The Hitchens "Poison" thread.

[Jackie]

[Nope]

Wait. That article says that science teachers are using the bible as their main textbook?  Damn. 

I wonder if there will now be a group of secular homeschoolers whose parents are trying to actually keep them from religious indoctrination and if Christians will be as accepting of them as they demanded that everyone be or religious homeschoolers

I do not think that anyone should be allowed to teach science if they don't accept evolution as fact.

[Pyrrho]

...

I do not think that anyone should be allowed to teach science if they don't accept evolution as fact.

That would set a very bad precedent.  There should not be loyalty oaths for current ideas.  There should be proper training and certification.  No one should be allowed to teach something without the relevant degree.

[Jackie]

...

I do not think that anyone should be allowed to teach science if they don't accept evolution as fact.

That would set a very bad precedent.  There should not be loyalty oaths for current ideas.  There should be proper training and certification.  No one should be allowed to teach something without the relevant degree.

Um no, sorry, nobody is talking about stopping people from going to church or Sunday school on their own time. You are enabling people to falsely equate all claims as being true by default. Nobody is talking about loyalty oaths here. Gravity is not debated and nobody tries to teach that gravity was a product of Harry Potter. Evolution is also not up for debate either. Just like there is no need to insert Thor as the cause for lightening.

The problem with the well intended sense of fairness is that EVERY religion when they cant debunk science they try to co opt science. I have been at this for 14 years and seen this tactic not just from Christians, but Jews and Muslims and Hindus and even once a Rastafarian. And even new age wooers and si fi wooers make arguments to claim science sides with them.

The truth is you cannot operate like this in either a lab or a classroom. It has to be bias free. Yes it is mandatory to question science which is why peer review exists. But if you don't keep it bias free, you end up with bullshit, it is also why con artists outside religion can con investors out of their money with fake contraptions because they use buzz words from science to convince them.

Science has to be treated as independent of religion and personal bias. To do otherwise because of a false, all be it well intended sense of fairness, is to set yourself up to come to bad conclusions, on top of being outright dangerous to the education of society. Mixing religion with science is stupid and dangerous.

I agree with Nope, you have no business teaching science if you cannot accept the facts science says.

---

Wait. That article says that science teachers are using the bible as their main textbook?  Damn. 

I wonder if there will now be a group of secular homeschoolers whose parents are trying to actually keep them from religious indoctrination and if Christians will be as accepting of them as they demanded that everyone be or religious homeschoolers

I do not think that anyone should be allowed to teach science if they don't accept evolution as fact.

I agree. To allow a teacher to teach who denies facts, would be like allowing a Passenger Pilot to ignore their equipment because they believe Harry Potter's broom will fly the plane. Stupid and dangerous. 

[robvalue]

The problem with beliefs is that they can't usually be proven. So someone could, in theory, understand evolution perfectly well, and teach it well, but secretly not believe in it. There's not much you can do about that.

But say in the above example they found out the guy doesn't believe in it, yet continues to teach it at a good level and doesn't bring his beliefs into the classroom, what would be the opinion of that?

[AFTT47]

The problem with beliefs is that they can't usually be proven. So someone could, in theory, understand evolution perfectly well, and teach it well, but secretly not believe in it. There's not much you can do about that.

That wouldn't really be a problem but I think it's as unlikely as a thief stealing your valuables and replacing them with exact duplicates.

[Nope]

The problem with beliefs is that they can't usually be proven. So someone could, in theory, understand evolution perfectly well, and teach it well, but secretly not believe in it. There's not much you can do about that.

But say in the above example they found out the guy doesn't believe in it, yet continues to teach it at a good level and doesn't bring his beliefs into the classroom, what would be the opinion of that?

That is an interesting point. I don't know. The problem with creationists is that they can't help but let their beliefs slip into their teaching because so many are contemptuous of evolution. In the link in the OP, teachers are using Genesis as a science textbook. My guess is that this is something that has probably colored their lessons for a long time but only now are they able to be so open.

I had a wonderful Biology teacher in highschool who was also a Christian. When we got to the subject of evolution he stated that religion and science don't have to be at odds. He was teaching in a school in the south with students who often had very conservative parents. The first day, he had a question and answer session where he let the students ask or discuss any problem that they had with the subject. He also wrote on the board the different reasons why god couldn't be taught in a science course. One reason was that it would be blasphemous to do scientific tests to prove god so religion really doesn't have a place in the realm of science(he explained it better, of course) He also stated that if he taught Christian creationism then he would have to teach all religions' creation story which would eat up all his time. No student complained or got upset so his method must have worked.

[Jackie]

The problem with beliefs is that they can't usually be proven. So someone could, in theory, understand evolution perfectly well, and teach it well, but secretly not believe in it. There's not much you can do about that.

But say in the above example they found out the guy doesn't believe in it, yet continues to teach it at a good level and doesn't bring his beliefs into the classroom, what would be the opinion of that?

That would be as far as I would go as "splitting the baby". If you can leave your personal bias at the door, that is one thing. As soon as you try to mix it in a method that is independent of your personal desires, at that point you have no business teaching a class or being in a lab.

The problem with this unfortunately is far to many "religious scientists" don't do that. Liberty University's biology professors attach the bible to science. And again, you can find scientists in Iran and in Saudi Arabia too, but that same biologist wouldn't suddenly believe in Allah because their scientists do.

There simply is no fair way to include religion in a science class, on top of it being unnecessary. Scientific method has always been independent of religion. It works everywhere and is why computers and planes work no matter where in the world they are used.

[robvalue]

That teacher sounds quite cool, Nope I think he was about as close to as you can get to admitting it's all bullshit without actually having to say it, haha! But in his mind, he was able to keep the two separate so that science didn't come over and beat the living piss out of the religion.

"God doesn't like being tested by science!" = "I know I'm not going to find anything with science so I'll just put him in a special science-proof box in my mind"

A very good point about the creation thing... and possibly a useful excuse to other theists He's either very open minded or very pragmatic, either way, if he's doing his job entirely properly then all is well I think. I agree this must be a rare case. He sounds better than my biology teacher actually. I had to go complain to the school because all he did was have us copy stuff word for word from a book. That's not teaching.

---

As for religion = poisin

A tiny bit won't hurt you too much. In some forms it may even cause mild merriment. But consume too much and it will cause serious brain damage, and eventually total loss of all senses.

[JuliaL]

Ok, I am going to try from now on to post stories about how religion creates human cruelty and stupidity in this thread.

Religions are very large living organisms.
Super-stupid, super-animals that will fight to survive.
If that fight requires the sacrifice of some components, so be it.
From the perspective of the super-organism, this is rational behavior. Like losing some T-cells to kill a cancer.
But it is the sub-units that suffer. They are self aware and the religion is not.
And I am against suffering.
Generally my suffering, but through empathy this includes others.