The Difference between Facts and Lies

Wow who's getting emotional now.

Actually Sam I don't teach evolution in school. I teach History.

There is no indoctrination in the schools. And furthermore you haven't proven that there is you just keep saying there is, and I'm sorry but simply saying there is indocrination over and over and over doesn't make it true.

You also provide no facts or background as to your statement that schools are full to the rafters of leftists (whatever that mean). Most every teacher at the school I work at are moderate to conservative. There are very few liberals.

I'm sorry Sam, I guess you are right we do indoctrinate our students. We indoctrine them to love their country, community, and family and friends. We indoctrine them to think for themselves and don't accept what someone says is the truth until they verify it for themselves.

But I guess you want all students to be controlled by what you believe to be true no matter the consequence.

I think Earth Day makes the perfect example of how we make people think they have to disagree with each other when really we don't. When Earth Day and that Earth hour thing came along, I didn't make a big deal out of it. However, I didn't make sure I turned on every light in my house and drive around aimlessly just to spite the environmentalists. I just let it pass like any other day or hour in the day. There's nothing wrong with taking aside one day to help the environment or just going about your day as normal and I still haven't figured out why people argue about it. It's not like we don't have plenty to disagree about already.

I have no doubt that proving or disproving indoctrination in schools is impossible. You have to look at each incident, relative to what is being taught and the actual intent of the teacher. When I was in high school we were studying satire. The required reading for that class was Animal Farm. Someone could argue that my teacher was indoctrinating me with conservative views against communists and their socialist state. In reality, we were studying satire and no matter what book he picked he could have been accused of indoctrination for it. Not to mention, I think he just liked to mellow out with cartoons since we watched the movie after we read the book. Some teachers are guilty of indoctrination, some aren't and sometimes I think they unintentionally let it slip in. Teachers are people with beliefs just like all of us and we basically demand that they hide those beliefs around their students, which is not an easy task but most of them do. I believe the majority of what could be construed as indoctrination is not a concentrated effort to mold the minds of students to a specific set of beliefs. It is merely the teachers being themselves and not realizing that they may be influencing some of their students. I partially came to this conclusion by asking the simple quetion, "could I teach people without incorporating my conservative nature to the subject I'm teaching?" and my answer just reinforced my realization of how easy it would be to slip up. Especially, if you're discussing a political or controversial subject. All I can say is kick off your old shoes and walk that "mile" and see where it takes you.

Okay "dude" are you serious? Your example of homosexuality and abortion being taught in school is Surgeon General Elders? From the early 90s? Really? Last time I checked she never had any bearing on the education system what-so-ever. The only thing that came close is that she thought sex-ed should be taught in school not abstinence. Where you get homosexuality and abortion.

As far as you first little "gotcha" on me I was offering opinion, because science is not a religion but Sam and apparently you believe that it is.

Me becoming nasty comes from no playbook. I'm sure Mickel that if someone was routinely telling lies and making up stories about your profession you would probably get tired of it real quick.

This is not from any playbook. This is me, just me, defending my profession. I'm sorry I offended you. No, wait, no I'm not sorry. The "nastier" I get about the American Education System the more nervous you guys get because I am exposing your lies and the only thing you think to do once your lies are exposed about the education system is to attack the person defending it.

And I don't know how you figure that me calling Sam out on his lies, and the notion he has no facts to back him up except what he believes is nasty. Should I soften it up a little Mickel? Should I go easy on someone who is trying to convince everyone the sky is falling and it starts at the education system?

Sorry that's not my cup of teabags.

Sam.

You didn't direct this at me but, as a Scientist, I have trouble passing up a chance to clarify the record. You ask - "Answer this question: Is Darwinism truth?" - the answer to that question is "no", both because there is no such thing as "Darwinism" and because science doesn't deal in absolute "truths", that's generally left to religion. Evolution (not "Darwinism" Sam), is the only theory that fully explains the evidence at our disposal. It does so through numerous lines of scientific reasoning including biology, geology, chemistry, paleontology and others. So, is it "truth"? No, it is not. Just as gravity is not "truth".

"Your science is flawed Michael, and you know that your leftist scientists can be bought with tax dollars, you just don't want to admit it." - I've never understood this. I am a Geologist and I would give my right arm to find a complex fossil in earlier strata. Not only would I become instantly famous, I would become very, very rich. Unfortunately, that's not what happens, simple organisms are found in lower strata, more complex fossils in higher strata. This has NEVER been falsified.

"Fact: Schools are stocked to the rafters with leftists teachers. They indoctrinate, a little here, and a little there, and they do it every day." - I can't comment on all teachers but those that I do know (and I know a lot), present the evidence and the scientific theories that best explain them. The only 'indoctrination' going on is teaching students to think logically and use reason over preconceived beliefs.

"Teach facts in schools, 2+2 = 4. Fact. We all evolved from slime, is your opinion. Try and learn the difference." - a) Facts are what evolution is based on...nothing more, nothing less. b) Evolution does not posit a hypothesis for origins...that is abiogenesis and it's a sub-field of chemistry, not biology. It's an interesting field of science but not one relevant to this discussion.

Mickel,

Here is why I don't take you seriously:

First of all, nobody is "pro-abortion," no one that I ever read, heard, or seen and found compelling on the issue. People are pro-choice....i.e., putting personal freedom regarding medical decisions over, above, and beyond state control. The way you characterize pro-choice as pro-abortion, makes you appear ignorant.

How is condom use and masturbation methods (both components of heterosexual behavior) "in direct alignment with the...pro-homosexualtiy" agenda? I can't wait to hear this.

Not that it really matters, because the FACT is that teaching sex education comprehensively and realistically in schools has been proven over and over again to lower the spread of STI's and unwanted pregnancies, thus abortions.

ttp://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_ATSRH.html

Fact: the alternative, abstinence only until marriage curricula, cuts high-school students off from a critical space to analyze and experience the formation of their sexual identities.

Fact: kids going to learn about sex from American pop-culture regardless of what we teach in schools, and what we do as parents.

Fact: There is solid evidence that kids learning about sex in the classroom helps them make better decisions in the streets.

And to address your general reasoning for posting: Sam is twice as controversial and represents his cowardice and beliefs as enlightened truth with such regularity and with such divisiveness, that a few conservative people have declared on this board that he doesn't represent conservative Christians and that they are no longer going to read or post on his blog. Where is your outrage for him? His "vitriol is patterned from the template of bitterness and elitism that is the [conservative] worldview."

See, none of your critiques hold much water because you wear your ideology on your sleeve, but you make no efforts to use facts yourself to support what you say (ref: "pro-abortion" and "education on how to masturbate and the distribution of condoms in the stead of 'sex education'") and instead you offer your divisiveness in the place of Micheal's. Your bluster, without aid of fact, is easily turned right around to address conservative posters (ref: your accusation meaningfulness as a critique of Sam)...So if YOU want your criticism to be taken seriously you are going to need a bit more consistency...or you can start wielding facts and adhering to accuracy as a value to support your criticism.

Why do you keep calling me dude, are we personal friends? Am I working at a ranch somewhere?

As for my vitriol I will explain. I tried playing nice after the Democratic Party, because I didn't want the Republicans being treated the same way my party was when they were in power. But after hearing nothing but lies, whining, crying, and hatred I have discovered that whether in power or not the Republican Party (and more specifically the far right of the party) treats anyone who does not agree with them as godless idiots who can't cross the street without being led.

They act exactly the same whether in charge or not, as a bunch of power hungry SOBs, so the gloves are off.

You attack me and those who believe the same as me don't get all a twitter when it is returned to you.

I was hoping that when we had a president truly elected by the majority of the electorate that this country would start helping each other to restore this country, but the Party of No is acting like a bunch of two year olds who just got their toy taken away from them. Not only are they standing in the way of progress by saying no at every corner, they can't even offer any new ideas. Everything they have spouted out as being a new idea, is actually an old idea from Bush and Reagan and already failed miserably.