Was at least the first life form created?

[fr0d0]

I was a school governor as well as a member of staff so I know exactly how the figures are manipulated. Unfortunately I can't share that information publicly. It's blatantly obvious that a system set up so that schools have to attract customers and stay afloat isn't going to shoot itself in the foot. The way schools run has been changed to business ethos, and business ethos is all about lying through your back teeth.

[rjh4 is back]

First, I never said everyone who is home schooled is schooled that way for religious reasons. I'm simply saying it is a fact that many religious people home school to deny their children access to education that conflicts with their religious belief. If you do it because you think you can provide a better education, that's fine. But it's a well established fact that religious reasons are often a primary reason, especially among fundamentalists. I'm not hating on home schoolers, I think it's great if parents can do it. However, home schoolers are given different standards and don't have to take standardizing testing, so the statistics on home schoolers doing better is warped. To me that's a problem, and allows some (Note: Not all) fundamentalist religious home schoolers to fall way below basic education standards and deny their child good scientific education, of which the video was an example. I'm quite aware that video is not representative of every home school child everywhere.

Besides, I was only providing a general example about willful ignorance of science. It happens in many other areas, not just home schooling.

You still have not provided and support or reasoning for your statement that many homeschool families do it so their children "won't learn science". You seem to be saying that "religious reasons for homeschooling" = "so children won't learn science". I see no reason for making that leap. Instead of providing reasons you keep changing the focus of what you are talking about and then begin talking about something you appear to know very little about. (For information on what homeschoolers must do in each state, visit HSLDA.) What, for example, is your basis for saying homeschoolers do not have to take standardized testing? In my state, VA, unless you homeschool through a religious exemption clause in the law, you must do standardized testing each year in order to be approved for the next. I do know that it is a lot of work and effort to get the religious exemption and I personally only know of one family who has done this. For us it is just as easy to comply with the regular homeschooling laws. So we must do the standardized tests each year. You also say that it is a "fact" that "many religious people home school to deny their children access to education that conflicts with their religious belief". Now I am not going to bring up burden of proof or anything but if you are going to say something is a fact, I really think you should include some support for it, which you have not. As for my family, we homeschool for several reasons, but the "religious" ones are so that their education can be from a Christian perspective. Does that mean they are denied an education of things that conflict with our beliefs? No. They are exposed to it all but then taught why we believe what we do. Seems like a balanced way to do things. And I can assure you that even though we are fundamental Christians, we have never considered homeschooling so that our children "won't learn science".

---

I'm curious. What is your religious reason to home school?

Hopefully I answered this to your satisfaction above.

---

And don't forget that all the other Gospels were written later and so the other disciples would have been even older.

I guess this would depend on who you think is right. See Markan Priority. Even this wikipedia entry admits that for about 1800 years people thought that Matthew was first. From something else I read online, this thinking may be returning to scolarship. As I said before, I think one needs to read all the information for and against and decide for themselves what they think.

[Eilonnwy]

First, I was speaking about averages and how those averages don't take into account that in many cases, standardized testing is voluntary. I already provided this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooli...nt_studies

Honestly, if you are teaching your child evolution is false and creationism is true, that is not teaching them science. I hang my hat by that statement, no matter how much you may feel personally offended by it.

I have not been inconsistent in what I've said. I do not have a problem with home schooled children who are taught with the appropriate curriculum, and research shows the one on one teaching can do so much for the child, and that's great. I repeat, I don't have a problem with that. I think a primary reason for home schooling should always be to provide a better education, not religious reasons. You can still send your child to public school and teach them religion at home. I don't think a parent has the right to deny children a basic science education.

I'll also through in this clarification, religious people can certainly home school a child successfully and give them all the education they need to be successful adults. I'm not saying religious parents should not home school, but when they're doing it for specific reasons, such as wishing to teach creationism, using books from sources like Answers in Genesis, and not give them access to good evolution science, that to me is harm and denying appropriate education.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/homeschool/p...easons.asp

[rjh4 is back]

First, I was speaking about averages and how those averages don't take into account that in many cases, standardized testing is voluntary. I already provided this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooli...nt_studies

Honestly, if you are teaching your child evolution is false and creationism is true, that is not teaching them science. I hang my hat by that statement, no matter how much you may feel personally offended by it.

I have not been inconsistent in what I've said. I do not have a problem with home schooled children who are taught with the appropriate curriculum, and research shows the one on one teaching can do so much for the child, and that's great. I repeat, I don't have a problem with that. I think a primary reason for home schooling should always be to provide a better education, not religious reasons. You can still send your child to public school and teach them religion at home. I don't think a parent has the right to deny children a basic science education.

I'll also through in this clarification, religious people can certainly home school a child successfully and give them all the education they need to be successful adults. I'm not saying religious parents should not home school, but when they're doing it for specific reasons, such as wishing to teach creationism, using books from sources like Answers in Genesis, and not give them access to good evolution science, that to me is harm and denying appropriate education.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/homeschool/p...easons.asp

I am not offended at all. I have heard or read all this kind of thing before.

I think you are a bit biased on this subject. Don't you think? Do you really think that historical science as it relates to origins is the only science in existence? That is how you come across. It seems to me that the bulk of work done in science (90%+?)is in the area of operational science, i.e., the things that we test and observe in the here and now and how that can be applied to technology. I'm guessing that we would actually agree on all of this science (maybe not the reasons why we find order and reproducibility in the universe but certainly that we do find this in the universe). Do you really think that historical science as it relates to origins is on the same level proof wise as operational science? If you do, it is my opinion that you do not think very scientifically. I think it is perfectly appropriate to teach my children what evolutionary science (common descent) says and also indicate why I do not agree with the conclusions made. Your position seems to be that because you think that God does not exist and, therefore, that creation didn't happen, then teaching a child that God exists and creation did happen is being harmul to the child. Your position, if I am correct, is clearly based on your presuppositions and I reject your position wholeheartedly as being unfounded (you have not demonstrated at all that it is harmful in any way to a child).

[Eilonnwy]

The problem is that evolutionary science is not controversial and is a scientific fact, just the way we know the holocaust happened. I do not think I am biased because I'm an atheist, I'm supporting the proven evolutionary theory, which, FYI, I was taught in Catholic school without any mention of "Controversies" about evolution and common descent. I did not become an atheist because of that. There were many factors that lead to my atheism. You can accept common descent and be religious.

Does teaching a child creationism over evolution physically harm the child? No. But I think it does harm in the same sense if you taught your child the holocaust didn't happen. We have a responsibility to ensure our children get a good and accurate education. And by no means am I saying public schools is the only answer, they certainly need some rehabilitation, as they are failing our children as well.

[rjh4 is back]

But I think it does harm in the same sense if you taught your child the holocaust didn't happen.

How?

We have a responsibility to ensure our children get a good and accurate education.

I agree. And I thank God that you are not the artiber or what a good and accurate education is.

[Eilonnwy]

By denying accurate education it can cause many problems academically and socially. If someone wants to go into biology to become a doctor and doesn't have a basic understanding of evolution, that may cause them to fail in their attempt to become a doctor. Our society thrives on intelligence and if you equip a child with bad information it can have implications later in life that you may not foresee. I think teaching a child creationism is akin to teaching them left = right and right= left or that the holocaust never happened.

Carl Sagan discusses in his book "The Demon-haunted World" how America, as a country is losing it's edge in science education, especially in comparison with other countries. This study discusses how American students are failing in bioscience.

[rjh4 is back]

If someone wants to go into biology to become a doctor and doesn't have a basic understanding of evolution, that may cause them to fail in their attempt to become a doctor.

Do you think it is possible to have a basic understanding of evolution (common descent), or even an in depth understanding of it, without actually agreeing with it?

... if you equip a child with bad information it can have implications later in life that you may not foresee.

You mean like teaching a child that God does not exist when He does?

Sorry. I couldn't resist. (And yes I know that that is not technically what you think or what you would teach being an agnostic atheist.)

[theVOID]

If someone wants to go into biology to become a doctor and doesn't have a basic understanding of evolution, that may cause them to fail in their attempt to become a doctor.

Do you think it is possible to have a basic understanding of evolution (common descent), or even an in depth understanding of it, without actually agreeing with it?

... if you equip a child with bad information it can have implications later in life that you may not foresee.

You mean like teaching a child that God does not exist when He does?

Sorry. I couldn't resist. (And yes I know that that is not technically what you think or what you would teach being an agnostic atheist.)

How about teaching the child that God is a matter of faith and has absolutely no basis in scientific fact.

[rjh4 is back]

How about teaching the child that God is a matter of faith

Sure. Some faith is definitely required since God cannot be scientifically "proven". But I do not think it is a blind faith, like I am guessing you mean. It is a reasoned faith. I have no problem teaching my children that.

Note, I wasn't sure all of what you meant by the last part of your comment so I left it out.