SELECTED
CONTENTS:

Home

Theory of Evolution and Racism

Dawkins --A Dinosaur Defends the Indefensible

Other Letters and My Comments

School Choice
in African American
Education

Home-School Advocate

Texas Essay

Eighth Grade Test

Other Articles of Interest

"...every group that wishes to see conflicting interests resolved reasonably, or is wise about the conditions under which it enjoys its own freedom, must be profoundly concerned with the state of freedom of speech and assembly, freedom of inquiry and teaching, freedom of press and other forms of communication, freedom of cultural opportunity and development.  For in large measure intelligent moral choice depends upon them."
  --Sidney Hook (1902-1988), disciple of John Dewey, and champion of pragmatism and democracy

 Aspiring Teacher Defends Darwin

--"Teaparty" Does not Like Goodschools

An aspiring high school teacher, calling himself "Teaparty," recently wrote to Goodschools.com complaining about my stand on Darwin.  As always, I was happy for his comments.  It is helpful to receive this type of enlightenment from the education community.   He starts out by quoting a short excerpt from Goodschools, and then comments on it.  Here in total is the content of his letter:

"Teaparty" writes:

[You wrote in Goodschools]  My problem with this whole event is this:  If commenting in a positive fashion about Hitler can get a teacher fired, why is it OK to exonerate Hitler's 'teacher,' Charles Darwin? Darwin was every bit the racist that Hitler was -- Think about it.

["Teaparty" then writes in response]-- think about it.  that really says it all doesn't it. You obviously haven't and it sickens me that their are people out there who believe this bullshit.   I find it very disturbing that a bunch of deluded, ignorant hillbillies are out there trying to have any influence on schools. I thank you not to do me that favor and ask you rather instead to move into the woods were you won't bother anyone or infect any more children with your deluded racist fantasies and hallucinations about a caretaker cartoon gods.  Today the theory of evolution is about as much open to doubt as the theory that the earth goes round the sun.

Because I am always happy to hear from even the most caustic correspondent, I replied immediately to "Teaparty" with an email.  I wrote:

Dear Teaparty:

Thank you for your interesting note.  I appreciate criticism because it makes me better able to understand what others think.  I can see from your letter that you do not think Hitler was a racist.  I would appreciate your input on that.  What makes you so sure he was not?  Or, if you would agree that he was a racist, why is that not important?  Second, what makes you think that Darwin's evolution is correct?  Most scientists refute Darwin.  Did you know that?   Please elaborate a little for me.

Thanks again for your note.

Sincerely,  Goodschools

As is my custom, I will, for this publication, address "Teaparty's" comments in detail: 

"Teaparty" writes:

--[sic] think about it.  that really says it all doesn't it.[sic]  You obviously haven't and it sickens me that their [sic] are people out there who believe this bullshit.  

My response:

Teaparty (henceforth I am going to leave the quotation marks off your email name), it is quite obvious that  while your "spellcheck" is working quite well, your "grammarcheck" is not.   (1) You need to capitalize the "T" on think (even though you used a dash),   (2) You need to use a question mark even after a rhetorical question.  (3) I suspect that you intended "there" for "their."  As far as your equating my views with bull feces, that is ok.  You probably know a lot more about feces than do I, so I will leave that comment alone.

Teaparty further writes:

I find it very disturbing that a bunch of deluded, ignorant hillbillies are out there trying to have any influence on schools [sic].  I thank you not to do me that favor and ask you rather instead to move into the woods were [sic] you won't bother anyone or infect any more children with your deluded racist fantasies and hallucinations about a caretaker cartoon gods [sic].  

My response:

There (Perhaps Teaparty would prefer "their"?) are a number of elements in this segment upon which I would like to comment.  The term "bunch" implies that more than one person was responsible for the article Teaparty was critiquing.  Such is not the case.  I (Mike) am the lone "hillbilly" responsible for it.  Teaparty, as far as your request that I move into the woods is concerned, that does not sound like a bad idea at all.  I picture a beautiful little house on the side of a tree-covered hill overlooking the Pacific, perhaps just North of Ixtapa-Zihuatanejo, Mexico.  I just might take you up on that, someday.  But for now, I have to help educate educators, such as you aspire to be.  ...Perhaps someday.   Again, your "grammarcheck" allowed "were" where "where" would have worked better.  You allude to my "racist fantasies."  There is nothing to support that claim.  You are here using "racist" and as adjective modifying "fantasies."  That does not make any sense.  I think you meant something like this:  [my] ...deluded fantasies about racism."  That would fit with what you were trying to convey, at least I think it would.  You are really a terrible writer.  I hope you do not plan to teach English.  

Perhaps the most telling of all is your comment about my "hallucinations about a caretaker cartoon gods."  I assume that you know that the indefinite article "a" cannot reference the plural "gods."  So, I really do not know whether (in your eyes) I am bad because I am a monotheist, or a pantheist.  Actually, I suspect you are miffed at me because I know what I am talking about, and you do not.  Teaparty, do you realize that in all of Goodschools you will not find one reference to my theory (or lack thereof) of gods, or God?  You did not know that, did you?  You simply had to toss that comment in there because you are scared to death that your little, racist theory of flat-earth Darwin is going to get tossed out, and you do not know what to replace it with.  

Teaparty finally writes:

Today the theory of evolution is about as much open to doubt as the theory that the earth goes round the sun.

My response:

This is just plain wrong.   Click here to check out what some of the real scientists are saying, and have been saying for a long time.  The only safe harbor for the flat-earth Darwinists is in education.  

Would you like to read other letters from Darwinists, and my comments?

Would you like to see related letters and my comments?

--Mike Carrier (MA, NYU--Graduate School of Arts and Science)

 

 

 

Search Screen Copyright © Goodschools 1997 All rights reserved.Send us an Email message

 

This site features a frank presentation of issues facing parents, taxpayers and schools in reforming schools in the twenty-first century.  Good Schools promotes good schools, and explains what is necessary to achieve good schools.  We are convinced that good schools can be obtained only with sound curriculum, which does not include the teaching of Darwin's theory of origin, or Darwin's theory of evolution.  We believe that local school boards need to be empowered, and the influence of teachers' unions ought to be limited to  labor-related issues.  Teachers' unions should have no say in curriculum. 

We are convinced that the teachings of Darwin, particularly Darwin's teachings on evolution, and Darwin's theories on origins, ought not be taught as fact.  Darwin and Darwin's theories are not generally accepted by contemporary physicists and cosmologists, and, therefore, Darwin and Darwin's theories ought not be accepted whole-cloth by our schools of education, and ought not be presented as fact in public schools. 

Because Richard Dawkins has set himself up as the number one defender of Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, we will go to some length explaining Dawkins' Darwin defenses, and we will do our best to explode Dawkins' Darwin defenses.

We seek to show from Darwin's own hand that Darwin, and Darwin's theory of evolution, are racist at the core.  Darwin was a racist,  Darwin's theory of evolution is racist, and Darwin's theory of origins is racist.

We further seek to show that Darwin's theory of evolution is not scientific.  We show that racism, more than science, was behind Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, and Darwin's theory of origins.

Some of the terms commonly used on this site are:  Darwin, Dawkins, schools, public schools, education, gun control, teachers, John Dewey, Littleton, racist, racism , school choice, African American, Sidney Hook, evolution, and Mike Carrier.

Bottom line--good schools require work.  Good schools do not just happen.  We need good schools, if we are to have a good nation.

This site features a frank presentation of issues facing parents, taxpayers and schools in reforming schools in the twenty-first century.  Good Schools promotes good schools, and explains what is necessary to achieve good schools.  We are convinced that good schools can be obtained only with sound curriculum, which does not include the teaching of Darwin's theory of origin, or Darwin's theory of evolution.  We believe that local school boards need to be empowered, and the influence of teachers' unions ought to be limited to  labor-related issues.  Teachers' unions should have no say in curriculum. 

We are convinced that the teachings of Darwin, particularly Darwin's teachings on evolution, and Darwin's theories on origins, ought not be taught as fact.  Darwin and Darwin's theories are not generally accepted by contemporary physicists and cosmologists, and, therefore, Darwin and Darwin's theories ought not be accepted whole-cloth by our schools of education, and ought not be presented as fact in public schools. 

Because Richard Dawkins has set himself up as the number one defender of Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, we will go to some length explaining Dawkins' Darwin defenses, and we will do our best to explode Dawkins' Darwin defenses.

We seek to show from Darwin's own hand that Darwin, and Darwin's theory of evolution, are racist at the core.  Darwin was a racist,  Darwin's theory of evolution is racist, and Darwin's theory of origins is racist.

We further seek to show that Darwin's theory of evolution is not scientific.  We show that racism, more than science, was behind Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, and Darwin's theory of origins.

Some of the terms commonly used on this site are:  Darwin, Dawkins, schools, public schools, education, gun control, teachers, John Dewey, Littleton, racist, racism , school choice, African American, Sidney Hook, evolution, and Mike Carrier.

Bottom line--good schools require work.  Good schools do not just happen.  We need good schools, if we are to have a good nation.

This site features a frank presentation of issues facing parents, taxpayers and schools in reforming schools in the twenty-first century.  Good Schools promotes good schools, and explains what is necessary to achieve good schools.  We are convinced that good schools can be obtained only with sound curriculum, which does not include the teaching of Darwin's theory of origin, or Darwin's theory of evolution.  We believe that local school boards need to be empowered, and the influence of teachers' unions ought to be limited to  labor-related issues.  Teachers' unions should have no say in curriculum. 

We are convinced that the teachings of Darwin, particularly Darwin's teachings on evolution, and Darwin's theories on origins, ought not be taught as fact.  Darwin and Darwin's theories are not generally accepted by contemporary physicists and cosmologists, and, therefore, Darwin and Darwin's theories ought not be accepted whole-cloth by our schools of education, and ought not be presented as fact in public schools. 

Because Richard Dawkins has set himself up as the number one defender of Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, we will go to some length explaining Dawkins' Darwin defenses, and we will do our best to explode Dawkins' Darwin defenses.

We seek to show from Darwin's own hand that Darwin, and Darwin's theory of evolution, are racist at the core.  Darwin was a racist,  Darwin's theory of evolution is racist, and Darwin's theory of origins is racist.

We further seek to show that Darwin's theory of evolution is not scientific.  We show that racism, more than science, was behind Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, and Darwin's theory of origins.

Some of the terms commonly used on this site are:  Darwin, Dawkins, schools, public schools, education, gun control, teachers, John Dewey, Littleton, racist, racism , school choice, African American, Sidney Hook, evolution, and Mike Carrier.

Bottom line--good schools require work.  Good schools do not just happen.  We need good schools, if we are to have a good nation.

This site features a frank presentation of issues facing parents, taxpayers and schools in reforming schools in the twenty-first century.  Good Schools promotes good schools, and explains what is necessary to achieve good schools.  We are convinced that good schools can be obtained only with sound curriculum, which does not include the teaching of Darwin's theory of origin, or Darwin's theory of evolution.  We believe that local school boards need to be empowered, and the influence of teachers' unions ought to be limited to  labor-related issues.  Teachers' unions should have no say in curriculum. 

We are convinced that the teachings of Darwin, particularly Darwin's teachings on evolution, and Darwin's theories on origins, ought not be taught as fact.  Darwin and Darwin's theories are not generally accepted by contemporary physicists and cosmologists, and, therefore, Darwin and Darwin's theories ought not be accepted whole-cloth by our schools of education, and ought not be presented as fact in public schools. 

Because Richard Dawkins has set himself up as the number one defender of Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, we will go to some length explaining Dawkins' Darwin defenses, and we will do our best to explode Dawkins' Darwin defenses.

We seek to show from Darwin's own hand that Darwin, and Darwin's theory of evolution, are racist at the core.  Darwin was a racist,  Darwin's theory of evolution is racist, and Darwin's theory of origins is racist.

We further seek to show that Darwin's theory of evolution is not scientific.  We show that racism, more than science, was behind Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, and Darwin's theory of origins.

Some of the terms commonly used on this site are:  Darwin, Dawkins, schools, public schools, education, gun control, teachers, John Dewey, Littleton, racist, racism , school choice, African American, Sidney Hook, evolution, and Mike Carrier.

Bottom line--good schools require work.  Good schools do not just happen.  We need good schools, if we are to have a good nation.

This site features a frank presentation of issues facing parents, taxpayers and schools in reforming schools in the twenty-first century.  Good Schools promotes good schools, and explains what is necessary to achieve good schools.  We are convinced that good schools can be obtained only with sound curriculum, which does not include the teaching of Darwin's theory of origin, or Darwin's theory of evolution.  We believe that local school boards need to be empowered, and the influence of teachers' unions ought to be limited to  labor-related issues.  Teachers' unions should have no say in curriculum. 

We are convinced that the teachings of Darwin, particularly Darwin's teachings on evolution, and Darwin's theories on origins, ought not be taught as fact.  Darwin and Darwin's theories are not generally accepted by contemporary physicists and cosmologists, and, therefore, Darwin and Darwin's theories ought not be accepted whole-cloth by our schools of education, and ought not be presented as fact in public schools. 

Because Richard Dawkins has set himself up as the number one defender of Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, we will go to some length explaining Dawkins' Darwin defenses, and we will do our best to explode Dawkins' Darwin defenses.

We seek to show from Darwin's own hand that Darwin, and Darwin's theory of evolution, are racist at the core.  Darwin was a racist,  Darwin's theory of evolution is racist, and Darwin's theory of origins is racist.

We further seek to show that Darwin's theory of evolution is not scientific.  We show that racism, more than science, was behind Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, and Darwin's theory of origins.

Some of the terms commonly used on this site are:  Darwin, Dawkins, schools, public schools, education, gun control, teachers, John Dewey, Littleton, racist, racism , school choice, African American, Sidney Hook, evolution, and Mike Carrier.

Bottom line--good schools require work.  Good schools do not just happen.  We need good schools, if we are to have a good nation.