You're not saying... no way!

Um, you might read some other threads, its really never one sided.
And OK, your point was that there is too much emphasis on the "pipe debate" topics like science right?

And my point was that American kids are already lagging behind in many areas and your idea to de-emphasize them even more would only add to the problem. But ok, I twisted your statements. To cut back on science and foreign languages simply would add momentum to the trends of us lagging behind. And science is crucial as mrriff says in that it is the foundation to many of the other topics.

what in the world do foreign languages have to do with falling behind. If a someone cant balance a check book then going out of the country isn't going to happen anyway. I see exactly what she is saying and she is absolutely correct

why am i not surprised?

Thats the best comeback you have. Test I think you post just to see your thoughts on the screen. You really bore me.

Dawg, sometimes I think you post just to pick fights. You annoy me.

But back on topic, the points have been made with regards to what to focus on in elementary education. Some feel the best way is to put more emphasis on reading and basic math while some others think that the broad approach must be taken to compete with the global leaders and to overall give the best education.

If the US was a developing nation then yes focus on reading and basic math but with 99% literacy and one of the best higher educational systems in the world, I think we are past that point.

Ha, this ^^ is not by accident, and surely not done in an unconscious state?

Yes JSanders I guess i was guilty of picking fights. But atleast I am not a mod doing the same two things.:razz:

I actually was being facetious about twisting her words.
Because her point was that there is too much emphasis on science, atleast that was what I got out of it. And the only way to put less emphasis on it is to drop the time spent on it. So I don;t really see how I twisted her words. To me the debate over what to teach affects the students, teachers and parents all the time so it is not a "pipe smoke" debate.

lol, always on the attack.

right back at you. :-(

I think you to should settle this with a good old-fashioned thumb wresting match :?

Kathryn, all these threads in the Sensitive Forum are like this. Especially this one. You can see that in the above few posts.

But I still don't get what you're saying. If it is true that it is a meaningless debate, then why is it so passionate? The science community sees itself as being attacked. And they are rightfully pushing back. There are other branches of science such as physics and geography that don't suffer from such scrutiny. Why the life sciences? I don't think it's asking too much to teach the most current science in each of the branches without injecting religion.

(jsconyers, I like your sig. I have used it recently.)

Kathryn (and anybody else who'd care to comment), I'd like your opinion on post number 558. If you don't mind, please read what is happening in TX with the school board and the president wanting to inject his creationist views into the science curriculum. Do you agree or disagree with him?

These threads for the most part are all debates so there are going to be two or more sides and they do get people upset sometimes. Its all part of the back and forth of it.

Jsconyers, No need for thumb wrestling although I think I could take him. Not sure about dawg though. :razz:

You just won't let it go will you?

The poster above commented about their comments being taken out of context and you admit the issue (finally) you have been guilty of throughout this (and other) threads.

If your goal is to poke at me and make me look foolish, have at it, I really don't care what reputation I have with you.

But then again, I think you are only poking me because I am a Moderator. I don't throw that around in this Sensitive Discussion area, and as a matter of fact only in like two threads have I even reminded the users of the our supposed rules of civility here. You have thrown my "title" at me several times.

And that, I am truly tiring of. Do you want to poke and poke to see what, if any, action I will take? What is your goal in all that?

Is this your version of "I can make myself look better, if I first make him (or her) look stupid"?

Damn, you win.

The original post was regarding a journalist having asked the president about his attitude regarding the teaching of evolution in schools. Following that post, and the comments that followed, I asked if anyone else besides me felt that the evolution debate is out of proportion to its relevance.

(An analogy: I feel the amount of attention Britney Spears receives in the media is out of proportion to her relevance as an artist.)

There are a handful of issues like evolution that people on both sides get so worked up about that the entire field of study gets hijacked. Science and evolution are not synonymous; one is a tiny subset of the other. Somehow, in spite of the fact that I never used the word "science" in any previous post, or addressed any facet of science apart from the evolution debate, I was interpreted as attacking science.

"The science community sees itself as being attacked. And they are rightfully pushing back."

The entire point of science is to create a theory and test it against all manner of arguments. How can one have any scientific progress without pointing out the flaws in hypotheses and theorems? What would the point be of "pushing back" against a process that - theoretically - makes one a better scientist?

As a parent, I am more concerned about the fact that people seem unwilling to teach their children that:

* people disagree
* even teachers
* that's perfectly normal
* it's OK to disagree with ANYONE as long as it's done respectfully, and
* differences of opinion lead to growth

So the man has a non-evolutionist view. He's entitled. Will he use his job to advocate his own position instead of behaving impartially? Probably, most people would do that. With any luck, a review board exists that will keep any unilateral decisions in check.

I am equally opposed to suppressing either view. "Some people believe X, and others Y. Here's why... " is the best thing for our children to hear. Not only does it make them more tolerant of multiple points of view, but it gives them a chance to apply their own reason.

Wow, went back to the original post. That was a long time ago.

Please make use of another analogy. You gotta bring it back to reality. :razz:

Kathryn, I'm not sure what you do for a living, but I have to say that you have it wrong here. There is nothing tiny about the Theory of Evolution. As I've said, it underlies all of the life sciences. I'm not sure what else I can do to convince you of that, but I can certainly provide some sources.

EXACTLY AND PRECISELY! Thank you for making my point. The Theory of Evolution has been tested and tested and tested. A body of evidence exists that support all aspects of evolution. People have tried and tried to point out flaws. Guess what, none of them work. Just in the last 10 years, science has made tremendous strides in understanding evolution, even on a molecular level. Still, everything, all studies, support the science of evolution.

This is exactly what people are worried about. He is forcing his non-evolutionist (religious) views on everyone around him and into the science classroom. A review board? They are also worried about that. So tell me. Are you the least concerned that a man who believes the earth is 10,000 years old has tremendous influence in what is written in science textbooks, not only in TX but the entire country? If not, you really should be.

But come on, don't you think that the science curriculum should teach what we know? It's not about multiple points of view and 'teach both sides'. There are no two sides. The Theory of Evolution is the only theory of how forms evolve. There are no other theories.