewhere around spring break.   Chapter outlines were:

Chapter 14  Origin of life.  14.1 Biogenesis; 14.2 Earth's History; 14.3 The first life forms.   I did not cover 14.1 

Chapter 15  Evolution:  Evidence and Theory.   15.1 The Fossil record; 15.2 Theories of evolution; 15.3 Evolution in process. 

Chapter 16 The evolution of populations and speciation.  16.1 Genetic equilibrium; 16.2 Disruption of genetic equilibrium; 16.3 Formation of Species

Chapter 17  Human Evolution   not covered.

Chapter 18  Classification ..... never got that far.

You never taught human evolution?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Blitzking said:

You never taught human evolution?????

That is correct.

In my first year teaching biology, I didn't get to chapter 17.  Early in my second year, the principal escorted me to the superintendent's office during my planning period.  The superintendent told me in no uncertain terms that if I expected to stay at that school, I wouldn't teach "that evolution crap."

That put me in something of a "Catch-22" because I was required to teach state standards that (paraphrasing) "the diversity of life was the result of small changes over time."  Further, the textbook provided by the district had the evolution section in it.  So, I came up with the "disclaimer speech" I used at the beginning of sections of the curriculum I knew would get push-back from the creationists.  That was evolution in biology and deep time in physical science.  It must have worked as I stayed there for 5 years.

If you look at the section titles, you'll find most of what was covered was speciation .... something few creationists have any problem with.

Edit:   I've posted the disclaimer speech a number of times, but for convenience of those few who haven't seen it.....

"The material we are about to cover may be in conflict with some of your religious beliefs.  You may believe what you wish without it impacting your grade in any way.  However, this is a science class and IN CLASS, you are expected to know what science says and why science says it."

In biology, I would add: "We will not cover the origin of life because from a scientific perspective, all proposals for it are speculative and we will not discuss human evolution due to pressure from local churches."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2020 at 7:49 PM, piasan said:

I never taught human evolution or abiogenesis.

In the textbook I used, evolution began with chapter 14.  I usually covered a chapter every two weeks, so I'd reach evolution somewhere around spring break.   Chapter outlines were:

Chapter 14  Origin of life.  14.1 Biogenesis; 14.2 Earth's History; 14.3 The first life forms.   I did not cover 14.1 

Chapter 15  Evolution:  Evidence and Theory.   15.1 The Fossil record; 15.2 Theories of evolution; 15.3 Evolution in process. 

Chapter 16 The evolution of populations and speciation.  16.1 Genetic equilibrium; 16.2 Disruption of genetic equilibrium; 16.3 Formation of Species

Chapter 17  Human Evolution   not covered.

Chapter 18  Classification ..... never got that far.

"I never taught human evolution or abiogenesis"

If you taught Evolution as taught in the Biology textbooks you taught BOTH OF THESE as well.. How can you not see that?? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2020 at 8:35 PM, piasan said:

That is correct.

In my first year teaching biology, I didn't get to chapter 17.  Early in my second year, the principal escorted me to the superintendent's office during my planning period.  The superintendent told me in no uncertain terms that if I expected to stay at that school, I wouldn't teach "that evolution crap."

That put me in something of a "Catch-22" because I was required to teach state standards that (paraphrasing) "the diversity of life was the result of small changes over time."  Further, the textbook provided by the district had the evolution section in it.  So, I came up with the "disclaimer speech" I used at the beginning of sections of the curriculum I knew would get push-back from the creationists.  That was evolution in biology and deep time in physical science.  It must have worked as I stayed there for 5 years.

If you look at the section titles, you'll find most of what was covered was speciation .... something few creationists have any problem with.

Edit:   I've posted the disclaimer speech a number of times, but for convenience of those few who haven't seen it.....

"The material we are about to cover may be in conflict with some of your religious beliefs.  You may believe what you wish without it impacting your grade in any way.  However, this is a science class and IN CLASS, you are expected to know what science says and why science says it."

In biology, I would add: "We will not cover the origin of life because from a scientific perspective, all proposals for it are speculative and we will not discuss human evolution due to pressure from local churches."

my first year teaching biology, I didn't get to chapter 17.  Early in my second year, the principal escorted me to the superintendent's office during my planning period.  The superintendent told me in no uncertain terms that if I expected to stay at that school, I wouldn't teach "that evolution crap."

But you decided to do it anyway in spite of what your very wise principle said due to your own wishes.. You WANTED those kids to believe that they are nothing more than accidental Apes that descended from sea sponges and you WANTED them to believe that they are related to cockroaches bananas elephants and jellyfish.... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

piasan,

what state and county did you teach evolution?

in what year did the principal tell you to "not teach that evolution crap"?

revealing this information is in no way divulging any kind of personal information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Blitzking said:

 You WANTED those kids to believe that they are nothing more than accidental Apes that descended from sea sponges and you WANTED them to believe that they are related to cockroaches bananas elephants and jellyfish.... 

 

there is no evidence that man descended from sea sponges or jellyfish.

anyone that says such a thing is either lying to you or is ignorant.

correction, there is evidence in the fact of commonality of biomolecules such as DNA, RNA, and other such biomlocules.

science has been unable to connect these to a single source.

to be precise, all members of a specific phyla are related but science has been unable to demonstrate that phyla descended from one another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, what if said:

piasan,

what state and county did you teach evolution?

in what year did the principal tell you to "not teach that evolution crap"?

revealing this information is in no way divulging any kind of personal information.

 I taught MS Office in Texas for the '00-01 school year. Then in Oklahoma from fall '01 thru spring '20 where I taught almost entirely math and science.   I taught biology in Love County fall '01-spring 06 and in Bryan county fall '18-spring '20.

The superintendent told me not to teach evolution in early '03 before I reached that part of the course in the '02-03 school year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, what if said:

to be precise, all members of a specific phyla are related but science has been unable to demonstrate that phyla descended from one another.

Which is likely why the idea of a single common ancestor seems to have been discarded .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2020 at 9:49 PM, piasan said:

I never taught human evolution or abiogenesis.

In the textbook I used, evolution began with chapter 14.  I usually covered a chapter every two weeks, so I'd reach evolution somewhere around spring break.   Chapter outlines were:

Chapter 14  Origin of life.  14.1 Biogenesis; 14.2 Earth's History; 14.3 The first life forms.   I did not cover 14.1 

Chapter 15  Evolution:  Evidence and Theory.   15.1 The Fossil record; 15.2 Theories of evolution; 15.3 Evolution in process. 

Chapter 16 The evolution of populations and speciation.  16.1 Genetic equilibrium; 16.2 Disruption of genetic equilibrium; 16.3 Formation of Species

Chapter 17  Human Evolution   not covered.

Chapter 18  Classification ..... never got that far.

10 hours ago, Blitzking said:

"I never taught human evolution or abiogenesis"

If you taught Evolution as taught in the Biology textbooks you taught BOTH OF THESE as well.. How can you not see that?? 

 

No.  I specifically EXCLUDED both of them as previously explained.

I would not discuss anything from Chapter 14.1 (The origin of life) or Chapter 17 (Human evolution).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, piasan said:

 I taught MS Office in Texas for the '00-01 school year. Then in Oklahoma from fall '01 thru spring '20 where I taught almost entirely math and science.   I taught biology in Love County fall '01-spring 06 and in Bryan county fall '18-spring '20.

The superintendent told me not to teach evolution in early '03 before I reached that part of the course in the '02-03 school year.

so, can i assume you taught evolution in love county ok. from 2001-2006 and bryan county from 2018-2020?

the reason i ask this is because i find it hard to believe a school principal would tell you not to teach something the school board approved of.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, piasan said:

Which is likely why the idea of a single common ancestor seems to have been discarded .....

once you come to this conclusion, then you must admit there had to be multiple origins.

a multiple origins scenario comports with the biblical account.

when faced with this scenario, my brain simply stops working.

maybe i should just accept my conclusions and be done with it, i don't see why god would fault me for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, piasan said:

No.  I specifically EXCLUDED both of them as previously explained.

I would not discuss anything from Chapter 14.1 (The origin of life) or Chapter 17 (Human evolution).

"I specifically EXCLUDED them".. No, you would like to THINK that you "excluded" them but your DIDNT exclude them as they are inextricably joined at the hip! Or did you teach your OWN hybrid version where God created the magic microbe and let it slowly evolve into all flora and fauna while EXCLUDING MAN from the equation? LOL... trying to soothe your own guilty conscience now that you know you planted poisonous seeds into the minds of each and every one of those kids that you helped indoctrinate?  You committed a grevious sin and it is finally starting to dawn on you.. Doubling down by justifying it wont work with me.. Pretend that you are King David and I am Nathan.... Best Wishes JT 

 

"If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." Romans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2020 at 10:35 PM, piasan said:

In my first year teaching biology, I didn't get to chapter 17.  Early in my second year, the principal escorted me to the superintendent's office during my planning period.  The superintendent told me in no uncertain terms that if I expected to stay at that school, I wouldn't teach "that evolution crap."

That put me in something of a "Catch-22" because I was required to teach state standards that (paraphrasing) "the diversity of life was the result of small changes over time."  Further, the textbook provided by the district had the evolution section in it.  So, I came up with the "disclaimer speech" I used at the beginning of sections of the curriculum I knew would get push-back from the creationists.  That was evolution in biology and deep time in physical science.  It must have worked as I stayed there for 5 years.

If you look at the section titles, you'll find most of what was covered was speciation .... something few creationists have any problem with.

Edit:   I've posted the disclaimer speech a number of times, but for convenience of those few who haven't seen it.....

"The material we are about to cover may be in conflict with some of your religious beliefs.  You may believe what you wish without it impacting your grade in any way.  However, this is a science class and IN CLASS, you are expected to know what science says and why science says it."

In biology, I would add: "We will not cover the origin of life because from a scientific perspective, all proposals for it are speculative and we will not discuss human evolution due to pressure from local churches."

11 hours ago, Blitzking said:

But you decided to do it anyway in spite of what your very wise principle said due to your own wishes.. You WANTED those kids to believe that they are nothing more than accidental Apes that descended from sea sponges and you WANTED them to believe that they are related to cockroaches bananas elephants and jellyfish....

 

I decided to teach to the STATE STANDARD as I am REQUIRED to do.

The SUPERINTENDENT (not the principal) had placed me in a "Catch-22" situation in which I could be disciplined for teaching evolution or I could be disciplined for not teaching the state mandated standard.  

A similar situation had reached the SCOTUS in the case of Epperson v. Arkansas in which Epperson was required to teach a biology text provided by the district that contained sections on evolution while state law mandated that the mere mention of evolution could result in revocation of her teaching certificate .... a professional death sentence.

I taught at a small school (the high school had about 90 students and typically graduated 10-15 per year) in a small town (less than 500 in the "city limits"). (Note:  The dropout rate was horrible, I had a 9th grade class of 26, ... only 12 graduated.)   I knew anything I said about the ultimatum would reach the principal and superintendent.  The state standard mandated that I teach  that (paraphrasing after all these years) "Modern life forms had developed by small changes over time."  

So I let it be known in the "grapevine" that I would teach to the state mandated standard.   No more.  No less.   If they wanted to do something about that they could try.... and I incorporated the disclaimer already mentioned.   There was never another word about it from the administration and I taught there several more years .... earning tenure in the process.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, what if said:

so, can i assume you taught evolution in love county ok. from 2001-2006 and bryan county from 2018-2020?

the reason i ask this is because i find it hard to believe a school principal would tell you not to teach something the school board approved of.

Yes, I taught evolution for 5 years in Love county and 2 years in Bryan county.

Again, it was the superintendent .... the principal's boss .... who made the threat.   Of course, I'm sure the principal agreed with him.   I'm also certain there was pressure exerted by at least one board member.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, what if said:

to be precise, all members of a specific phyla are related but science has been unable to demonstrate that phyla descended from one another.

1 hour ago, piasan said:

Which is likely why the idea of a single common ancestor seems to have been discarded .....

39 minutes ago, what if said:

once you come to this conclusion, then you must admit there had to be multiple origins.

 

 

Correct.

39 minutes ago, what if said:

a multiple origins scenario comports with the biblical account.

It does .... as does the command that the Earth and seas "bring forth life" in the Biblical account.

 

39 minutes ago, what if said:

when faced with this scenario, my brain simply stops working.

maybe i should just accept my conclusions and be done with it, i don't see why god would fault me for that.

Maybe it's time to put your brain into overdrive rather than "be done with it."    :think:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Blitzking said:

trying to soothe your own guilty conscience now that you know you planted poisonous seeds into the minds of each and every one of those kids that you helped indoctrinate?  You committed a grevious sin and it is finally starting to dawn on you.

Bit of a close shave there BK, you're playing it a bit loose and fast with the old ad-hom rhetoric

(I'm not saying you can't use colour in your posts and this isn't a warning as such but sometimes you seem to get stuck in colour-mode and can't come out of it.) :D

Your rhetoric-tally is getting rather high, Sir, you may want to cut it down a touch, once that anti-Darwinian fire is in your belly you can't be stopped. :rotfl3: ;) 

From the perspective of a teacher that is evolutionist and just sees evolution as another science theory, is it really to be unexpected that they would have no problem in teaching it? I should think the more grievous sin is with the people that create the rules, not the ones that have to obey them. 

--------

In regards to this topic my opinion for what it's worth is that traditionally, "the big questions" of life have not been scientific. Yes, there is an inductive argument that science-answers have replaced religious ones but that's usually because the religious ones were superstitions and the bible didn't teach them anyway. EXAMPLE: thunder is explained as Thor's voice and lightning the flash of him lighting his farts. 

But here is the point I am making; A person's beliefs, the big questions of life that pertain only to humans and no other, "animal", are touched upon by the, "theory" of evolutionogenesis. That is to say, it's ultimately up to the person to decide whether all life if explainable scientifically therefore in a sense evolution has IMPOSED itself upon humanity by saying, "here is a natural answer we insist upon where there may not be one".

And so if I had students that is what I would say; that the big questions of life aren't necessarily answered by natural means and because evolution implies they are, it IMPOSES upon the student a philosophy of naturalism whereby it is assumed that the big questions of life can be answered by nature itself. That is ultimately a very big and atheist-coloured assumption the student is not obliged to take on board but it seems it is basically rammed down their throats these days. 

There shouldn't be such a silencing of the opposition, and the opposition is NOT only creationists but a fairly large group of people including creationists, and many of them are very knowledgeable and educated and know what they are talking about.  It's that the establishment basically makes out any contrary argument does not exist which is repulsive. The whole, "no argument in science" card is also a MOOT point because the point is you can make strong non-scientific arguments or partially science arguments as to why the truth is NOT natural. 

Anatomy in and of itself is basically an insight into the design in lifeforms, anatomists will usually have no problem alluding to design simply because design is what they are looking at. That in itself is genuine science, the design of life is factual. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, piasan said:

No.  I specifically EXCLUDED both of them as previously explained.

I would not discuss anything from Chapter 14.1 (The origin of life) or Chapter 17 (Human evolution).

27 minutes ago, Blitzking said:

 No, you would like to THINK that you "excluded" them but your DIDNT exclude them as they are inextricably joined at the hip!

 

I would not even discuss them.

30 minutes ago, Blitzking said:

Or did you teach your OWN hybrid version where God created the magic microbe and let it slowly evolve into all flora and fauna while EXCLUDING MAN from the equation?

We are speaking of a PUBLIC SCHOOL science class.

34 minutes ago, Blitzking said:

LOL... trying to soothe your own guilty conscience now that you know you planted poisonous seeds into the minds of each and every one of those kids that you helped indoctrinate? 

I feel absolutely no guilt whatsoever for having taught science.

35 minutes ago, Blitzking said:

You committed a grevious sin and it is finally starting to dawn on you.. Doubling down by justifying it wont work with me..

I don't answer to you and you are not the One who will judge me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, piasan said:

Yes, I taught evolution for 5 years in Love county and 2 years in Bryan county.

 

ok.

Quote

Again, it was the superintendent .... the principal's boss .... who made the threat.

ok. my mistake.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mike the wiz said:

In regards to this topic my opinion for what it's worth is that traditionally, "the big questions" of life have not been scientific. Yes, there is an inductive argument that science-answers have replaced religious ones but that's usually because the religious ones were superstitions and the bible didn't teach them anyway. EXAMPLE: thunder is explained as Thor's voice and lightning the flash of him lighting his farts. 

But here is the point I am making; A person's beliefs, the big questions of life that pertain only to humans and no other, "animal", are touched upon by the, "theory" of evolutionogenesis. That is to say, it's ultimately up to the person to decide whether all life if explainable scientifically therefore in a sense evolution has IMPOSED itself upon humanity by saying, "here is a natural answer we insist upon where there may not be one".

And so if I had students that is what I would say; that the big questions of life aren't necessarily answered by natural means and because evolution implies they are, it IMPOSES upon the student a philosophy of naturalism whereby it is assumed that the big questions of life can be answered by nature itself. That is ultimately a very big and atheist-coloured assumption the student is not obliged to take on board but it seems it is basically rammed down their throats these days. 

There shouldn't be such a silencing of the opposition, and the opposition is NOT only creationists but a fairly large group of people including creationists, and many of them are very knowledgeable and educated and know what they are talking about.  It's that the establishment basically makes out any contrary argument does not exist which is repulsive. The whole, "no argument in science" card is also a MOOT point because the point is you can make strong non-scientific arguments or partially science arguments as to why the truth is NOT natural. 

Anatomy in and of itself is basically an insight into the design in lifeforms, anatomists will usually have no problem alluding to design simply because design is what they are looking at. That in itself is genuine science, the design of life is factual. 

i believe those that teach evolution to grade and high schoolers should tell students evolution hasn't been solved to everyones satisfaction and that there are certain critical aspects of evolution that can't in principle be solved.

the idea that all life came from a single ancestor for example.

the emergence of life from accretion of biomolecules in a pond of goo is another.

these 2 ideas must be explained to students before evolution is taught to them.

IOW, teach students the truth.

i don't see why creationists get all worked up about this, i have found NOTHING that outright discounts the god scenario.

i find it telling indeed that given the vast strides science has made over the years, it still hasn't dethroned god as creator of both life and the universe.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, what if said:

i believe those that teach evolution to grade and high schoolers should tell students evolution hasn't been solved to everyones satisfaction and that there are certain critical aspects of evolution that can't in principle be solved.

the idea that all life came from a single ancestor for example.

the emergence of life from accretion of biomolecules in a pond of goo is another.

these 2 ideas must be explained to students before evolution is taught to them.

IOW, teach students the truth.

Does explaining there are some things science will never solve and all proposals for the origin of life are speculative from a scientific standpoint count?

 

11 minutes ago, what if said:

i don't see why creationists get all worked up about this, i have found NOTHING that outright discounts the god scenario.

The ones who "get all worked up about this" tend to object because it is in conflict with the Genesis account..

14 minutes ago, what if said:

i find it telling indeed that given the vast strides science has made over the years, it still hasn't dethroned god as creator of both life and the universe.

Nor will it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, piasan said:

Does explaining there are some things science will never solve and all proposals for the origin of life are speculative from a scientific standpoint count?

 

yes, if you give specific examples.

things like determining pi to the last digit doesn't count.

Quote

Nor will it....

why do you believe abiogenesis will not be solved?

are you going to say something like it's impossible to determine the conditions or are you going to say there appears to be an irreducible quality to the cell?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

Our Terms