Classroom creationism atheists can live with?

[Wumbologist]

Ahahaha! Stupid Merkins and their Creationism!

OH WAIT ITS NOT MURKA

[JOZeldenrust]

Sounds like their teaching it in a sort of "darwin vs. the church" way, which does seem acceptable. As long as darwin wins.

The only problem is that the cretinists will consider it a victory if their crapulence is put into the public education area as worthy of serious academic study.

In some ways it is, but the PR spin they will put on such an inclusion is not worth it...

I think it's a bit worse then just that: they're going to teach it as (a controversy in the field of) ancient history, so it's being presented as an alternative explanation. Of course that's bullshit.

Creationism has to be taught as a propostional stance, so it has a place in religious education or even sociology, but certainly not in any subject where it's presented as an explanatory model.

[JimC]

Sounds like their teaching it in a sort of "darwin vs. the church" way, which does seem acceptable. As long as darwin wins.

The only problem is that the cretinists will consider it a victory if their crapulence is put into the public education area as worthy of serious academic study.

In some ways it is, but the PR spin they will put on such an inclusion is not worth it...

I think it's a bit worse then just that: they're going to teach it as (a controversy in the field of) ancient history, so it's being presented as an alternative explanation. Of course that's bullshit.

Creationism has to be taught as a propostional stance, so it has a place in religious education or even sociology, but certainly not in any subject where it's presented as an explanatory model.

Unless, very clearly, as a failed explanatory model...

And whenever it has been tested in a court of law (as to whether it is a valid alternative model), it has indeed failed...

[Hermit]

Sounds like their teaching it in a sort of "darwin vs. the church" way, which does seem acceptable. As long as darwin wins.

The only problem is that the cretinists will consider it a victory if their crapulence is put into the public education area as worthy of serious academic study.

In some ways it is, but the PR spin they will put on such an inclusion is not worth it...

I think it's a bit worse then just that: they're going to teach it as (a controversy in the field of) ancient history, so it's being presented as an alternative explanation. Of course that's bullshit.

Creationism has to be taught as a propostional stance, so it has a place in religious education or even sociology, but certainly not in any subject where it's presented as an explanatory model.

Unless, very clearly, as a failed explanatory model...

And whenever it has been tested in a court of law (as to whether it is a valid alternative model), it has indeed failed...

*Cue sinister sounding fanfare*
"Associated Christian Schools executive officer Lynne Doneley welcomed the draft curriculum, saying it cemented the position of a faith-based approach to teaching."

[JimC]

Sounds like their teaching it in a sort of "darwin vs. the church" way, which does seem acceptable. As long as darwin wins.

The only problem is that the cretinists will consider it a victory if their crapulence is put into the public education area as worthy of serious academic study.

In some ways it is, but the PR spin they will put on such an inclusion is not worth it...

I think it's a bit worse then just that: they're going to teach it as (a controversy in the field of) ancient history, so it's being presented as an alternative explanation. Of course that's bullshit.

Creationism has to be taught as a propostional stance, so it has a place in religious education or even sociology, but certainly not in any subject where it's presented as an explanatory model.

Unless, very clearly, as a failed explanatory model...

And whenever it has been tested in a court of law (as to whether it is a valid alternative model), it has indeed failed...

*Cue sinister sounding fanfare*
"Associated Christian Schools executive officer Lynne Doneley welcomed the draft curriculum, saying it cemented the position of a faith-based approach to teaching."

Oh sure, the arseholes will put that spin on it, but a cleverly designed course could rip their arguments to shreds, and influence a whole generation of students...

(and not by sleight of hand, just by letting the pathetic nature of the arguments appear in all their decrepitude...)

[Hermit]

*Cue sinister sounding fanfare*
"Associated Christian Schools executive officer Lynne Doneley welcomed the draft curriculum, saying it cemented the position of a faith-based approach to teaching."

Oh sure, the arseholes will put that spin on it, but a cleverly designed course could rip their arguments to shreds, and influence a whole generation of students...

(and not by sleight of hand, just by letting the pathetic nature of the arguments appear in all their decrepitude...)

Rightio. I guess ACARA ought to add the stork theory of human procreation to the curriculum next, and for the same reason that creationism got in there.

FFS, leave those topics out of the primary and secondary education system. There is plenty other stuff that ought to be offered in the limited time that is available. If you wish to discuss scientific controversies and ways to apply critical thinking to issues, there are plenty of them (piltdown man, Lysenko, cold fusion, the many scientific dead ends such as maxwell's demons, ether, scientific frauds like Mendel anf Fitzgerald). The list goes on forever. Why pick a topic that is bound to serve as a launching pad for YECs to propagandise their filth? Make no mistake. That is what they will do, and they will not be fair in their exposition either.

[JimC]

*Cue sinister sounding fanfare*
"Associated Christian Schools executive officer Lynne Doneley welcomed the draft curriculum, saying it cemented the position of a faith-based approach to teaching."

Oh sure, the arseholes will put that spin on it, but a cleverly designed course could rip their arguments to shreds, and influence a whole generation of students...

(and not by sleight of hand, just by letting the pathetic nature of the arguments appear in all their decrepitude...)

Rightio. I guess ACARA ought to add the stork theory of human procreation to the curriculum next, and for the same reason that creationism got in there.

FFS, leave those topics out of the primary and secondary education system. There is plenty other stuff that ought to be offered in the limited time that is available. If you wish to discuss scientific controversies and ways to apply critical thinking to issues, there are plenty of them (piltdown man, Lysenko, cold fusion, the many scientific dead ends such as maxwell's demons, ether, scientific frauds like Mendel anf Fitzgerald). The list goes on forever. Why pick a topic that is bound to serve as a launching pad for YECs to propagandise their filth? Make no mistake. That is what they will do, and they will not be fair in their exposition either.

Don't get cranky at me!

I didn't pick the fucking topic, the Queensland history teachers did. Our little forum will have no bloody influence on whether it stays or not. So, if it is to be in the mix, then I am simply arguing that, with the right treatment, it could be educationally valuable. Or is the intellectual dissection of their feeble arguments by someone the likes of Cali not a potentially valuable exercise?

As to the reasons why they have chosen this topic, who knows? I'd be surprised if a history teacher's association had been nobbled by the right - they are usually a cranky bunch of lefties!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

..."We talk to students from a faith science basis, but we're not biased in the delivery of curriculum," Mrs Doneley said. "We say, 'This is where we're coming from' but allow students to make up their own minds."

_________

A "faith science" basis?




However, since a sizeable number of people do believe in it, it's only reasonable to have it discussed in school (discussed vs taught). Seems to me that could be a great opportunity for open discussion, during which informed people can debunk it, point by ridiculous point. Even if the believing kids aren't convinced at that very time, it could well plant seeds that could later sprout into a rational worldview.

I think she meant "faith/science" or "faith vs. science" basis. Still a bad idea. Definitely a wedge strategy.

[Hermit]

Don't get cranky at me!

I didn't pick the fucking topic, the Queensland history teachers did.

My anger was directed at ACARA. Apologies for not making that clear.

The Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, by the way, has nothing to do with the Queensland history teachers. It is a federal government instrumentality.

[JimC]

Don't get cranky at me!

I didn't pick the fucking topic, the Queensland history teachers did.

My anger was directed at ACARA. Apologies for not making that clear.

The Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, by the way, has nothing to do with the Queensland history teachers. It is a federal government instrumentality.

Yeah, perhaps the implication of the OP was that it is there as a possible topic in the national curriculum, and the queenslanders were discussing how they would implement it...

More chance of some christian right influence percolating into a faceless federal bureaucracy, I suppose...

Anyway, from what I have seen so far, the maths and science part of the national curriculum is a bunch of crap; hopefully I will be retired before they implement it...

(sluggish things, bureaucracies...)

[RuleBritannia]

What about teaching the "controversy" about the holocaust. You know, it might not have happened.

[Pappa]

What about teaching the "controversy" about the holocaust. You know, it might not have happened.

[charlou]

Yes, let's also teach the controversial view that women are responsible for natural disasters. There's a heap of youtube material we can use for that one.

[AnInconvenientScotsman]

Yes, let's also teach the controversial view that women are responsible for natural disasters. There's a heap of youtube material we can use for that one.

Wait...so you're...not?

I mean I knew there was a little devil worship thrown in there for good measure, but I thought most of it was you not completely covering yourself.

[JOZeldenrust]

What's the lumberjack and bull about? I can place the other superstitions, but that one's lost on me.