Why do your kids teachers have to tell them these things? Why can't you do this at home? At church? Why can't you reserve an hour a day to sit with your kids and tell them abut this wonderful creator and all the things he has done? Why would you want a teacher, who might not have the same views and interpretations as you teach them something you hold so valuable? If I were a teacher, would you want me teaching your kids about your god? :D Didn't think so! :D[/QUOTE]


I actually do spend time with the kids - at church, at home, on the way dropping them off at school or pickiing them up when I can, Coaching [ badly I admit ] their basketball team, at the supper table, taking them on trips [ NY, FLA, and all the places in between], making sure their homework is done [ and there seems to be a lot more than I was their age ], signing off on assignments etc..

The other day while taking my 3rd grade son to school, he mentioned that birds came from dinosaurs. I asked him where dinosaurs came from, and he said amphibians, and we went down the line to fish, according to his responses. That was what he was taught.

At that point I asked where fish came from - he said rocks.

I asked him how? Why are current rocks not just becoming fish etc..


This is the type of stuff that is taught as fact in school. It only takes some simple questions
And reasoning to know that evolution is not fact.


Then, [as I have always told my children] I told him that God created him, loves him, cherishes him, gives him eternal life, makes it possible for him to do great things with his life. It is in the Bible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inthebox

At that point I asked where fish came from - he said rocks. ...
This is the type of stuff that is taught as fact in school.

---

Confront the teacher/school, there is a problem there obviously.

What would you say if I told you that the local church sermon here preached violence towards gays?

Um I know that I really have no idea about this ID thing my daughter is only in 1st grade. But I did have a response for inthebox.

When I went into my Freshman year my science teacher told us that next week we were going to learn about the BIG BANG. I immediately told him that I did not want to participate because I did not believe in the big bang theory. He got angry and sent me to the office. I told them what happened and they called my parents. My parents backed me up and said they refuse for me to take that part of the class also. This went all the way to the school board. Where I won. I got study hall for a week! So I just wanted to let everyone know there is still a choice. If you don't want you kids learning about it, tell the school. They can't make you go against your beliefs.

PS I am so glad I got on this website! I learn SO much stuff it's unbelievable!!

NK:



I would tell you that is wrong!

Unbelievable. I am truly sorry that they claim to be Christ followers.


The sermon should be


Galatians 5:4... [niv] The only thing that counts is faith expressed as love.

1 John 4... We love because He first loved us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by achampio21

Um I know that I really have no idea about this ID thing my daughter is only in 1st grade. But I did have a response for inthebox.

When I went into my Freshman year my science teacher told us that next week we were going to learn about the BIG BANG. I immediately told him that I did not want to participate because I did not believe in the big bang theory. He got angry and sent me to the office. I told them what happened and they called my parents. My parents backed me up and said they refuse for me to take that part of the class also. This went all the way to the school board. Where I won. I got study hall for a week!! So I just wanted to let everyone know their is still a choice. If you don't want you kids learning about it, tell the school. They can't make you go against your beliefs.

PS I am so glad I got on this website!! I learn SO much stuff it's unbelievable!!!!

---

Welcome.

My wife was taught similar things in College 100 level bio courses. You have to repeat these things on the test in order to get a good grade.

inthebox,
That's the simili I was making. Your child's teacher is wrong and he/she in no way reflects the curriculum that science teacher's use.

Wow. Okay well maybe it only works in elem and high school. But I guess I was thinking keep your kids from learning that way of thinking until they are old enough to know the difference and establish their own beliefs. Thanks for the info though!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by achampio21

Wow. Okay well maybe it only works in elem and high school. But I guess I was thinking keep your kids from learning that way of thinking until they are old enough to know the difference and establish their own beliefs. Thanks for the info though!

---

Actually the same can be said for religion can't it?

The part about old enough to know the difference and establish their own beliefs? Yes. I tell my daughter what I believe. And when she asks me if it is real or the truth I ask her if she believes it's real. She says yes or no. If she wants answers to questions I answer them and show her where or how I got those answers. But I stress to her that it is about belief and faith. It's up to her if she wants to believe and have faith in it or choose her own way. (as of now, she believes with me. We'll see when she is a teen if that stays the same! )

Well done!

Here is some insight to my daughters way of thinking (7 years old)
"Mommy, I think Santa and Easter bunny aren't real. I think big people made them up to make bad kids be good so they will get presents. But the tooth fairy HAS to be real. Because you don't have to be good for the tooth fairy to show up you have to lose a tooth, and that happens if you are good or bad."

So maybe I should let her learn about this ID thing in school. She may have some powerful insight for the teacher!!

By the way when should I be expecting her to come home with all those questions and new knowledge anyway... 3rd grade or so?

I have a 7 year old daughter as well. There is no talk of religion in our house because there is no need for it. My kids have great morals instilled by their parents :). If later she wants to learn about religion she is of course free to do so. I'm OK for her to learn all about science since it is based of man's observation of nature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Galveston1

From that premise, I believe that the only people who should have any argument against ID being taught alongside evolution would be Atheists. No one else's ox would be gored. And, of course, those who believe in creation are presently seeing their ox being gored. Either way, someone will not like it, so does majority rule or minority rule in this case?

---

Hello again, Galvesgton:

Even if I wasn't an atheist, my scientific "ox would be gored" by your proposal. Even WITH it's gaps, or because of them, evolution is science - ID is religion.

I don't know why you think evolution is a done deal. It ain't. That's what's so coooooool about it. We're LEARNING it, AS we are teaching it. Look, when I was a kid, they taught me that the land mass was fixed. They were wrong. Shortly after I graduated, they discovered plate tectonics. That means the continents move.

Should they NOT have taught what they knew at the time in science class?? No, of course not. They should have (and fortunately they did) taught what they knew. That's what we're doing now with evolution. I don't think there's ANY science teacher ANY where in the world that doesn't teach, that the theory of evolution is itself evolving.

As a matter of fact, it would be MY opinion, that we know 10% about evolution and where we came from. Maybe we'll never find out for sure. I certainly hope we do, and I think we will. The quest for the truth is certainly exciting - unbelievably exciting. I relish each new discovery, and they're happening every day. What a wonderful time to be alive.

But, back to your question. Since ID is religion and NOT science, it really would violate MY First Amendment rights to be free from a state sponsored religion if it were taught in school. That's what would be happening if state employed teachers taught religion.

But, there's good news for you. The other great thing about the First Amendment, is that it allows YOU to teach anything you want in your church and you can even call it science it you want to. Nobody is going to do anything about it.

So, even if (as I've said before), I was the ONLY citizen in this entire country who objected to religion being taught in public school, I, as a minority of ONE, have the Constitutional right to STOP it.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

As a matter of fact, it would be MY opinion, that we know 10% about evolution and where we came from. Maybe we'll never find out for sure. I certainly hope we do, and I think we will. The quest for the truth is certainly exciting - unbelievably exciting. I relish each new discovery, and they're happening every day. What a wonderful time to be alive.

---

I agree. Here's a thread I started sometime ago that has a pretty good discussion of some of what's new in genetics and evolutionary theory, if you're interested. Genetics-Developmental Biology-Evolutionary theory

Here's a great blog by a biologist: 2008 May - Olivia Judson - Evolution - Opinion - New York Times Blog

Science from the opinion section of the NYT?


Come on.

* RNA is different fromm DNA because the former is usually single vs double stranded.

Is that the only difference?

How about R = ribo.. D = Deoxyribo.. or In RNA uracil pairs with adenine. In DNA thymidine pairs with adenine.

The science is there to describe genetics, but mentioning evolution adds no information.

A better way of describing DNA trascription, translation etc... is to marvel at the DESIGN of it.

Truly what goes on in the cell is more complex than what goes on in any man made manufacturing factories.


* Retroviruses.


To believe this is to believe that viruses added to the genetic information present to develop humans and other species? Purely by chance and luck because the majority of gene mutations that medicine finds in humans lead to diseases like cystic fibrosis, sickle cell, huntington's, CML, higher risk for breast or colon cancer, or higher risks for alzheimer's

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inthebox

Science from the opinion section of the NYT?


Come on.

---

Well, yes, actually. Olivia Judson is a qualified practicing biologist who also is able to write clearly for a general audience. If you aren't interested in what she has to say, don't read it.

Quote:

---

The science is there to describe genetics, but mentioning evolution adds no information.

---

If you are suggesting that there is no relationship between genetics and evolution, you are displaying your ignorance of both.

Science is an observation of fact.

Does genetics need to be taught with an evolutionary assumption?

No. You can teach cell biology and inheritance and genetics without an evolutionary assumption.

You can teach of gene transfer and molecular biological lab techniques, but WHO is doing these experiments?

Scientists, using their INTELLIGENCE. Not evolution.


Now take this blog about HIV vs SIV


ERV: How a 'just so' story turns into just 'so?'-- HIV and the failures of Intelligent Design

Dr Behe has stated that HIV mutates at an astounding rate as do most viruses. Hiv, despite its mutation rate stays HIV. It has not become a herpes virus or another type of virus. Same with influenza.

In this blog note the wording: [hang in there because it is decidedly more complex than the opinion page of the NYT ] :o

"new gene/protein in HIV-1 called 'Vpu'. To quickly summarize, Vpu first emerged in chimpanzees version of HIV, SIV. [ Which does not cause clinically significnt disease in chimps ] After chimpanzees transmitted SIV to humans [HOW? Was this observed?], Vpu ACQUIRED new properties to deal with the environment of a new host. AS TIME PROGRESSED, HIV-1 split into multiple subtypes [ HOW? ], and the Vpus of different subtypes STARTED TO EVOLVE different characteristics as well. Thus SIVcpz Vpu, HIVSubtype B Vpu, and HIVSubtype C Vpu are GENETICALLY AND BIOCHEMICALLY DISTINCT PROTEINS."

Notice all the evolutionary assumptions. From there they go on to more details colored by evolutionary bias.

These are the same type of assumptions that Rev Wright makes about the US government [ not evolution ] as the cause of AIDS. ;)

Let me ask a stupid question what makes a species, a species and not just a variation within a different species? What is the concrete set in stone that says this is a species? Is it say if they are 97% the same call them the same species or do they need to be closer than that?

The definition of species is set by scientists.

Equating similarity/homology to evolutionary relationship is fallacious.

If one is to use, retrospectively, degree of similarity to prove evolutionary relationships, then your tractor trailer is "evolutionarily" related to a Honda Civic. They both have wheels, seats, steering wheels, IC engines, a transmission, a metal body, a/c, etc... the difference is we know that both these vehicles were DESIGNED by humans. We are not assuming that 4 wheels "evolved" into 18, or one, through mutations, "evolved" a turbo diesal engine and the other a gas/electric hybrid engine.

I know the difference between types of cars and trucks, there isn't much variation within them a civic is a civic they never show up with the occasional 5th or 6th wheel because they are designed. (http://weirdpicturearchive.com/pics/6leggedcow.php). I want to know what make a species a particular species or kind. What stops the mutations from continuing until you have a new species?

Also about viruses of course the aids virus is still the aids virus. I wouldn't expect it to change in only 20 or so years. Evolution takes thousands of years and of course eviromental pressure. Although what was it before it was the aids virus it's only been around for the last what 30 maybe 40 years? Are viruses even alive? I seem to remember in science class that it was kind of a debated subject. My information on that may be old though.

Don't even get me started about Michael behe.