a science-friendly God

[Plane]

Can we eliminate numbers? No math. Only numbers taught in school will be Numbers from the Bible.  There will be a video version for those who feel that teaching reading is satanic.
Better make just an audio version for those who think seeing graven images is satanic. 

Why indeed have serious math courses been so hard to find in school?

The number of High school graduates who know the difference between Apatasourous and Allosaurous is greater than the number that can balance a check book by an order of magnitude.

It is as if there was greater support for the less usefull teaching.

[Amianthus]

Of course not , just what someone objects to.
Anyone.

You'll find someone who will object to any part of any science curriculum. So, you are advocating the removal of science from public school.

[Amianthus]

No that is true , though I have heard it said that you must beleive in evolution or you won't get employed.

Possibly in a field that is directly related to the study of evolution and it's products.

However, geologists are free to disbelieve in evolution. Just as biologists don't need to be concerned with galactic hyperstructures.

[Plane]

Of course not , just what someone objects to.
Anyone.

You'll find someone who will object to any part of any science curriculum. So, you are advocating the removal of science from public school.

'

On this basis religion was banished.

Was it legitamately banished?

[Plane]

No that is true , though I have heard it said that you must beleive in evolution or you won't get employed.

Possibly in a field that is directly related to the study of evolution and it's products.

However, geologists are free to disbelieve in evolution. Just as biologists don't need to be concerned with galactic hyperstructures.

The number employed directly by their confidence in Evolution must be a lot smaller than those employed directly by faith , which is no longer taught .

Math is poorly taught , and math ties into lots of jobs. Why is there a great emphasis for defending the teaching of evolution , a subject of marginal utility , when the teaching of math is in such a sorry state already?

[Amianthus]

On this basis religion was banished.

Was it legitamately banished?

Last time I checked, religion was still taught in theology courses. This is the proper place to teach religion.

[Amianthus]

Math is poorly taught , and math ties into lots of jobs. Why is there a great emphasis for defending the teaching of evolution , a subject of marginal utility , when the teaching of math is in such a sorry state already?

Math is not challenged on religious grounds as often as biology.

[Plane]

Posted on: Today at 10:00:10 PMPosted by: Amianthus 
Insert Quote
Quote from: Plane on Today at 09:55:53 PM
Math is poorly taught , and math ties into lots of jobs. Why is there a great emphasis for defending the teaching of evolution , a subject of marginal utility , when the teaching of math is in such a sorry state already?


Math is not challenged on religious grounds as often as biology.


][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][


Math is almost never challenged on religious grounds , perhaps it should be .
Millions of Americans are math illiterate , with no challengers , math has no defenders either .

How with such little religious challenge is math in such a disrepute , but evolution , being a political football, is presented as an orthodox dogma?

[Amianthus]

How with such little religious challenge is math in such a disrepute , but evolution , being a political football, is presented as an orthodox dogma?

Evolution is not presented as "orthodox dogma." The science behind it is very well documented. It is the only scientific explanation for life.

[Plane]

How with such little religious challenge is math in such a disrepute , but evolution , being a political football, is presented as an orthodox dogma?

Evolution is not presented as "orthodox dogma." The science behind it is very well documented. It is the only scientific explanation for life.

Yes as I said , orthodox dogma  , all other viewpoints will please remain silent as the truth we are sure of is presented.

[fatman]

So I guess the Earth really is flat after all.

[Plane]

So I guess the Earth really is flat after all.

Not according to the venerable Bede;

The monk Bede (c.672 ? 735) wrote in his influential treatise on computus, The Reckoning of Time, that the Earth was round, explaining the unequal length of daylight from "the roundness of the Earth, for not without reason is it called 'the orb of the world' on the pages of Holy Scripture and of ordinary literature. It is, in fact, set like a sphere in the middle of the whole universe." (De temporum ratione, 32). The large number of surviving manuscripts of The Reckoning of Time, copied to meet the Carolingian requirement that all priests should study the computus, indicates that many, if not most, priests were exposed to the idea of the sphericity of the Earth.[53] ?lfric of Eynsham paraphrased Bede into Old English, saying "Now the Earth's roundness and the Sun's orbit constitute the obstacle to the day's being equally long in every land."[54]


.....
A non-literary but graphic indication that people in the Middle Ages believed that the Earth was a sphere, is the use of the orb (globus cruciger) in the regalia of many kingdoms and of the Holy Roman Empire. It is attested from the time of the Christian late-Roman emperor Theodosius II (423) throughout the Middle Ages; the Reichsapfel was used in 1191 at the coronation of emperor Henry VI.

A recent study of medieval concepts of the sphericity of the Earth noted that "since the eighth century, no cosmographer worthy of note has called into question the sphericity of the Earth."[57] However, the work of these intellectuals may not have had significant influence on public opinion, and it is difficult to tell what the wider population may have thought of the shape of the Earth, if they considered the question at all.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth

Is this a change of subject?

Or is this to point out that the mathmatical or geometrical proof developed centurys ago that the earth was sphereical would be incomprehensible to a modern high school graduate?

[fatman]

The latter.  Of course Bede himself (and the Church by extension) didn't do a very good job of promoting the fact that the earth is round, sailors and statesmen for centuries afterwards believed otherwise.

[Amianthus]

Yes as I said , orthodox dogma  , all other viewpoints will please remain silent as the truth we are sure of is presented.

Science is not an "orthodox dogma." To claim so is to be ignorant of scientific process.

[Plane]

Yes as I said , orthodox dogma  , all other viewpoints will please remain silent as the truth we are sure of is presented.

Science is not an "orthodox dogma." To claim so is to be ignorant of scientific process.

Scientific process is not used to teach evolution to schoolchildren.
Evolution is presented exactly as an orthodox dogma .

If Scientific process itself were better taught there would be much less to discuss on this subject.