Fwd: [IP] Dave, why do the IP consider recogniti on of cr eationism in afewschool districts so

> From: "David Farber"
> Date: February 13, 2005 12:43:22 PM EST
> To: ip@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: RE: [IP] Dave, why do the IP consider recogniti on of cr
> eationism in afewschool districts so
> Reply-To: dave@farber.net
>
>
>
> _______________ Forward Header _______________
> Subject: RE: [IP] Dave, why do the IP consider recognition of cr
> eationism in afewschool districts so
> Author: Marc
> Date: 13th February 2005 12:27:07 pm
>
> Dave;
>
> For IP if you wish;
>
> I may be simply preaching to the choir, but it occurs to me that Neil
> has
> subtly answered his own question.
>
> Kansas schools aren't the current BIG problem - I agree. They ARE
> however
> the place where big problems begin. Today's kids are tomorrow's
> leaders and
> voters. As we discuss the decline in the quality of education, we seem
> to
> forget that we are living in times that result from the shortcomings of
> yesterday's educational system. While it may be difficult to link AIDS
> and
> Sudanese genocide to American education, it is not to difficult to lay
> war,
> Bush and a good measure of global warming at Americans' feet. How did
> we get
> here? Because the average American is not broadly educated, lacks basic
> skills in problem decomposition/resolution and critical thought, and is
> poorly prepared for the role of citizen in a world class democracy. A
> system
> that is by the people, for the people, is only as good as its people!
>
> As education fails, so too follows the society. In certain respects, I
> have
> to consider that the success of America in the last century was at
> least
> somewhat due to the large scale importing of highly educated
> non-Americans
> as either immigrants or students. Current xenophobic policy is choking
> that
> lifeblood out of the country; Where will the critical thought, and
> broadly
> founded imagination, that is necessary for innovation and social
> evolution,
> come from?
>
> If we deal with the Kansas' of the moment, we will be doomed to deal
> with
> their consequences in 20 years.
>
> I am not American, but this is swiftly ceasing to be a world with
> national
> boundaries - what happens to America happens to the world. What I have
> found
> disturbing are the reactions I hear to global polls of education
> quality
> that show US students ranking lower than most developped nations; "Who
> cares
> if the Swedes are better educated? They don't run the world, we do!"
> (I wish
> I was joking)
>
> Marc Aniballi
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ip@v2.listbox.com [mailto:owner-ip@v2.listbox.com] On
> Behalf Of
> David Farber
> Sent: February 12, 2005 7:25 PM
> To: ip@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: [IP] Dave, why do the IP consider recognition of cr eationism
> in a
> fewschool districts so
>
>
>
> _______________ Forward Header _______________
> Subject: Dave, why do the IP consider recognition of creationism in a
> fewschool districts so
> Author: "Munro, Neil"
> Date: 12th February 2005 5:19:59 pm
>
>
> much more offensive than the crummy math & science scores among so
> many poor
> and middle-class Americans? Or the declining number of Americans going
> into
> the sciences and engineering? Or, more broadly, why care about Kansas
> schools when there are so many greater horrors, such as global
> warming,
> genocide in Sudan, President Bush, war, AIDS, etc.
>
> I'm not defending or attacking creationism, just trying to find out
> why your
> folks care so much about the policy of a school board in Kansas.
>
> Neil
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-ip@v2.listbox.com on behalf of n
> Sent: Sat 2/12/2005 11:16 AM
> To: ip@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: [IP] Re: Creationists take their challenge to evolu tion
> theory
> into theclassroom
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John S. Quarterman"
> To:
> Cc: "John S. Quarterman" ;
> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 10:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Creationists take their challenge to evolu tion
> theory
> into theclassroom
>
>
>>> _______________ Forward Header _______________
>>> Subject: Re: Creationists take their challenge to evolution theory
>>> into theclassroom
>>> Author: David Byrden
>>> Date: 12th February 2005 1:26:23 pm
>>
>>> ...
>>
>>> I think my approach should be used to deflate the Creationists such
>>> as Mr. Harris, who said:
>>>
>>>>> "There are creation myths on both sides. Which one do you teach?"
>>>
>>> Mr. Harris is wrong; there are more than two sides. Every religion
>>> has a different creation myth.
>>
>> And Christianity has at least two: Adam and Eve created
>> simultaneously vs.
>> Eve created out of Adam's side; they're both in Genesis 1. This is
>> well known to every serious student of religion, or, for that matter,
>> to anyone who simply reads that book.
>>
>>> If the Creationists force Creation to be taught in schools, the
>>> schools should teach every single creation myth from cultures all
>>> around the world. This would leave no time for any science in science
>>> class - thus making a point - and would undermine the students'
>>> unthinking acceptance of Christianity.
>>
>> Or at least undermine their unthinking acceptance of some particular
>> sect's interpretation of Genesis as representing Christianity. After
>> all, when did Bishop Ussher's dating of Creation to 4004 BC
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ussher
>>
>> become more important than the Sermon on the Mount or the parable of
>> the Good Samaritan?
>>
>> David has said what I haven't seen many people say: the response that
>> will succeed to a creationist attack on evolution is not to circle the
>> wagons around evolution or even around science. It is to
>> counterattack against the creationists' version of religion and
> Christianity.
>>
>> This isn't something that many of us particularly want to do; science
>> isn't about attacking religion; it is about science.
>> However, this isn't science; it is politics. What creationists
>> believe and teach in their own homes and churches is their affair.
>> But when they interject their dogma into public school systems as
>> fact, they expose it for critical examination, not to mention
>> ridicule.
>>
>>> David
>>
>> -jsq
>