Haha you are so funny when you are scrambling. Keep playing your word games. We all know you are clueless on this topic.
I destroyed chumps like you in the statues thread as well
Haha you are so funny when you are scrambling. Keep playing your word games. We all know you are clueless on this topic.
I destroyed chumps like you in the statues thread as well
read much? wrote:
krispy kremlin._._._._. wrote:
We'll be a better society on the day we repeal the Civil Rights Act.
Ladies and Gentleman......your 2021 Republican Party!
Even though the dems in California are doing exactly this? Methinks you have no idea what’s going on in this country.
energeticlotuseater wrote:
trashcan wrote:
Yes, that last part is the piece that bothers me. Any nuance could subject the teacher to discipline.. I mean, to whom do you think the founding fathers thought their principles applied?
All teachers might be subject to discipline for “wrong think” unfortunately.
In “woke school districts” I’m sure if teachers tried to make “The Bell Curve” by Charles Murray (which is an objectively well researched academic study) required reading I’m sure they may get some some angry phone calls.
Re “The Bell Curve” we have since learned a good deal about heritability (eg epigenetics) and issues with test taking. To use that book at this point in time would be using a substandard resource that happens to bolster a certain political view.
Also, I am not sure how many states mandate an approach to history that prevents looking at weaknesses in the process and the people involved in the founding of the country.
It is a good way to graduate people who don’t know how to think.
Ah you are one of those “math is bad and outdated” type of people.
The bell curve is still a reliable source of information.
Yawn^9 wrote:
Ah you are one of those “math is bad and outdated” type of people.
The bell curve is still a reliable source of information.
No, if you have seen my posts you would know that I use and interpret math quite a bit. I also keep up on the science.
“The Bell Curve.” Was controversial at the time. Now it is just a poor resource. Also, do you have an idea why I might think that epigenetics is particularly relevant here?
trashcan wrote:
Yawn^9 wrote:
Ah you are one of those “math is bad and outdated” type of people.
The bell curve is still a reliable source of information.
No, if you have seen my posts you would know that I use and interpret math quite a bit. I also keep up on the science.
“The Bell Curve.” Was controversial at the time. Now it is just a poor resource. Also, do you have an idea why I might think that epigenetics is particularly relevant here?
Many of the things this thread has talked about is controversial, that’s the point of this thread and why we have been arguing for the last five pages.
Exploring the cultural reasons for success and failure in American life, which “The Bell Curve” does, through a researched and academic lense seems a very pertinent and important topic.
Given that the Bell Curve. has been superseded, and was never accepted as a consensus opinion, it certainly doesn’t make sense to be taught in a high school science course. I’m you wish to treat it as cultural anthropology, then fine.
At the time, it was approved by less than half of the experts they submitted it to. The number would be far less now. What other material with such a low amount of past and present expert consensus is taught today in high school science?
By the way if the Bell Curve is taken as gospel, then the United States must be extremely racist in favor of whites over Asians.
And you still haven’t answered the epigenetics question.
So will Texas now write LBJ out of their history books or brand him as a weak cuckold that was forced to sign The Civil Rights Act by a young George Soros?
I think that other states should teach that Mexico was doing a very good job governing their sovereign territory until a bunch of buckskin clad ANTIFA disrespected authority and starting rioting and looting at The Alamo. Thankfully, the Mexican Army came in and slaughtered them for their unlawful protest and bad behavior.
Part of the outrage over this you see on the left is because conservatives are finally starting to go on the offensive on the cultural front. For about a generation the left and the liberals have had a focus on the culture while conservatives have focused on shallow things like tax cuts. The liberals have simply been smarter and better at fighting the “culture war”.
Where did this get us? Well we are now living in a culture where men can get pregnant, CRT is mainstream doctrine, racial animosity is at its highest in years, full blown socialists like AOC and Bernie Sanders are mainstream viable politicians and tyrannical lockdowns are encouraged.
Finally, through legislative processes, as we see here, and through certain media channels (The Daily Wire for example) conservatives are actually making an attempt to take the culture. Liberals are now angry their game is being used against them. I say it’s about damn time.
What is wrong with our country is that racists like you are allowed to be HS XC Coaches..... disgusting
My god liberals are dumb. As usual, leftists twist the facts to support their insane narrative. The bill doesn't "remove civil rights from the curriculum" it is just meant to amend a separate an earlier bill that compels teachers to teach certain topics such as the 1619 project - a fundamentally CRT-take on US history. Don't worry libs, Texan kids will still learn about civil rights and racism, but they won't be learning the leftist version that's meant to create hatred and division. Sorry libs.
trashcan wrote:
Given that the Bell Curve. has been superseded, and was never accepted as a consensus opinion, it certainly doesn’t make sense to be taught in a high school science course. I’m you wish to treat it as cultural anthropology, then fine.
At the time, it was approved by less than half of the experts they submitted it to. The number would be far less now. What other material with such a low amount of past and present expert consensus is taught today in high school science?
By the way if the Bell Curve is taken as gospel, then the United States must be extremely racist in favor of whites over Asians.
And you still haven’t answered the epigenetics question.
Nah, the Bell Curve is perfectly valid and many agree with it. It was based on a collection of studies that were already agreed up (not that the fact that some people agree or disagree really makes a difference as to if it's true or not). The only reason there is disagreement is that some weak, anti-intellectuals will screech that it's racist and untrue because it goes against their "blank-slate," egalitarian views of the world. Again, just because some people choose to disagree doesn't make it untrue - even the scientific field can become very political and biased and you know that.
Racial and sexual differences due to genetics and natural selection is not exactly, or should not be, a very controversial fact. The data backs it up - turns out racial differences in IQ exist no matter how much you want to cry about it. That doesn't mean that any race is superior or inferior over another, but these facts still exist.
trashcan wrote:
Given that the Bell Curve. has been superseded, and was never accepted as a consensus opinion, it certainly doesn’t make sense to be taught in a high school science course. I’m you wish to treat it as cultural anthropology, then fine.
At the time, it was approved by less than half of the experts they submitted it to. The number would be far less now. What other material with such a low amount of past and present expert consensus is taught today in high school science?
By the way if the Bell Curve is taken as gospel, then the United States must be extremely racist in favor of whites over Asians.
And you still haven’t answered the epigenetics question.
I’m sure the book has its flaws. But there are many good points made in the book as well; you can’t just throw the baby out with the bathwater because you can’t fathom some of the concepts in it.
Plus, we’ve seen your “math” in other threads and it leaves much to be desired.
The scientific community shunned Galileo but he was right. More recently, scientists shunned those who supported the Covid blab leak theory. Just because an idea isn’t approved by your group of experts doesn’t mean it isn’t right.
Posters opposing this bill have got to be conservatives attempting to make liberals look stupid.
energeticlotuseater wrote:
Part of the outrage over this you see on the left is because conservatives are finally starting to go on the offensive on the cultural front. For about a generation the left and the liberals have had a focus on the culture while conservatives have focused on shallow things like tax cuts. The liberals have simply been smarter and better at fighting the “culture war”.
Where did this get us? Well we are now living in a culture where men can get pregnant, CRT is mainstream doctrine, racial animosity is at its highest in years, full blown socialists like AOC and Bernie Sanders are mainstream viable politicians and tyrannical lockdowns are encouraged.
Finally, through legislative processes, as we see here, and through certain media channels (The Daily Wire for example) conservatives are actually making an attempt to take the culture. Liberals are now angry their game is being used against them. I say it’s about damn time.
You are actually on to something here. But conservatives focussing on the Culture War isn't new though. They have always been fighting it. It's easy terrain for them. It distracts from their abysmal lack of economic policy.
For example it's easy to restrict the rights of trans people. More people will vote for banning them from restrooms than are affected by it. They can win over 10% of the voters by stigmatizing 1%
And what's more popular? - videos and podcasts about monetarism and privatization, or about culture war topics and the 'moonbat' type stuff. I know which goes viral more often.
For the left and center-left, it's a hard task - most people are very skeptical about Big Business and Wall Street. The left haven't managed to harness this into a movement that can win power possibly because social issues move slower than economic ones. Voters unsatisfied with the status quo tend to move rightwards, where politics offers change without all the social liberal ideas.
This can only happen for so long however, if the same economic problems are here in 15 years, the voters and the social issues will have caught up. Unless conservatives can continue to pull the same trick, the next successful populist movement will be from the left.
Yawn^9 wrote:
trashcan wrote:
Given that the Bell Curve. has been superseded, and was never accepted as a consensus opinion, it certainly doesn’t make sense to be taught in a high school science course. I’m you wish to treat it as cultural anthropology, then fine.
At the time, it was approved by less than half of the experts they submitted it to. The number would be far less now. What other material with such a low amount of past and present expert consensus is taught today in high school science?
By the way if the Bell Curve is taken as gospel, then the United States must be extremely racist in favor of whites over Asians.
And you still haven’t answered the epigenetics question.
I’m sure the book has its flaws. But there are many good points made in the book as well; you can’t just throw the baby out with the bathwater because you can’t fathom some of the concepts in it.
Plus, we’ve seen your “math” in other threads and it leaves much to be desired.
The scientific community shunned Galileo but he was right. More recently, scientists shunned those who supported the Covid blab leak theory. Just because an idea isn’t approved by your group of experts doesn’t mean it isn’t right.
You certainly haven’t found an issue that you critiques in any proper methodological way. Maybe you did without responding. Pupil did catch an error once, which I acknowledged. Misread terms in an article which I read too quickly. Do you have another error?
Almost all bad theories start from points most can agree on. Stating someone can’t fathom concepts they disagree with is just poor argument. You don’t even describe that which you believe I can’t fathom.
Certainly scientists need to address controversial topics. High school science; however, addresses much more settled issues. I think it is wonderful for students to learn the steps and missteps that led to our understanding of basic chemistry. A primer on the philosophy of science as well as logic would be a wonderful addition to our curriculum. And still, that gives no reason to spend time in high school addressing theories that currently are not shared by the majority of specialists in the field.
Why is it THIS book you think should be taught? Where do you think it should be taught?
And you still haven’t addressed epigenetics.
Critique not critiques
Tatar... wrote:
energeticlotuseater wrote:
Part of the outrage over this you see on the left is because conservatives are finally starting to go on the offensive on the cultural front. For about a generation the left and the liberals have had a focus on the culture while conservatives have focused on shallow things like tax cuts. The liberals have simply been smarter and better at fighting the “culture war”.
Where did this get us? Well we are now living in a culture where men can get pregnant, CRT is mainstream doctrine, racial animosity is at its highest in years, full blown socialists like AOC and Bernie Sanders are mainstream viable politicians and tyrannical lockdowns are encouraged.
Finally, through legislative processes, as we see here, and through certain media channels (The Daily Wire for example) conservatives are actually making an attempt to take the culture. Liberals are now angry their game is being used against them. I say it’s about damn time.
You are actually on to something here. But conservatives focussing on the Culture War isn't new though. They have always been fighting it. It's easy terrain for them. It distracts from their abysmal lack of economic policy.
For example it's easy to restrict the rights of trans people. More people will vote for banning them from restrooms than are affected by it. They can win over 10% of the voters by stigmatizing 1%
And what's more popular? - videos and podcasts about monetarism and privatization, or about culture war topics and the 'moonbat' type stuff. I know which goes viral more often.
For the left and center-left, it's a hard task - most people are very skeptical about Big Business and Wall Street. The left haven't managed to harness this into a movement that can win power possibly because social issues move slower than economic ones. Voters unsatisfied with the status quo tend to move rightwards, where politics offers change without all the social liberal ideas.
This can only happen for so long however, if the same economic problems are here in 15 years, the voters and the social issues will have caught up. Unless conservatives can continue to pull the same trick, the next successful populist movement will be from the left.
“For example it's easy to restrict the rights of trans people. More people will vote for banning them from restrooms than are affected by it. They can win over 10% of the voters by stigmatizing 1%”
Disagree on a lot of things in your post but I will correct this.
No conservatives are banning “trans people” (men pretending to be women or women pretending to be men) from restrooms. What conservatives are for is banning men or boys from going into Lockerooms or restrooms assigned for women or girls or vice versa.
trashcan wrote:
Yawn^9 wrote:
I’m sure the book has its flaws. But there are many good points made in the book as well; you can’t just throw the baby out with the bathwater because you can’t fathom some of the concepts in it.
Plus, we’ve seen your “math” in other threads and it leaves much to be desired.
The scientific community shunned Galileo but he was right. More recently, scientists shunned those who supported the Covid blab leak theory. Just because an idea isn’t approved by your group of experts doesn’t mean it isn’t right.
You certainly haven’t found an issue that you critiques in any proper methodological way. Maybe you did without responding. Pupil did catch an error once, which I acknowledged. Misread terms in an article which I read too quickly. Do you have another error?
Almost all bad theories start from points most can agree on. Stating someone can’t fathom concepts they disagree with is just poor argument. You don’t even describe that which you believe I can’t fathom.
Certainly scientists need to address controversial topics. High school science; however, addresses much more settled issues. I think it is wonderful for students to learn the steps and missteps that led to our understanding of basic chemistry. A primer on the philosophy of science as well as logic would be a wonderful addition to our curriculum. And still, that gives no reason to spend time in high school addressing theories that currently are not shared by the majority of specialists in the field.
Why is it THIS book you think should be taught? Where do you think it should be taught?
And you still haven’t addressed epigenetics.
I enjoyed your word salad. Also, point out where I said the book needs to be taught? It’s possible I might have conveyed that message but it was not my intention. I was responding to you who pretty much called the book racist trash which is simply. It true. You didn’t really address either the fact that science changes and just because something isn’t the consensus at the time means it is wrong.
I’ll bite, what do you want to talk about with epigenetics?
energeticlotuseater wrote:
Part of the outrage over this you see on the left is because conservatives are finally starting to go on the offensive on the cultural front. For about a generation the left and the liberals have had a focus on the culture while conservatives have focused on shallow things like tax cuts. The liberals have simply been smarter and better at fighting the “culture war”.
Where did this get us? Well we are now living in a culture where men can get pregnant, CRT is mainstream doctrine, racial animosity is at its highest in years, full blown socialists like AOC and Bernie Sanders are mainstream viable politicians and tyrannical lockdowns are encouraged.
Finally, through legislative processes, as we see here, and through certain media channels (The Daily Wire for example) conservatives are actually making an attempt to take the culture. Liberals are now angry their game is being used against them. I say it’s about damn time.
A bit alarming that removing MLK's "I Have a Dream Speech" from the curriculum is considered 'going on the offensive' for your side.
What does your side stand for if removing the "I Have a Dream" speech is considered some kind of victory in your 'culture war'? What kind of culture views that as a victory? Victory against what?
What is your side exactly if MLK is considered an enemy?