General Music Chat

I think you have to remember that in the case of support people they are told exactly what to say, almost robot like. It annoys the heck out of me and I'm sure they feel idiots too sometimes perhaps?

I've met some really good support people, and some real toughies. Most are human though the system won't allow them to be to an extent where they can really use their abilities to the fullest advantage. I'm totally against outsourcing, nothing will change my mind on that. As regards kids not having high enough standards... Are there enough challenges out there?

I mean real challenges, like walking to school, walking to the bus stop. General math skills when shopping and so on? I'm not knocking anything here it's the same back home now from what I hear. I used to walk some 6 miles to school, I was thin and fit, math wasn't good when I was younger but I think if you have the right challenges in front of you things kinda have a way of making you learn.

Good challenges I mean.

Education is one thing. The ability to apply the information quite another.
I went to college with some whom would make %100 on every test. But when they got into a live clinical situation, lost as a goose.
A fool with a masters degree is still just a fool.
Hard to speak about today's education levels. When I was in Jr & Sr High School we always had foreign exchange students living with us.
They would have to be placed one to two grades ahead in our system to keep from getting too far behind. And still had to repeat a grade when they went home. By special considerations I might add, as they were the best and brightest to even get the opportunity to start with.
Yet they also would relate that at the juncture between elementary and secondary education they were required to test. Those whom failed went to trade school, period! Those who passed went on through the government funded secondary education courses.
There was no attempt to graduate idiots or slackers with the same sheepskin as everyone else like we do here. I got the same diploma as the kids who made A+ in Physics and Trigonometry and the ones who did three years our auto shop because the could not or would not even learn to write their names. Makes no sense.
They had no trouble makers, no people who had failed to pass and were "retained" in a grade. If you could not or would not make the grade, society was done with you.
All this business about everyone having a right to education is all well and good, as long as you actively exercise that right.
If not, we owe you nothing.

when I graduated college I thought I was really sharp...
but one of the most painful lessons I've learned in life...
is that it's easy to look around you on the street and come away thinking you are a genius by comparison...

then life puts you next to a group of people who are REALLY smart...
not just
"I figured out how to install ms word on my computer" or
"I can figure out my gas mileage in my head" or
"I can usually figure things out" or
"I know the proper use of ellipsis" -kinds of smart...

but people who are smart against a room full of computer scientists...

and you realize then: anyone who was ever smart was only relatively so...
relative only to the people around them.

So I've come to realize that my strength is in knowing just how much of an approximate dumb ass I am, cause there is a world full of people who have no idea.

Pride has come before many falls for me my friends, many.

While that's true, Mike, there IS sufficient cause for our worry.

Look at where we put some of our emphasis in our school systems. Have you ever heard of "Guidance Class?" This is where we teach our kids to "feel better about themselves." Yep. The main reason for this course is to stop youth from hurting themselves, with drugs, with suicide, etc, to improve thier self esteem. They also want your kids to turn you in if you're a user. A local 1st-grade kid turned in his folks for beer & cigs, cuz they were "drugs," as taught by the school system. Meanwhile, there is NO geography anymore, & evolution is so feared by the religious right that it is no longer taught. Evolution - one of the cornerstones of modern scientific thought, no longer touched upon for our kids. Instead, they're taught "intelligent design?"

Now go to the workplace. You don't hafta know how to count out change, cuz the computerized register does that for you. You don't hatta know how to spell, cuz your computer does that for you.

Now, one might think that this would free us up to think about the really IMPORTANT stuff, mightn't one? Nothing is farther from the truth. The more you are taught that you DON'T need to think, the less you will think. There are fewer & fewer brain exercizes for us on a daily basis, & our technologies are designed to make us all equal in all things, so that no one can shine or stand out in any way. Thinking things through is becoming a thing of the past.

Our collective motivation is being erased by our technology, & so is our very need to work to improve ourselves. Our media tells that we need to improve our appearance, NOT our minds or problem-solving abilities.

Yes, there are those who are naturally smart, or who are naturally driven, but the masses need something to motivate themselves to exercize thier brain on a moment by moment basis, & our technologies are working against that goal.

Our country has fallen behind, not only the industrialized world, but the THIRD WORLD, as well, in the area of education. We are the least-informed of world affairs. the worst in math & science, hell, most kids with a 10th grade education can't even use a frikken tape measure! Foreigners who don't even speak English as thier main language have a better grasp of it than our inner-city children! A sad sorry pitiful state of affairs, if you ask me! Many high school seniors can't find our nation's capital on a frikken map, or tell east from west. They also have limited knowledge of history, or of how our very gov't works. THESE are our leaders of tomorrow?

Oh, we're in the sh*t, now, ain't we?

One of my Father's favorite sayings about education.

Somebody has to dig the ditch and take out the trash.
We cant all be brain surgeons.


For sure everyone is a dumb ass, in different subjects.

While that's true, Mike, there IS sufficient cause for our worry.

there is a website somewhere that compares 8th grade math from the 60's to 8th grade math from more recent decades and demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that math courses have gotten easier.

Evolution - one of the cornerstones of modern scientific thought, no longer touched upon for our kids. Instead, they're taught "intelligent design?"

I'm pretty sure intelligent design is taught "in addition to" and not "in place of" evolution.

I'm ok with intelligent design since both schools of thought are just theories at this point, and since the science of yesterday is often contradicted by science of today... belief in either theory is a form of 'faith' isn't it?

But I agree that education tends to be a system of imposed stupidity.
Just wanted to point out that: before we go patting ourselves on the back and telling ourselves that the world is nothing but morons everywhere... we should take note of how little actually separates "us" from "them".

So who is the smartest person here? any takers?

The one who sticks to music ? LOL

I had a conversation recently with a brilliant Neurologist.
Off the subject of business the conversation turned to firearms.
A subject of which he had little knowledge or experience.
My attempts to explain in short the concepts of exterior and interior ballistics went as far past him as his attempts to explain neurology to me.

Such is life.

I hate to say it but there is a word for some of these descriptions.
Mollycoddled. Thankfully I was never in a position to be mollycoddled.

While that's true, Mike, there IS sufficient cause for our worry.

there is a website somewhere that compares 8th grade math from the 60's to 8th grade math from more recent decades and demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that math courses have gotten easier.

Evolution - one of the cornerstones of modern scientific thought, no longer touched upon for our kids. Instead, they're taught "intelligent design?"

I'm pretty sure intelligent design is taught "in addition to" and not "in place of" evolution.

I'm ok with intelligent design since both schools of thought are just theories at this point, and since the science of yesterday is often contradicted by science of today... belief in either theory is a form of 'faith' isn't it?

But I agree that education tends to be a system of imposed stupidity.
Just wanted to point out that: before we go patting ourselves on the back and telling ourselves that the world is nothing but morons everywhere... we should take note of how little actually separates "us" from "them".

ID is not a theory, it's a hypothesis at best. Theories start out as a hypothesis, or "guess", and then experiments are designed and evidence is collected to either support or refute the hypothesis. The theory of evolution is accepted as fact by nearly all educated people, just as the theory that the earth revolves around the sun. I have nothing against ID being mentioned in a science class but only as a point of reference to the study of evolution. Our children deserve nothing less.

I'm pretty sure intelligent design is taught "in addition to" and not "in place of" evolution.

I'm ok with intelligent design since both schools of thought are just theories at this point, and since the science of yesterday is often contradicted by science of today... belief in either theory is a form of 'faith' isn't it?

But I agree that education tends to be a system of imposed stupidity.
Just wanted to point out that: before we go patting ourselves on the back and telling ourselves that the world is nothing but morons everywhere... we should take note of how little actually separates "us" from "them".

ID is not a theory, it's a hypothesis at best. Theories start out as a hypothesis, or "guess", and then experiments are designed and evidence is collected to either support or refute the hypothesis. The theory of evolution is accepted as fact by nearly all educated people, just as the theory that the earth revolves around the sun. I have nothing against ID being mentioned in a science class but only as a point of reference to the study of evolution. Our children deserve nothing less.

I'm sure we could go round and round on this one but... lets take that theory at the point where it is a hypothesis... what separates it from the hypothesis of ID? Nothing. And now lets take that theory now... it is not PROVEN and hence it is still a theory. You can say that it is more likely to be true based on experiments and evidence... but the truth is that neither are fact, and therefore neither is more likely to be true.
Note that I am not a champion of ID. It is really unimportant to me which school of thought is correct. I am only invested in the point that 'what is good for the goose is good for the gander'.

Even now that the theory has become widely accepted... theories that have been widely accepted in the past and have turned out to be incorrect... therefore belief in the theory over the hypothesis is a leap of faith... BOTH the theory and the hypothesis could be true... and neither the theory nor the hypothesis could be true... to say one is more likely than the other is not based on any scientific conclusion because otherwise one would be proven.

We may say we have evidence but at one point science had evidence that the world was flat. At one point science had evidence that time was constant.

So, IMO if either is included as a teaching the other should be included as well... along with the hypothesis of the 'flying spaghetti monster' which I personally subscribe to.

I see your point, but the passionate bias that created the ID hypothesis just irks the living hell out of me. I still say that this is in no way science, but a concentrated effort to destroy scientific thought & replace it with dogma. It offends me to the bone, & I will teach my family just how stupid the entire affair has become as often as I can. It's just the right thing for a parent to do.

Somebody has to dig the ditch and take out the trash.
We cant all be brain surgeons.

That's one of the angles that I found so interesting in Huxley's "Brave New World"

Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al. (400 F. Supp. 2d 707, Docket no. 4cv2688) was the first direct challenge brought in the United States federal courts against a public school district that required the presentation of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution as an "explanation of the origin of life

Decision
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District et al.

On December 20, 2005, Judge Jones found for the plaintiffs and issued a 139 page decision, in which he wrote:

For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the religious nature of ID [intelligent design] would be readily apparent to an objective observer, adult or child. (page 24)
A significant aspect of the IDM [intelligent design movement] is that despite Defendants' protestations to the contrary, it describes ID as a religious argument. In that vein, the writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity. (page 26)
The evidence at trial demonstrates that ID is nothing less than the progeny of creationism. (page 31)
The overwhelming evidence at trial established that ID is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory. (page 43)
Throughout the trial and in various submissions to the Court, Defendants vigorously argue that the reading of the statement is not ‘teaching’ ID but instead is merely ‘making students aware of it.’ In fact, one consistency among the Dover School Board members' testimony, which was marked by selective memories and outright lies under oath, as will be discussed in more detail below, is that they did not think they needed to be knowledgeable about ID because it was not being taught to the students. We disagree. (footnote 7 on page 46)
After a searching review of the record and applicable caselaw, we find that while ID arguments may be true, a proposition on which the Court takes no position, ID is not science. We find that ID fails on three different levels, any one of which is sufficient to preclude a determination that ID is science. They are: (1) ID violates the centuries-old ground rules of science by invoking and permitting supernatural causation; (2) the argument of irreducible complexity, central to ID, employs the same flawed and illogical contrived dualism that doomed creation science in the 1980's; and (3) ID's negative attacks on evolution have been refuted by the scientific community. (page 64)
[T]he one textbook [Pandas] to which the Dover ID Policy directs students contains outdated concepts and flawed science, as recognized by even the defense experts in this case. (pages 86–87)
ID's backers have sought to avoid the scientific scrutiny which we have now determined that it cannot withstand by advocating that the controversy, but not ID itself, should be taught in science class. This tactic is at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard. The goal of the IDM is not to encourage critical thought, but to foment a revolution which would supplant evolutionary theory with ID. (page 89)
Accordingly, we find that the secular purposes claimed by the Board amount to a pretext for the Board's real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom, in violation of the Establishment Clause. (page 132)

Judge John E. Jones III issued the decision in the caseIn his Conclusion he wrote:

The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board's ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents. [...]
The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy. With that said, we do not question that many of the leading advocates of ID have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors. Nor do we controvert that ID should continue to be studied, debated, and discussed. As stated, our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom.

You could say that there is no proof that the theory of gravity is correct. If you jumped off a cliff you would have pretty good evidence that is. And technically, Newton's theory turned out to be wrong; gravity doesn't cause things with lower mass to fall towards a bigger object. The bigger object warps space and the smaller object get caught in this warped space. This doesn't mean that Newton had it all wrong; things like inertia and the action/reaction laws are still valid. We've just refined our understanding to better fit the evidence. That's what science does; it fixes itself as flaws are discovered. But even though we make mistakes as we learn, it's still the best system we have to understand the universe. Religion (masquerading as Intelligent Design) does not follow the scientific process and therefore cannot be taught in public schools, nor considered as equal to science in legitimacy. If you want to worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster that's fine with me, but there's no evidence for that either so you might as well worship God(s).