Texas Board of Education at it again Banning textbooks

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by Joebill

Next time I see the professors from university, I'll tell them you told me humans aren't primates. I'm sure they'll find it amusing.

You must not have noticed I did go look it up and changed it to 5-8 million years for the divergance.

Around 60-90 million years ago, the mammal's ancestor was a small rodent-like creature. I don't know of anyone saying Primates/Apes went back that far.

I've got an idea-- why don't you try sharing your insights with a professor of a university? They could probably use a good belly-laugh with you.

What you are claiming is that the common ancestor of all primates lived 5 to 8 million years ago. That is the time frame for the common ancestor of the primate species Pan troglodites and the primate species Homo sapiens. Humans and chimps are not the only freaking primates, you gently misinformed individual. It is blatantly obvious that you do not have a clue what a primate is and isn't, even after reading a definition, and you are doing yourself a disservice with every innocently misinformed post that you make.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0418073440.htm

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=19101213

http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/site...ew0/chapter12/

http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB...asp?Doi=105145

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-ancient-skull

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...=out-on-a-limb

http://books.google.com/books?id=OQ1...imates&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=TSa...rimates&f=true

http://books.google.com/books?id=i5z...imates&f=false

http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprima...t_primates.htm

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evoluti...-primates.html

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar...te_discovered/

http://www.answers.com/topic/fossil-primates

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-pdm012307.php

http://www.physorg.com/news161954864.html

http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/faculty/wal...ateOrigins.pdf

http://www.springerlink.com/content/dh230k203j04149u/

http://www.ltcc.edu/data/ResourcePDF...ctureWeek6.pdf

http://animals.howstuffworks.com/mam...ates-info6.htm

http://edoc.bbaw.de/volltexte/2009/1..._03_Martin.pdf

Note that none of those are from Wikipedia.

Why don't you go back and learn some of the absolute basics of evolutionary history before you go off sticking both feet in your mouth again? Such as, oh, I donno, knowing the difference between an "ape" a "primate", for instance? (This one ain't gonna change)

(Edited to conceal true opinions, by decree of moderation)

[GeoffC]

... deep breaths now guys .....

[WT Sharpe]

I've found Wikipedia to be a valuable resource. BS and sloppy research does creep in from time to time, but the ground rules they have established allow for self-correction. Hence you will usually see "Citation needed" and "The impartiality of this article is in dispute" tags placed in areas that are questionable. Like any research tool, it is imperfect and a skeptical attitude must be maintained, but the same could be said of The Encyclopaedia Britannica (which is another excellent source of information). To err is human, and no one escapes it entirely.

[Joebill]

Originally Posted by tompe

It is not a question about who to believe. There are rules. And you need sources for everything. These rules can have strange result sometimes but overall they increase the reliability.

You should understand I have had encounters with Flat Earthers, I believe the Earth is a sphere. They said I was delusional and ignorant.

I have had encounters with Klansmen, who said I was ignorant and a 'n-lover'. Only, they used the entire word.

The list goes on.

So, as you can see, someone calling me ignorant won't work on me. I'm using your post to reply to, as I have no further time this milllenia for ardeegee.

[poohbear_nc]

This thread is being closed (temporarily) to allow the MobileRead Moderation team to review the numerous complaints and reports we have received over the past few days, and to allow members to step back, breathe, and cool down.

[Alexander Turcic]

Most of you are most certainly aware of our guidelines. So please let me remind you that personal attacks are not tolerated at MobileRead. Neglecting this rule will most certainly lead to a warning and/or ban. If anyone likes to pick up fights or have personal vendettas in public, I am sure there are better places elsewhere on the Net.

Thank you.

This thread has been reopened.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Joebill

So, as you can see, someone calling me ignorant won't work on me. I'm using your post to reply to, as I have no further time this milllenia for ardeegee.

But you did not reply to my point that all encyclopedias (including wikipedia) have rules and methods used when producing them and they will cause some errors in particular cases but they will overall increase reliability. So your observation in the case of Wikipedia is not enough evidence to say that it is worse than any other encyclopedias or similar sources.

[Joebill]

Originally Posted by tompe

But you did not reply to my point that all dictionaries (including wikipedia) have rules and methods used when producing them and they will cause some errors in particular cases but they will overall increase reliability. So your observation in the case of Wikipedia is not enough evidence to say that it is worse than any other dictionary or similar soruces.

I only ever used dictionaries for checking my spelling.

Which leads to an interesting job interview... an interviewer told me I had misspelled words in my resume, and pointed to a company name. And said it was wrong, and I shouldn't rely on spell checkers.

I politely observed that is how they spelled it. And that I used hard cover dictionaries to double check spell checkers.

I even suggested he call them, it was a local call, he refused.

I thanked him for the interview, and left. I wondered how he could claim such... they advertised often back then. He couldn't help butk now he was wrong.

After I got home, I double checked very word. All spelled correctly.

I shrugged it off, and made ready for my next interview. I eventually got hired.

[Joebill]

Okay. I decided to check with relatives. I could be misremembering. The relative suggested I checked the Smithsonian's web site.

So, I did.


From the Smithsonian/National Zoo:

http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Publicatio...imatethink.cfm

Scientists are hotly debating these questions, but one thing is clear: differences between humans and other primates arent as black and white as once was thought. Intelligence appears more a matter of degree, developing gradually throughout the primate lineage rather than sprouting magically when humans first arrived on the scene. Many of the features of our brain that support higher cognitive functions, such as language and mathematicsor at least their precursorsmay well be present in ape and monkey brains, and in the brains of long-extinct relatives like the Australopithecines.


http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/Pr...ts/default.cfm

About Primates
There are more 300 species of primates in the world from humans and apes to monkeys and prosimians ("premonkeys"). Several primate species have been discovered in Brazil and Madagascar in recent years.

http://newsdesk.si.edu/factsheets/di...-origins-facts

Modern humans are great apes, one of the major groups on the primate family tree.

http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/Primates/

About Primates

There are 376 species of primates in the world—from humans and apes to monkeys and prosimians ("premonkeys").

If you read this far, I drop the subject of primates.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by Joebill

I only ever used dictionaries for checking my spelling.

...He couldn't help butk now he was wrong....

Maybe you should start using spell checkers!

with you, man. Everyone makes those kind of typos (I know I do). It just seemed ironic given the topic of that post was spelling!

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Joebill

I only ever used dictionaries for checking my spelling.

Sorry, I of course meant "encyclopedia" and not "dictionary".

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by tompe

But you did not reply to my point that all encyclopedias (including wikipedia) have rules and methods used when producing them and they will cause some errors in particular cases but they will overall increase reliability. So your observation in the case of Wikipedia is not enough evidence to say that it is worse than any other encyclopedias or similar sources.

Originally Posted by Joebill

I only ever used dictionaries for checking my spelling.

Which leads to an interesting job interview... an interviewer told me I had misspelled words in my resume, and pointed to a company name. And said it was wrong, and I shouldn't rely on spell checkers.

I politely observed that is how they spelled it. And that I used hard cover dictionaries to double check spell checkers.

I even suggested he call them, it was a local call, he refused.

I thanked him for the interview, and left. I wondered how he could claim such... they advertised often back then. He couldn't help butk now he was wrong.

After I got home, I double checked very word. All spelled correctly.

I shrugged it off, and made ready for my next interview. I eventually got hired.

can we get off the wiki issue?

there is a meaty topic here that deserves discussion and having tempers blown over wiki is silly.

shall we return to the topic at hand?

[tompe]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

can we get off the wiki issue?

there is a meaty topic here that deserves discussion and having tempers blown over wiki is silly.

shall we return to the topic at hand?

What tempers?

I would say that it is related. If you cannot evaluate sources and had a lot of mis-conceptions than this will lead to things like banning of textbooks.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by tompe

What tempers?

I would say that it is related. If you cannot evaluate sources and had a lot of mis-conceptions than this will lead to things like banning of textbooks.

Did you Read the posts above?

I think everyone knows what wikipedia is and what it's reliability is. This topic is not about that, it's about Textbooks for teaching our children....in particular the actions of the Texas School Board in relation to those textbooks.

[citac]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

There is much to commend that point of view, however I would add my own belief that anyone who lives in Western Civilization who has never read the Hebrew Bible as well cannot consider himself to be adequately educated. It wasn't just New Testament teachings that helped to mold Western civilization. In addition, I think the influence of pre-Christian Greek and Roman thought has not been given it's due in the schools. Before Christianity shaped modern Western thought, Greek and Roman philosophy and political models shaped Christianity and the Church. There have been other peripheral influences over the centuries, but I think these are the main ones to understand if we are to consider ourselves as having a functional education in Western culture.

As for teaching about Islam, I think it's important as well if for no better reason than it is the belief system of a large portion of the world's population (as well as many here in the United States), and in our ever-shrinking globe we need to learn how to deal amiably with other cultures.

I have come late into this topic so I apologize if the thread isclosed or if this has been discussed, but I still can't help but point out that Islam has also had an influence on Western civilization and science. Wikipedia has an entry on that. Re: Greek and Roman thought:

Main article: Arab transmission of the Classics to the West

Following the fall of the Roman Empire and the dawn of the Middle Ages, many texts from Classical Antiquity had been lost to the Europeans. In the Middle East however, many of these Greek texts (such as Aristotle) were translated from Greek into Syriac during the 6th and 7th centuries by Nestorian, Melkites or Jacobite monks living in Palestine, or by Greek exiles from Athens or Edessa who visited Islamic Universities. Many of these texts however were then kept, translated, and developed upon by the Islamic world, especially in centers of learning such as Baghdad, where a “House of Wisdom”, with thousands of manuscripts existed as soon as 832. These texts were translated again into European languages during the Middle Ages.[1] Eastern Christians played an important role in exploiting this knowledge, especially through the Christian Aristotelician School of Baghdad in the 11th and 12th centuries.

Also,

The method of algorism for performing arithmetic with Indian-Arabic numerals was developed by al-Khwarizmi (hence the word “Algorithm”) in the 9th century, and introduced in Europe by Leonardo Fibonacci (1170–1250).[8] A translation of the Algebra by al-Kharizmi is known as early as 1145, by a certain Robert of Chester. Ibn al-Haytham (Alhazen, 980-1037) compiled treaties on optical sciences, which were used as references by Newton and Descartes.

What have the Romans ever done for us, I wonder?