Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:No haven't looked much into it in just for school vouchers and choice. Fill me in what's the issue?

In short.. students with special needs are required to relinquish their civil and legal rights before they are able to get their vouchers.

Private schools shouldn't be eligible for federal dollars.

Quote:Private schools shouldn't be eligible for federal dollars.

 

Federal dollars shouldn't go to schools.

Quote:Federal dollars shouldn't go to schools.

Education is one of the pillars of a great democracy.

Quote:In short.. students with special needs are required to relinquish their civil and legal rights before they are able to get their vouchers.

It's their fault for being born with special needs. That's probably his response.

I'm at the, In gonna let this all just play out, while eating popcorn. 4 loooong years of popcorn.

Quote:Education is one of the pillars of a great democracy.

Not a federal matter, not a democracy.

Quote:Not a federal matter, not a democracy.

So the states pay for public school? What's the point? You have changed nothing.

Excuse me... you plan on running our education dept...

 

can we see your tax returns?

 

LMAO

Quote:So the states pay for public school? What's the point? You have changed nothing.

 

Local control is best control. You know, one of the founding principles of this here country we live in? When your government is too big to succeed then you have the kind of problems we have today.

Quote:Local control is best control. You know, one of the founding principles of this here country we live in? When your government is too big to succeed then you have the kind of problems we have today.

There's no logic to support this.

Quote:There's no logic to support this.

 

I'm sorry you didn't learn civics in school. Maybe Betsy will fix that for the future generations.

I wonder....

 

everyone with a problem with Betsy....

 

Has our education system gotten better in the last 8.... hell... 16 years?

 

Legit question... I've been removed from highschool that long...

it wasn't great then...

 

My kids are youngsters in primary school...

it doesn't seem any different from what I remember, except they learn Spanish earlier now....

Quote:First, I think we have to clear something up:


Are you talking about macroevolution (which has fossil evidence, suggesting a common ancestor between man and ape as well as loads of other evidences)

 

or are you talking about Abiogenesis (The theory by which all living organisms evolved from a single lifeform)

 

I mean you seem to be conflating the two, but they're two very different things.  I'm less familiar with abiogenesis than I am macroevolution, but you do have evidence for abiogenesis that you can actually examine.  Results like the organic amino acids produced by the Miller-Urey experiment (combined with geological, chemical, and biological evidence).  I mean there's evidence to examine.  It's all there.  (If you're interested, you should probably look deeper into it.  Like I said, I'm not that familiar with it myself.  But you can't say "There's no evidence!" if you haven't really looked into it.  You've just assumed it doesn't exist.  I wonder how deeply you've actually looked into this if you've come to that conclusion.  I mean you even say you dont dislike the evidence, you just believe it doesn't exist.  But it definitely does, you have to actually read up on it though.  Whether it actually convinces you that abiogenesis is the best answer to origins of life on earth is another question altogether).  It's not accepted as fact, but it's definitely a legitimate theory worth discussing in a science classroom.   What evidence is there to examine for creationism?  What evidence could you even expect?  I mean I'm not dismissing creationism as a legitimate belief.  But that's what it is--a belief.  Not really a scientific theory.  At least not until there's evidence for it that can be examined.  Same goes for Ancient Astronaut Theory.  I mean that's the whole point of science.  Examining the evidence.  

 

Thank you for this information.  I'll look into the Miller-Urey experiment and do some research.  And yes, I did conflate the two, as most who believe in macroevolution seem to point to abiogenesis as their explanation for how life began, as Darwin himself did.

 

I should not have claimed that there is no evidence--rather, the arguments and evidence I have been exposed to previously leave me unconvinced.

 

Quote:Evolution is evolution. There is no micro and macro evolution. And you can observe your so called "macro evolution" over time. Gregory Mendel did it with the pea plant. Breeders do it with dogs and other animals all the time.

 

What you speak of is not macroevolution.  Macroevolution refers to one species group changing over time into another--i.e, dinosaurs into birds, apes into man, etc.  You're talking about genetics--changes within a species group.  The peas were still peas, and the dogs were still dogs.

Quote:Thank you for this information. I'll look into the Miller-Urey experiment and do some research. And yes, I did conflate the two, as most who believe in macroevolution seem to point to abiogenesis as their explanation for how life began, as Darwin himself did.


I should not have claimed that there is no evidence--rather, the arguments and evidence I have been exposed to previously leave me unconvinced.



What you speak of is not macroevolution. Macroevolution refers to one species group changing over time into another--i.e, dinosaurs into birds, apes into man, etc. You're talking about genetics--changes within a species group. The peas were still peas, and the dogs were still dogs.

I don't think you understand the concept of speciation. In the pea plant example enough changes can accumulate over time via artificial selection mechanisms that a new species of pea plant can arise from the wild type. Again, evolution is evolution. If you were to sequence the genome of the pea plants you could do something like SNP calls to look at polymorphisms which would inform you on the two plants genetic relatedness. Assuming enough time was given during the experiment you might expect enough changes to accumulate so that the new plant diverges from the original wild type. Genetics is all about evolution. Sorry on mobile...

Before I jump in here, let me say that I am not a creationist. 

 

Evolution is a sound theory to me and it makes the most sense.While I have met many high school and college students that fanatically and smugly preach evolution, a much smaller percentage of them can actually explain it. The only explanation I have for that is that they were not taught, they were indoctrinated. Accepting one theory or another does not make anyone more intelligent or educated. Perhaps that is what the goal has been though, not to teach students about evolution, but simply to strike a blow against Creationism and make a sycophant follower for evolution.

Quote:They can decide. But they can't spend taxpayer dollars on it. If they want to spend their own money, fine.

That's why vouchers are the simple solution. I pay taxes let me select the education I want my kids to recieve in the form of a voucher. If I pick some fancy school that's more than the voucher I'll pay the difference.

Quote:In short.. students with special needs are required to relinquish their civil and legal rights before they are able to get their vouchers.

That doest make any sense I'll have to look into it

Quote:That doest make any sense I'll have to look into it

 

Kotite posted it, so proceed with caution.

Quote:That's why vouchers are the simple solution. I pay taxes let me select the education I want my kids to recieve in the form of a voucher. If I pick some fancy school that's more than the voucher I'll pay the difference.

 

30,000 kids with vouchers want into Stanton. No one wants to go to Ribault. Who makes the cut for the one and gets banished to the other?