Jump to content

🐵 E V O L U T I O N 🐵


sppunk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 278
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<H2 itxtvisited="1">New research rejects 80-year theory of 'primordial soup' as the origin of life</H2>February 2, 2010 For 80 years it has been accepted that early life began in a 'primordial soup' of organic molecules before evolving out of the oceans millions of years later. Today the 'soup' theory has been over turned in a pioneering paper in BioEssays which claims it was the Earth's chemical energy, from hydrothermal vents on the ocean floor, which kick-started early life.

 

google_protectAndRun("render_ads.js::google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);[/color]

 

http://www.physorg.com/news184336191.html

Darwin vs. Jerry Falwell - Not Your Daddy's Evolution Debate New Theory Wins Nobel Prize - www-HyperEvolution.com

 

--------------------------------

 

So scientist get things wrong? Evolution, Global Warming, and then to think about some of the flaws in the social sciences I think I will stick with God created everything in six days then rested.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

 

Seriously?! Now THAT is funny yet rather scary at the same time that this nonsense is still brought up! The Scopes Monkey trial was what, 85 years ago? Darwin published "On The Origin of Species" 150 years ago? How many of you still believe the earth is flat? The only "reference" from any semi-respected journal listed above is from 1954 (8 years before Watson and Crick won the Nobel Prize for the discovery of DNA). Fail!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

 

Seriously?! Now THAT is funny yet rather scary at the same time that this nonsense is still brought up! The Scopes Monkey trial was what, 85 years ago? Darwin published "On The Origin of Species" 150 years ago? How many of you still believe the earth is flat? The only "reference" from any semi-respected journal listed above is from 1954 (8 years before Watson and Crick won the Nobel Prize for the discovery of DNA). Fail!

I can respect you not agreeing with certain things for whatever reason. We all have our opinions on things. However, do you really believe that scientists are right about everything? Once upon a time all scientists thought the world was flat. At another point all scientists thought the planets and stars revolved around the earth. Yet at another time no scientists knew of dinosaurs and thought man was the first species to walk the earth. Scientists have been wrong about everything at one point or another in the history of mankind. Why do you think that just today, they have everything figured out? What is it about 2010 that makes all scientists all the sudden all knowing. My guess is they are still wrong about everything and they will continue to be wrong until the end of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

 

Seriously?! Now THAT is funny yet rather scary at the same time that this nonsense is still brought up! The Scopes Monkey trial was what, 85 years ago? Darwin published "On The Origin of Species" 150 years ago? How many of you still believe the earth is flat? The only "reference" from any semi-respected journal listed above is from 1954 (8 years before Watson and Crick won the Nobel Prize for the discovery of DNA). Fail!

 

So what was the Scopes monkey trial about and what did it prove?

 

And how did you become the expert on "reconized journals" sounds like an argument one would use when they find out what they believe to be a truth can not hold water? Plus your whole "reconized journal" argument sounds a lot like the global warmers argument agianst those who questioned the truth about global warming, and by the way Global Warming was debunked early this year as a hoax. Did you know that? Talk about an epic fail is all those who believed what the scientist on glaobal warming and variouse other false ideas.

 

And as far as darwinian evolution it is still tuaght as fact in every single public school I have been to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cognitive dissonance is the feeling you get when something you morally believe in is disproven, its the big word(s) of the day!! Exactly and the libs are in a real moral dillema

Andrew Breitbart talks about this, it is pretty good watch part 1 and 2 I think you would find it thought provoking and entertaining. Go to the 5:23 mark on the link below.

 

http://eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=Xdnznzuz8z

 

 

Anyways, I don't try to pretend I know how life came to be, I am a christian and believe in a lot of what the good book has to say. Better believe all of it, becuase Every word of God is pure and is a shield for those who put thier faith in it. No doubt I and everyone else could be completely wrong, and we could just be marbles like the ending of Men in Black lol.

 

I will leave you with a quote from a professor, "Saying our world and our universe were created by some type of lightning strike on a puddle of water is like saying I can take apart a rolex watch down to each individual part, put it in a small box, shake it twice, and it come out in perfect working condition and even know the time" That is real good

 

Science is fantastic though, think of where we would be if we didn't allow our cultures to get away from our religions and to develop new ideas.

Have you ever seen the movie Expelled by By Ben Stien? It shines light on how corrupt/dogmatic people in science can be to make sure there theroy is the accepted theroy of truth.

 

Science can always be wrong, but is always in the pursuit of beign right. But what about when people who are doing the science are in pursuit of wealth, power, prestige and do not care about being right? And the movie Expelled sorta shines some light on that.

 

 

:bye:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Evolution, Textbooks, and Homeschooling

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

 

 

Day after day, week after week, year after year, an estimated 55 million U.S. public school students open their science textbooks to learn about Big Bang theory, spontaneous generation, and man’s alleged evolution from toads (“Back to School,” 2009). Although various scientific laws defy the General Theory of Evolution (e.g., the Law of Biogenesis, the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics; see The Scientific Case..., 2004), and even though nearly half of Americans still believe God created humans in our present form (cf. “Poll: Creationism...,” 2004; see also Gallop and Lindsay, 1999, pp. 36-37), multiplied millions of tax-payer-funded textbooks espouse man’s alleged animal ancestry as fact. Christians might hold out hope for their public-schooled children having teachers who do not believe in evolution, however, the odds are stacked against them. A 2007 nationwide survey revealed that only “16% of US science teachers are creationists” (Holmes, 2008). [NOTE: Similar to how atheists are annoyed that “only” 85% of the members of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences are atheists (see Brooks, 2006, p. 10), many militant evolutionists are bothered because “only” 84% of U.S. science teachers are evolutionists; see “Comments,” 2008).]

 

Hundreds of thousands of creationists in the U.S. have chosen to homeschool their children partly because they do not want their most precious God-given gifts (Psalm 127:3) sitting year after year at the feet of evolutionists, reading evolutionary textbooks, especially without critical analysis. These homeschooling parents still provide their children with training in Earth science, biology, chemistry, etc. In fact, many religiously motivated homeschoolers (which comprise at least 83% of homeschooling families in the U.S.; see Lovan, 2010) provide countless more hands-on, operational science experiences for their children than a lot of young people receive in public schools (where funding is limited and where classrooms are often shared with 20-30 other students). Some individuals, however, are extremely critical of the various textbooks many homeschoolers use.

 

Associated Press writer Dylan Lovan recently penned an article wherein he interviewed three non-religious homeschooling families and two evolutionary scientists, all who expressed disappointment over the available homeschooling science textbooks. After reviewing two of the best-selling biology textbooks homeschoolers frequently use, Virginia Tech biology professor Duncan Porter said “he would give the books an F” (Lovan, 2010). Ecology and evolutionary professor Jerry Coyne of the University of Chicago stated: “If this is the way kids are home-schooled then they’re being shortchanged, both rationally and in terms of biology” (as quoted in Lovan). “These books are promulgating lies to kids,” said Dr. Coyne (as quoted in Lovan), and allegedly are not scientifically credible. What is so terrible about the science books produced by Apologia, Bob Jones, and other publishers that frequently sell to homeschooling families? The textbooks “dispute Charles Darwin’s theory” of evolution (Lovan, 2010).

 

And why shouldn’t the theory of evolution be disputed? Why shouldn’t it be assessed critically and debated? Why shouldn’t students learn that all evolutionary dating methods are based upon various assumptions (see Butt and Lyons, 2009, pp. 94-100; see also DeYoung, 2005)? Why shouldn’t they be taught scientific laws that contradict evolution? Why shouldn’t they be allowed to explore the scientific case for Creation and ask whether non-intelligence can reasonably explain complex, functional design, like that in a living, human cell? As Dr. Jay Wile, textbook writer for Apologia, said: “We definitely do not lie to the students. We tell them the facts that people like Dr. Coyne would prefer to cover up.” In truth, it is evolutionists like Jerry Coyne who feel “compelled to lie in order to prop up a failing hypothesis (evolution)” (as quoted in Lovan).

 

Furthermore, regarding Coyne and Porter’s concerns that homeschoolers are being “shortchanged, both rationally and in terms of biology” because of their use of science textbooks that do not blindly embrace Darwinian evolution, consider how well the average homeschool student scores in standardized science tests. Two different studies (from 1998 and 2009), which included a total of more than 30,000 homeschool students from all 50 states, revealed that, on average, homeschoolers score 30 to 36 percentile points higher than the average student on standardized science tests (see Slatter, 2009). What’s more, many of these same homeschoolers go on to attend universities around the country where they excel in science classes, rather than being hindered because of their religious homeschooling heritage.

 

The facts speak for themselves: (1) Evolution is not a proven fact (so why should it be the only theory of origins presented to students?); (2) Studies show that, on average, homeschoolers outperform public school students by a wide margin on standardized tests, including science tests, despite most homeschoolers being taught that life on Earth was created and designed by an intelligent, infinite, eternal Mind. Evolutionists may give creationist homeschooling families an “F” on their choice of science curriculum, but in reality, it is the theory of evolution that deserves the “F.”

 

REFERENCES

“Back to School: 2006-2007” (2009), U.S. Census Bureau, http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/re...ives/facts_for_ features_special_editions/007108.html.

 

Brooks, Michael (2006), “In Place of God,” New Scientist, 192[2578]:8-11.

 

Butt, Kyle and Eric Lyons (2009), Truth Be Told (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).

 

“Comments” (2008), The Richard Dawkins Foundation, http://richarddawkins.net/articles/2609-16...re-creationists.

 

DeYoung, Donald B. (2005), Thousands...Not Billions (Green Forest, AR: Master Books).

 

Gallup, George Jr. and Michael Lindsay (1999), Surveying the Religious Landscape: Trends in U.S. Beliefs (Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse Publishing).

 

Holmes, Bob (2008), “16% of US Science Teachers are Creationists,” New Scientist, May 20, http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1393...eationists.html.

 

Lovan, Dylan (2010), “Top Home-School Texts Dismiss Darwin, Evolution,” http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/articl...ugU9NgD9E9AOV80.

 

“Poll: Creationism Trumps Evolution” (2004), CBS News, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/22/...ain657083.shtml.

 

The Scientific Case for Creation (2004), (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press), http://www.apologeticspress.org/pdfs/e-books_pdf/scfc.pdf.

 

Slatter, Ian (2009), “New Nationwide Study Confirms Homeschool Academic Achievement,” August 10, http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/200908100.asp.

 

 

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Copyright © 2010 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

We are happy to grant permission for items in the "Sensible Science" section to be reproduced in their entirety, as long as the following stipulations are observed: (1) Apologetics Press must be designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Apologetics Press Web site URL must be noted; (3) the author’s name must remain attached to the materials; (4) any references, footnotes, or endnotes that accompany the article must be included with any written reproduction of the article; (5) alterations of any kind are strictly forbidden (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, quotations, etc. must be reproduced exactly as they appear in the original); (6) serialization of written material (e.g., running an article in several parts) is permitted, as long as the whole of the material is made available, without editing, in a reasonable length of time; (7) articles, in whole or in part, may not be offered for sale or included in items offered for sale; and (8) articles may be reproduced in electronic form for posting on Web sites pending they are not edited or altered from their original content and that credit is given to Apologetics Press, including the web location from which the articles were taken.

 

For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:

 

Apologetics Press

230 Landmark Drive

Montgomery, Alabama 36117

U.S.A.

Phone (334) 272-8558

http://www.apologeticspress.org

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the information regarding standardized test scores higher for homeschoolers versus public schools is true in numbers, it is skewed information. For the last ten or so years there has been a push for more and more students to take the SAT and ACT tests as well as AP exams. So much that school can receive grant money to pay for the tests. What is happening is students that would not normally take the test are doing so because counselors are persuading them with rewards. For example, all students that sign up for the upcoming SAT test in June will be put in a drawing for two 16GB iTouches. A lot of these kids don't even have to pay for the tests.

 

I would like to see how the home schooled children's test scores rank versus the top 25% of the student body.

 

As for teaching Creationism in public school science classes - I can see using the laws of science how it would be difficult. God's plan is founded on faith. Most scientists need more explanation than "because it says so in this book." Besides, it's what the parents teach at home that should stick. There's nothing wrong with learning Darwin's theory of Evolution. It might come in handy one day when your answering a question on a test. It's what YOU believe to be true that matters, and that happens in the home environment - much like home schooled students.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look at it this way: BOTH Creationism and Darwinism are FAITH-BASED. We know how Creationism is faith-based, but Darwinism is also faith-based in the fact that there is no real proof ---- it is ONLY a theory. If it were FACT, I could see why we would need to be taught Darwinism in school. BOTH are hypotheses that should be taught in school, in my opinion, because both are based on faith and both deserve the same treatment due to them being theories that can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Common sense will tell anybody with half a brain or better that we did NOT originate from apes! :icon_eek: I think the atheist scientists that spread that junk are blind to the obvious, in my opinion. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My youngest wrote a paper regarding this when he was like a freshman.

 

To sum it up... "Why couldn't God have created the great bang theory, and why couldn't God have done all of this. And if God didn't like the way humans looked like during evolution, why couldn't he have changed things environmentally to change them?"

 

He got an A plus by the way....

 

Some teachers can explain the whole entire picture; others can't, unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the information regarding standardized test scores higher for homeschoolers versus public schools is true in numbers, it is skewed information. For the last ten or so years there has been a push for more and more students to take the SAT and ACT tests as well as AP exams. So much that school can receive grant money to pay for the tests. What is happening is students that would not normally take the test are doing so because counselors are persuading them with rewards. For example, all students that sign up for the upcoming SAT test in June will be put in a drawing for two 16GB iTouches. A lot of these kids don't even have to pay for the tests.

So if more kids take the test ,for whatever reason, how does that diminish what homeschoolers score? To me that is more proof that Public Education is less and less about what is best for the kid and more about looking good on paper or for the money.

 

I would like to see how the home schooled children's test scores rank versus the top 25% of the student body. That would be an interesting and three things could come out of it.

1) Home schoolers do not preform as well as top 25% of public education which could be bad for homeschoolers

2) They score the same which would be a plus for homeschoolers

3) Home schoolers do better which would be devestating to the Public Schools

As for teaching Creationism in public school science classes - I can see using the laws of science how it would be difficult. God's plan is founded on faith. Most scientists need more explanation than "because it says so in this book." Besides, it's what the parents teach at home that should stick. There's nothing wrong with learning Darwin's theory of Evolution. It might come in handy one day when your answering a question on a test. It's what YOU believe to be true that matters, and that happens in the home environment - much like home schooled students.

I would argue that God did not make the universe on faith but according to what is true. Now was evolution His way of creating errthing? I doubt it, becuase why would God show/reveal evolution to Darwin ( who came up with evolution to discredit the Genesis account of the Flood) and not to a scientist who believed? Plus The Bible says six days so I will take God at His Word

 

Plus let us not forget there is BIG MONEY in evolution and people have spent thier life re-working the theory? Scientist lied about globel warming?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"So if more kids take the test ,for whatever reason, how does that diminish what homeschoolers score? To me that is more proof that Public Education is less and less about what is best for the kid and more about looking good on paper or for the money."

 

One of the most common used arguements home schooled education parents use is the home schooled average test scores against public schools average test scores. In public schools, it is not the top half of the student body that is being pushed to take the exams because they already take them. It is the bottom half that counselors are pushing into the exams. Hence, the average scores for the ACT/SAT are going down in public schools. For the most part, the only home schooled students that take these tests are students that plan to attend college. This is not the case in public schools anymore. It is similar to comparing test scores with private schools. Many folks will tell you that private schools are better because the students are more prepared for college, and they score higher on entrance exams such as the ACT/SAT. This is 100% true when compared to the average of a public school. BUT, why would we compare the environment of a private school to the the whole environment of a public school. How about just comparing the public school kids that are in the PreAP and AP classes - you know, the kids that take school seriously.

 

The fact is public school students in PreAP and AP classes routinely score higher on college entrance exams than home schooled children and even private school students. This is not to say public schools are better than private schools or home schooled students. This is just to point out that the better students at most public schools can hang with students taught at home or in a private school.

 

On a side note, we had our Academic Awards Ceremony last night, and I'm proud to say we passed out over 2 million dollars in scholarships. The biggest being the Faculty Choice at Harvard Scholarship valued at $195,200.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Indirect Observation

by Kyle Butt, M.A.

 

 

The idea often is presented that the creation of the Universe is not “scientific” because a supernatural Creator cannot be tested using present scientific instruments and procedures. Eugenie Scott, the Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education, avid proponent of evolution and outspoken opponent of creation, has expressed precisely such sentiments: “The ultimate statement of creationism—that the present universe came about as the result of the action or actions of a divine Creator—is thus outside the abilities of science to test” (2004, p. 19). Presumably, because God cannot be “controlled” in an experiment, and because He is a supernatural, non-physical Being, then any information that involves such a God cannot be deemed “scientific.”

 

It is interesting to note, however, that Scott makes some very pertinent admissions when it comes to the ways in which scientists gather data and formulate their theories. In her discussion of data collection, she noted that some scientific data are gathered from indirect observation. She stated:

 

In some fields, not only is it impossible to directly control the variables, but the phenomena themselves may not be directly observable. A research design known as indirect experimentation is often utilized in such fields. Explanations can be tested even if the phenomena being studied are too far away, too small, or too far back in time to be observed directly. For example, giant planets recently have been discovered orbiting distant stars—though we cannot directly observe them (2004, p. 6, italics in orig.).

 

She proceeded to suggest that because we know that large planets would have quite a large gravitational pull, and because we see the distant stars “wobble” like they have been pulled by planet gravitation, then we can know that “these planetary giants do exist,” and even estimate their sizes.

 

Let us, then, analyze what Ms. Scott is suggesting: (1) there are some things in this world that we cannot observe directly; (2) we cannot do tests or experiments on the actual object; (3) nor can we see, taste, hear, smell, or touch them. But we can know that they exist due to the fact that we can see their effects on things.

 

One reason Scott is forced to admit the legitimacy of indirect observation is the fact that evolution cannot be tested directly. She admits: “Indeed, no paleontologist has ever observed one species evolving into another, but as we have seen, a theory can be scientific even if its phenomena are not directly observable” (2004, p. 14). According to Scott, we cannot observe evolution in action, per se, but we can look at the effects it has left in the fossil record and other areas and call it a “scientific” discipline.

 

It may come as quite a surprise to the reader that Ms. Scott’s explanation of indirect experimentation is almost identical to the evidence given by the apostle Paul for the existence of an omnipotent Creator: “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things which are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20). Paul was simply saying that the general population cannot directly observe the Creator, and yet the effects the Creator causes in this observable Universe are so directly tied to His omnipotent abilities that those who refuse to recognize His existence are without excuse.

 

Can we look into this Universe and see complex biological machinery that demands a superintending mind? Yes. Can we look at the qualities of matter and energy in relationship to the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics and know that matter cannot be eternal and must have had a starting point? Absolutely. Is it possible to locate irreducibly complex systems in nature that could not have evolved, but must have been designed by an Intelligence that far surpasses any and all human intelligence? Certainly. Then just as surely as Ms. Scott recognizes that much scientific data comes from indirect observation, a rational thinker must admit the possibility and legitimacy of obtaining information about the Creator in the same way.

 

We can look at phenomena that we know must be caused by a mind—such as computers, cars, and houses. Therefore, we can study the characteristics that show they were caused by a mind and look for those same characteristics in nature. When we do, we find abundant evidence that a Mind must have been involved in the Universe to bring about the physical effects that we observe directly. In truth, Creation is the most rational, scientific explanation for the material Universe we see.

 

REFERENCE

Scott, Eugenie (2004), Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction (Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press).

 

 

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Copyright © 2010 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

We are happy to grant permission for items in the "Sensible Science" section to be reproduced in their entirety, as long as the following stipulations are observed: (1) Apologetics Press must be designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Apologetics Press Web site URL must be noted; (3) the author’s name must remain attached to the materials; (4) any references, footnotes, or endnotes that accompany the article must be included with any written reproduction of the article; (5) alterations of any kind are strictly forbidden (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, quotations, etc. must be reproduced exactly as they appear in the original); (6) serialization of written material (e.g., running an article in several parts) is permitted, as long as the whole of the material is made available, without editing, in a reasonable length of time; (7) articles, in whole or in part, may not be offered for sale or included in items offered for sale; and (8) articles may be reproduced in electronic form for posting on Web sites pending they are not edited or altered from their original content and that credit is given to Apologetics Press, including the web location from which the articles were taken.

 

For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:

 

Apologetics Press

230 Landmark Drive

Montgomery, Alabama 36117

U.S.A.

Phone (334) 272-8558

http://www.apologeticspress.org

 

This item is available on the Apologetics Press Web site at: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2830

 

AP Content :: Sensible Science

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/911-gets-pc-rewrite-in-u-s-textbooks/

 

Who perpetrated the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 – a group of men merely fighting “for a cause,” or a band of radical Muslims bent on violent jihad?

 

According to a new, comprehensive study of 6th-12th grade textbooks used by schools across the country, America’s children are being taught a very different answer to that question than many alive to witness 9/11 remember.

 

The non-profit organization ACT! for America Education studied 38 textbooks from popular publishers like McGraw Hill and Houghton Mifflin, for example, to determine whether American schoolchildren are being taught the truth about Islam and its role in 9/11.The report, titled “Education or Indoctrination? The Treatment of Islam in 6th through 12th Grade American Textbooks,” compares what it found in the textbooks with 275 historical sources, listing 375 footnoted citations, to conclude that America’s textbooks are laced with “historical revisionism.”

 

Specifically, the report details dozens of ways in which it contends the textbooks stray from accurately teaching about Islam, including the following list, quoted directly from the report’s summary:

 

  • The doctrine of jihad is omitted, incorrectly defined, inaccurately described, or understated.
  • Faulty description of women’s rights under Islam: The oppressive and discriminatory nature of Shari’a law with respect to women is omitted, mischaracterized or understated.
  • Omission or minimization of the Islamic slave trade, in sharp contrast with what is typically an extensive and appropriately critical examination of the Atlantic slave trade operated by Europeans.
  • Aggrandizement and elevation of Muhammad’s character that is contradicted by accepted historical facts.
  • Omission or minimization of Muslim conquest and imperialism, in sharp contrast with what is typically an extensive and appropriately critical examination of European and other imperialism.
  • False claim of Islam’s historical tolerance of Jews and Christians.
  • Misrepresentation of Shari’a Law in such areas as its applicability to non-Muslims and the separation of church and state.
  • False presentation of the Crusades as the cause of the animosity between Christianity and Islam.
  • Faulty historical narrative of the Crusades. Muslims in the Holy Land are commonly depicted as innocent victims of unprovoked aggression who were defending “their” lands against Christian invaders, rather than what is historically accurate: (1) that Muslims invaded and conquered the Holy Land centuries prior to the Crusades; (2) that Christians and Jews were victims of Muslim conquest and aggression centuries prior to the launching of the Crusades; and (3) that the Crusades were launched to wrest back control of the Holy Land from the Muslim invaders and conquerors.
  • Chronological revisionism of the historical development of Judaism, Christianity and Islam which incorrectly portrays Islam as preceding Judaism and Christianity and the Muslims/Arabs as the indigenous people in the Holy Land, resulting in the delegitizimation of Israel.
  • Treatment of Islamism as though it has no origins within classical Islam and Islam’s Holy Books.
  • Islamist Holocaust revisionism that attributes the creation of Israel to world guilt over the Holocaust and incorrectly maintains that Arabs were forced to give up land for the survivors of the Holocaust.
  • Omission of the fact that the United Nations created a two-state partition for Palestine, one for the Jews and one for the Arabs.
  • Omission of the fact that the Arabs refused to accept the offer of an independent Arab state contained in the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine.
  • False claim of Israel’s responsibility for the Palestinian refugee problem.
  • Omission of the fact that the PLO’s recognition of Israel’s right to exist was and remains a verbal recognition only, contradicted by the unrevised PLO charter.
  • Inaccurate claim that most Middle Eastern terrorist groups have roots in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
  • Omission of the fact that Islamic jihadists target Americans not only for their support of Israel but also for what they consider the “decadent nature” of Western way of life that threatens the spread of Islam throughout the world.
  • Failure to explain why the Islamic jihadists targeted the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and to identify the fourth target as the White House.

“Perhaps the greatest disservice done to students,” the report concludes, “is the net effect of the accumulation of these errors — the creation of a faulty historical narrative that not only misrepresents Islam but creates an inaccurate comparison between Islam, Christianity and Judaism, and between the Muslim world and the West. Regardless of the issue – slavery, conquest and imperialism, the Crusades, the Arab-Israeli conflict, to name a few – Islam and the Muslim world are not generally held to the same rigor of historical analysis that the textbooks apply to Christianity, Judaism and the West.”

 

But to many Americans, the politically correct nature of handling 9/11 may be the most surprising.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is only important to those who actually are interested in education. Trust me, Texas public schools have far more to worry about than this. A large percentage of students in Texas public schools today don't even know the state, country, hemisphere, or contintent they live in/on. If there were a secret map, plan, or whatever that you could put in a history book most kids would not even open the book. Education in America is going the way of freedoms in America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats WHY freedom is disappearing....because the vast majority are not educated enough to keep it.....

Educated? By who? Teachers? Or their parents?

 

That's the problem, it's not about "freedom", it's about parental responsibility and ensuring that the kids are taught right and make up what they're not taught in school. There are a lot of things that teachers simply cannot teach.

 

And the problem of true historical events hasn't been taught in schools for a long time... in fact, most don't even find that out until they go after a doctorate degree...which is stupid!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Educated? By who? Teachers? Or their parents?

 

 

Parents aren't educated enough obviously because THEY are one of the generations who keep sending these power hungry clowns to office....Teachers aren't educated enough because the parents were TAUGHT by teachers at some time in their lives and obviously were not taught the first thing about keeping their freedom...sometimes, one has to look things up for themselves in order to find truth....and kids won't do THAT...so this nation is doomed by it's lack of education.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parents aren't educated enough obviously because THEY are one of the generations who keep sending these power hungry clowns to office....Teachers aren't educated enough because the parents were TAUGHT by teachers at some time in their lives and obviously were not taught the first thing about keeping their freedom...sometimes, one has to look things up for themselves in order to find truth....and kids won't do THAT...so this nation is doomed by it's lack of education.....

Educated enough? As a parent, I may not like what the teachers are teaching my kids, truthfully. And that has happened in the past. We complain all the time about what the liberal college professors cram down our kids' throats, but yet, we want them educated more? By who?

 

If the parents aren't educated enough - it's not because they weren't taught it in the schools, it's because they choose to be ignorant... it's a choice.

 

Today, there is absolutely NO REASON ANYONE should be ignorant since we have the internet. Course, the only problem with that is, as I tell my youngest, just because you read it, doesn't mean it's true.

 

And I disagree, the nation is doomed because of lack of parental responsibility. We now expect our teachers to teach our kids...not exactly working out real well, is it? Parents don't want any responsibility, they want the state and feds to feed and clothe 'em and to pay for all their medical expenses, we want the schools to teach them everything....like I said, not exactly working out real well, is it?

 

Edited to add, because I just had this conversation with my youngest 5 minutes ago...not about freedom, or maybe it is...he has been told that to get into management, he has to have a bachelor's degree...if that were true, I wouldn't be doing what I'm doing, nor would his father, etc., etc. He's being told that by not only college professors, but also friends of his that are in college.

 

So I asked him this question: If you got the same management books that they're teaching in college and you read them, understood them, and did the work associated with, why can't you be just as smart as those who are paying the $400 plus to learn the same? Better yet, if you worked in the profession that you're wanting to be in, learn anything and everything about it, and read as many management books, etc., etc. as you could get your hands on, if you go after that job, guess who's going to get it? Because you know all facets of the business, and you have the knowledge of business management behind it... not because some college gave you a certificate that says, "You know all"... good grief almighty!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edited to add, because I just had this conversation with my youngest 5 minutes ago...not about freedom, or maybe it is...he has been told that to get into management, he has to have a bachelor's degree...if that were true, I wouldn't be doing what I'm doing, nor would his father, etc., etc. He's being told that by not only college professors, but also friends of his that are in college.

 

So I asked him this question: If you got the same management books that they're teaching in college and you read them, understood them, and did the work associated with, why can't you be just as smart as those who are paying the $400 plus to learn the same? Better yet, if you worked in the profession that you're wanting to be in, learn anything and everything about it, and read as many management books, etc., etc. as you could get your hands on, if you go after that job, guess who's going to get it? Because you know all facets of the business, and you have the knowledge of business management behind it... not because some college gave you a certificate that says, "You know all"... good grief almighty!

 

Agree with that to an extent.

 

However I've seen this at many of the jobs I have worked at where bosses have been replaced by new management who have the degrees where as the old bosses did not have one but had the experience.

 

Having a degree in business management is nice for the classroom "education" and taking that experience to the real world to adjust your skill set to becoming the best person at your position. What colleges fail to really state is that you should have some "work experience" in addition to "classroom training."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DLine, while I understand what you mean by experienced being replaced with "degreed"... here's the problem...and I face this everyday. I'll give myself as an example. In my world, the few of us left that can wing out transcripts three times as fast as the "newly educated ones", who by their very nature, don't have the experience behind them to understand what it is they're transcribing. They simply go and take a test, are "certified" and then don't have a clue what they're doing. They don't have the background and experience, but by golly, they know what all the new tech stuff is - which I think is a waste, but whatever. They lack experience and foundation.

 

Now, the very nature of the "certified non-experience" produces one thing...less cost. Just because you're certified/educated, doesn't mean you deserve more money - if anything, because of the lack of experience, you will be paid less.

 

You see, as a company, if they're paying a very experienced person, who has worked themselves through the ranks, has received raises after many years of service, let's say they're at $80,000. That same company can grab an "educated" college student for $45,000. See?

 

The same works with what I do. Companies know they can get these other folks a lot cheaper than the ones who actually know what they're doing and can accomplish the same task in half the amount of time. You see the mere indoctrination of not only the kids, but companies as a whole, who are being ran by those "educated", who are filing bankruptcy left and right.

 

Hence, when us experienced get the ultimate call of HELP because the "certified/educated" can't figure it out or get the job done, well...guess what, it's gonna cost 'em! (had this very same thing happen this week)

 

It has been shown that unless it's in the engineering or medical field, it takes a LONG time for those "educated" ones to equal their pay versus what they spent to get that degree.... long, LONG time! Colleges are about the money, too.

 

Now, let me give you another example - let's take my hubby. I'll toot his horn because he won't... LOL! Started out at $6 an hour, worked hard, is the ONLY one in the company who after the company gets a new contract, can go in talk to the customer, learn the lay-out, hire the folks, train the folks, take care of safety issues, make sure they're in compliance - the only one now out of thousands and thousands of employees. He is their "oh, heck, we're skewered up, fix it, please."

 

Well, it's that time again. Those "educated" folks who were "supposed to" make things happen at one of their new extreme money-making endeavors has failed... and not just one, but three. Hubby sorta knows what goes on "over there", is alikened to what he does, but a bit different. His job - sort it out, organize it, get rid of who needs to be gotten rid of, hire the folks he needs to get the job done, fix the safety issues, get things moving and quickly... but to FIX IT! quote/unquote. Because apparently no one else can. And he will. In fact, the supervisors that he knows over "there" were super excited because FINALLY someone can get the job done, and get things moving.

 

How much college - year and a half; his major - art... LOL! It's not so much to do with the education, but what you do with what you know, how far you'll go to do the extra, and keep yourself apprised of new things, obtain as much knowledge as possible in your chosen career. Now THAT is how it works! Not some self-absorbed college professor or college telling you need to take X and pay $$$$ because well, you'll need that on your degree, after "reading" or "studying" this BOOK...

 

Take my oldest son...gets knowledge behind him, does what he needs to do, goes 2 semesters of welding, which to this day tells me that was the biggest waste of my money and his time, has a new job. He wanted more responsibility and more money, and able to do more of what he likes to do. He's been told, he can't "read" welding plans because well, he doesn't have the experience. True to his upbringing, he pushed the envelope, made a bet with his new bosses, and he's been there less than 90 days, and said, I'll bet you a week's pay, that I can read these plans and build it. They said, you're on. And even signed a document releasing them.

 

He does it. He not only does it, but does it in half the time that the other "experienced" ones are doing it. His welds are microscoped or whatever it is they do to make sure they'll hold, and they pass inspection. Big boss has decided that even before his 90 days are up, he'll receive a $6 an hour increase in salary, is now a lead supervisor who is above the "experienced" and is only 22 years old. Needless to say, he walks a little prouder or shall I say, a little more puffed out... LOL!

 

As to education. Today in the news, a UK school has deemed kids shall not have "friends"...in Virginia, I believe it was, a liberal teacher asked her middle school students to "vet" and learn everything about the four GOP candidates, and to send same information to someone in Obama's campaign... Today, forget where, principal made announcement for middle school - there shall be no hugging...

 

Education?

 

(sorry that was long...got stirred up a bit! LOL!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take my oldest son...gets knowledge behind him, does what he needs to do, goes 2 semesters of welding, which to this day tells me that was the biggest waste of my money and his time, has a new job. He wanted more responsibility and more money, and able to do more of what he likes to do. He's been told, he can't "read" welding plans because well, he doesn't have the experience. True to his upbringing, he pushed the envelope, made a bet with his new bosses, and he's been there less than 90 days, and said, I'll bet you a week's pay, that I can read these plans and build it. They said, you're on. And even signed a document releasing them.

 

He does it. He not only does it, but does it in half the time that the other "experienced" ones are doing it. His welds are microscoped or whatever it is they do to make sure they'll hold, and they pass inspection. Big boss has decided that even before his 90 days are up, he'll receive a $6 an hour increase in salary, is now a lead supervisor who is above the "experienced" and is only 22 years old. Needless to say, he walks a little prouder or shall I say, a little more puffed out... LOL!

 

 

Good post overall and congrats to your son.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good post overall and congrats to your son.

Thanks! Now, if I can get that youngest one MOVING!!!!!! LOL! He'll get there... by golley! LOL!

 

You know I see it every day, especially when I'm head senior mom again...I see these kids, that over half of 'em, I can't match 'em with their parents because they have different last names... or the tales of kids who parents, one or both literally walked out on them, or the many who aren't raised by their parents, but live with their "friends". Or my sons bringing home young women who are from a broken home, weren't raised by their parents, or their female friends who got pregnant, not married, living at home, etc., etc.

 

And we wonder why kids grow up the way they do! It makes me sick to my stomach, and often, I have to watch myself not grabbing up a parent by the throat... I can't even BEGIN TO TELL YA!

 

Our sons are very lucky, they have supportive parents; my siblings and myself were very lucky that we had supportive and loving parents, and a grandmother who pushed and pushed. How odd it is to be blessed with a child, only not to parent that child through their early and teenaged years...I will NEVER understand that.

 

Parents' job is to love, support and educate for life, not leave it up to the govt. or a teacher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ I hear ya it is sad what a liberal worldview will do to the family structure. I am only 15 (haha) years removed from high school and looking back I was very blessed. The majority (close to 95%) of us lived with a traditional family, my wife and my parents still are married. But to tell a sad story a friend of ours kid ,came home from school confused, asking who his step-parents are. Sad our culture and the Church bought into the liberal mindset of family values and the price we pay now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Mr. P changed the title to 🐵 E V O L U T I O N 🐵

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



×
×
  • Create New...