| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Brian Westley" |
| Date: |
20 Dec 2005 11:16:04 PM |
| Object: |
Judge says creationists lied under oath |
Great stuff, several times the judge out-and-out SAYS that
the creationist school board members deliberately LIED UNDER OATH:
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/educate/ktzmllrdvr122005opn.pdf
....
Although Baksa claims he does not recall Bonsell identifying
"creationism" as the subject with which he wanted to share equal
time with evolution, nor that Bonsell mentioned "creationism" at
any time up until April 1, 2003, we do not find his testimony on
this point to be credible.
....
It is notable, and in fact incredible that Bonsell disclaimed any
interest in creationism during his testimony, despite the admission
by his counsel in Defendants' opening statement that Bonsell had
such an interest.
Simply put, Bonsell repeatedly failed to testify in a truthful manner
about this and other subjects. Finally, Bonsell not only wanted prayer
in schools and creationism taught in science class, he also wanted to
inject religion into the social studies curriculum, as evidenced by his
statement to Baksa that he wanted students to learn more about the
Founding Fathers and providing Baksa with a book entitled "Myth
of Separation" by David Barton.
....
Finally, although Buckingham, Bonsell, and other defense witnesses
denied the reports in the news media and contradicted the great
weight of the evidence about what transpired at the June 2004 Board
meetings, the record reflects that these witnesses either testified
inconsistently, or lied outright under oath on several occasions,
and are accordingly not credible on these points.
....
As we will discuss in more detail below, the inescapable truth is that
both Bonsell and Buckingham lied at their January 3, 2005 depositions
about their knowledge of the source of the donation for Pandas, which
likely contributed to Plaintiffs' election not to seek a temporary
restraining order at that time based upon a conflicting and incomplete
factual record. This mendacity was a clear and deliberate attempt to
hide the source of the donations by the Board President and the Chair
of the Curriculum Committee to further ensure that Dover students
received a creationist alternative to Darwin's theory of evolution.
We are accordingly presented with further compelling evidence that
Bonsell and Buckingham sought to conceal the blatantly religious
purpose behind the ID Policy.
....
---
Merlyn LeRoy
.
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 10:46:57 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 05:16:04 -0000, Brian Westley <westley@visi.com>
wrote:
Great stuff, several times the judge out-and-out SAYS that
the creationist school board members deliberately LIED UNDER OATH:
Of course they did. For a 'greater good' of course.
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/educate/ktzmllrdvr122005opn.pdf
...
Although Baksa claims he does not recall Bonsell identifying
"creationism" as the subject with which he wanted to share equal
time with evolution, nor that Bonsell mentioned "creationism" at
any time up until April 1, 2003, we do not find his testimony on
this point to be credible.
...
It is notable, and in fact incredible that Bonsell disclaimed any
interest in creationism during his testimony, despite the admission
by his counsel in Defendants' opening statement that Bonsell had
such an interest.
Simply put, Bonsell repeatedly failed to testify in a truthful manner
about this and other subjects. Finally, Bonsell not only wanted prayer
in schools and creationism taught in science class, he also wanted to
inject religion into the social studies curriculum, as evidenced by his
statement to Baksa that he wanted students to learn more about the
Founding Fathers and providing Baksa with a book entitled "Myth
of Separation" by David Barton.
...
Finally, although Buckingham, Bonsell, and other defense witnesses
denied the reports in the news media and contradicted the great
weight of the evidence about what transpired at the June 2004 Board
meetings, the record reflects that these witnesses either testified
inconsistently, or lied outright under oath on several occasions,
and are accordingly not credible on these points.
...
As we will discuss in more detail below, the inescapable truth is that
both Bonsell and Buckingham lied at their January 3, 2005 depositions
about their knowledge of the source of the donation for Pandas, which
likely contributed to Plaintiffs' election not to seek a temporary
restraining order at that time based upon a conflicting and incomplete
factual record. This mendacity was a clear and deliberate attempt to
hide the source of the donations by the Board President and the Chair
of the Curriculum Committee to further ensure that Dover students
received a creationist alternative to Darwin's theory of evolution.
We are accordingly presented with further compelling evidence that
Bonsell and Buckingham sought to conceal the blatantly religious
purpose behind the ID Policy.
...
---
Merlyn LeRoy
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Kess" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
20 Dec 2005 11:37:56 PM |
|
|
Specific creationists lied under oath. Secularists have done the same,
and so have people from every demographic.
Dispite popular belief, creationists aren't bad people. Undereducated,
sure, but I think we need to realize that this is the voice of a few
people, not everyone. Yes, the Dover people are scum, but one can't
make generalizations based on that. In the end of the day though,
they're just human beings.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DaveJr" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 12:03:12 AM |
|
|
"Martin Kess" <MartinKess@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1135143476.025609.42970@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Specific creationists lied under oath. Secularists have done the same,
and so have people from every demographic.
Dispite popular belief, creationists aren't bad people. Undereducated,
sure, but I think we need to realize that this is the voice of a few
people, not everyone. Yes, the Dover people are scum, but one can't
make generalizations based on that. In the end of the day though,
they're just human beings.
They are liars. They are also manipulative.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
24 Dec 2005 10:43:05 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 23:03:12 -0700, "DaveJr" <davesbrain@qwest.net>
wrote:
"Martin Kess" <MartinKess@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1135143476.025609.42970@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Specific creationists lied under oath. Secularists have done the same,
and so have people from every demographic.
Dispite popular belief, creationists aren't bad people. Undereducated,
sure, but I think we need to realize that this is the voice of a few
people, not everyone. Yes, the Dover people are scum, but one can't
make generalizations based on that. In the end of the day though,
they're just human beings.
They are liars. They are also manipulative.
The leaders like AIG, the ICR etc know they're lying. But lying for
God is acceptable according to their "morality" - it's a long and
dishonourable tradition going back to the best part of two millennia.
Their followers have neither the intelligence nor knowledge to see
through it and repeat it. But while the first time could be an honest
error, repetition when they've been corrected is something else.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "erikc" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 02:33:55 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 23:03:12 -0700, "DaveJr" <davesbrain@qwest.net> wrote:
"Martin Kess" <MartinKess@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1135143476.025609.42970@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Specific creationists lied under oath. Secularists have done the same,
and so have people from every demographic.
Dispite popular belief, creationists aren't bad people. Undereducated,
sure, but I think we need to realize that this is the voice of a few
people, not everyone. Yes, the Dover people are scum, but one can't
make generalizations based on that. In the end of the day though,
they're just human beings.
They are liars. They are also manipulative.
More to the point, many of them are psychopaths.
http://www.truthbeknown.com/mental.htm
http://www.911-strike.com/government.htm
http://www.rickross.com/reference/gatekeepers/gatekeepers8.html
http://www.hiddenmysteries.org/religion/christianity/religionillness.shtml
http://www.epinions.com/content_113770204804
http://www.hal-pc.org/~rcanup/sap.html
Erikc (alt.atheist #002) | "An Fhirinne in aghaidh an tSaoil."
BAAWA Knight (retired) | "The Truth against the World."
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 08:01:50 AM |
|
|
In <1135143476.025609.42970@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "Martin Kess"
<MartinKess@gmail.com> wrote:
Dispite popular belief, creationists aren't bad people.
The leadership is. The followers may be just ill educated and mislead but
the leadership of the "creationist" movement knows they're lying.
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"We need everything you've got"
http://makeashorterlink.com/?R2726554C
Forgotten Already
http://makeashorterlink.com/?H1233272C
Feds are treating Louisiana like enemy
"...it may be that they may have written us off."
http://makeashorterlink.com/?O21E51C1C
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Marc Adler" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 04:27:45 AM |
|
|
Martin Kess wrote:
Dispite popular belief, creationists aren't bad people. Undereducated,
sure, but I think we need to realize that this is the voice of a few
people, not everyone. Yes, the Dover people are scum, but one can't
make generalizations based on that. In the end of the day though,
they're just human beings.
Sure, they're human beings. They're law-abiding citizens who would
probably make good neighbors, good friends, good relatives if they
married someone you were related to.
But that's not the point. The point is that they're trying to subvert
not only science education, but all education in this country. Any
patriot worth his salt will stand up to these medieval obfuscators,
because they are what is dragging this country down. We spend more on
missiles than we do on our children's education - what the ***** is up
with that? How will this country survive? How will what we believe in
survive? Private schools are not the answer. School vouchers? The
Haliburton of the education industry. No matter how you look at it,
private school education will always cost more, while the cost of
providing even very good education for everyone free of charge would
take only a tiny sliver of the budget compared to our wasteful military
spending.
If you love this country and what it stands for, you'll fight these
backward-looking America-haters, because it's the religious right who
are the ones that hate the freedoms enshrined in the constitution and
embodied in modern American culture. It's the religious right that are
the ones who fear liberty and the light it shines on the dark corners
they inhabit. It's the religious right who want to sound the death
knell of the great American experiment. Forget Bin Laden, it's the
religious right who are the biggest threat to our American way of life.
You're right. They're nothing more than decent people who are fighting
for what they believe in. But what they believe in is irreconcilably at
odds with what it is to be an American. And they must be stopped by all
legal means.
Marc
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Kess" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 06:02:14 AM |
|
|
Amen brother.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 07:52:45 AM |
|
|
Marc Adler wrote:...
We spend more on missiles than we do on our children's education...
False. In the US, tax support for government schooling educaton exceeds
the DOD budget.
...Private schools are not the answer. School vouchers? The Haliburton of the education industry. No matter how you look at > it, private school education will always cost more...
False, again. Across the US and internationally, independent and
parochial schools cost less to operate and do a better job than State
schools, on average.
...while the cost of providing even very good education for everyone free of charge would take only a tiny sliver of the budget > compared to our wasteful military spending.
School is expensive. Education is potentially cheap, and probably needs
no tax subsidy at all. Benjamin Franklin attended school for two years,
from age 10 to 12. Thomas Edison left school at 13. Hiram Maxim left
school at 13, and apprenticed to a machinist. The Beagle Captain,
Robert FitzRoy, who took Darwin around the world and later founded the
British Weather Service, attended the Admiralty school from age 12 to
14, during which time he studied Math through Calculus, History,
classical and modern languages, navigation, ship handling and gunnery,
fencing, and dance. David Farragut joined the US Navy at 9, went to
sea at 11, and commanded his first ship at 15.
Gerard Lassibile and Lucia Navarro Gomez, ["Organization and Efficiency
of Educational Systems: some empirical findings", pg. 16,
__Comparative Education__, Vol. 36 #1, 2000, Feb.]
"Furthermore, the regression results indicate that countries where
private education is more widespread perform significantly better than
countries where it is more limited. The result showing the private
sector to be more efficient is similar to those found in other contexts
with individual data (see, for example, Psucharopoulos, 1987; Jiminez,
et. al, 1991).
This finding should convince countries to reconsider policies that
reduce the role of the private sector in the field of education".
See also...
Joshua Angrist, "Randomized Trials and Quasi-Experiments in Education
Research",___NBER Reporter___, summer, 2003.
http://www.nber.org/reporter/summer03/angrist.html
"One of the most controversial innovations highlighted by NCLB is
school choice. In a recently published paper,(5) my collaborators and I
studied what appears to be the largest school voucher program to date.
This program provided over 125,000 pupils from poor neighborhoods in
the country of Colombia with vouchers that covered approximately half
the cost of private secondary school. Colombia is an especially
interesting setting for testing the voucher concept because private
secondary schooling in Colombia is a widely available and often
inexpensive alternative to crowded public schools. (In Bogota, over
half of secondary school students are in private schools.) Moreover,
governments in many poor countries are increasingly likely to
experiment with demand-side education finance programs, including
vouchers.
Although not a randomized trial, a key feature of our Colombia study is
the exploitation of voucher lotteries as the basis for a
quasi-experimental research design. Because demand for vouchers
exceeded supply, the available vouchers were allocated by lottery in
large cities. Our study compares voucher applicants who won a voucher
in the lottery to those who lost. Since the lotteries used random
assignment, losers provide a good control group for winners. A
comparison of voucher winners and losers shows that three years after
the lotteries were held, winners were 15 percentage points more likely
to have attended private school and were about 10 percentage points
more likely to have finished eighth grade, primarily because they were
less likely to repeat grades. Lottery winners also scored 0.2 standard
deviations higher on standardized tests. A follow-up study in progress
shows that voucher winners also were more likely to apply to college.
On balance, our study provides some of the strongest evidence to date
for the possible benefits of demand-side financing of secondary
schooling, at least in a developing country setting.(6)"
See also:...
http://www.worldbank.org/research/journals/wbro/obsfeb97/educate.htm
Policies which give to individual parents the power to determine
which institution, if any, shall receive the pre-college education
subsidy which taxpayers will spend on their children would enhance
overall system performance relative to current US policy, which
restricts a parent's options for the use of the taxpayers' pre-college
education subsidy to schools operated by the NEA/AFT/AFSCME cartel.
I reason axiomatically, here. 1). Most parents love their children
and want their children to outlive them. 2) If you live among people
there are basically three ways to make a living: i) you can beg, ii)
you can steal, iii) you can trade goods and services for other peoples'
goods and services. 3) Most parents accept #2 and prefer 2.iii for
their children. 4) Therefore, most parents want what taxpayers want
from any education system: that children be educated to be contributing
members of society.
Current recipients of the US tax-generated K-12 revenue stream, as a
class, are not as representative of society at large as are parents, as
a class. The current US pre-college (and college, as well) educatioin
industry has become an employment program for State (government,
generally) employees, a source of padded contracts for
politically-connected contractors, a source of campaign support for
supportive (D) politicians, and a venue for State-worshipful
indoctrination.
http://www.rru.com/~meo/hs.minski.html (One page. Marvin Minsky comment
on school. Please read this.)
http://www.educationevolving.org/pdf/Adolescence.pdf
.
|
|
|
| User: "Marc Adler" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 01:21:11 PM |
|
|
wrote:
False. In the US, tax support for government schooling educaton exceeds
the DOD budget.
Do you even know what the real DOD budget is, you naive naive person?
False, again. Across the US and internationally, independent and
parochial schools cost less to operate and do a better job than State
schools, on average.
Sure, in the US they do, because public schools are starved of funds.
Internationally, you have no idea what you're talking about.
no tax subsidy at all. Benjamin Franklin attended school for two years,
Here we go. Welcome to the middle ages, people. Stay at home and don't
look too hard at the sun. And those people over there, who talk
different and look different, kill them.
Marc
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 07:01:32 PM |
|
|
Marc Adler wrote:...
malcolmkirkpatrick wrote:.....
Discussion deleted (Defense, education budgets compared)...
False. In the US, tax support for government schooling educaton exceeds
the DOD budget.
Do you even know what the real DOD budget is, you naive naive person?
Who's naive?
http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/statab/sec10.pdf
(Statistical Abstract of the United States. Defense budget)
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d03/tables/dt156.asp
Digest of Education Statistics. K-12 education budget)
While I'll grant that Defense increases after 2001/09/11 brought the
DOD
budget closer to the aggregate tax-funded K-12 budget, if you add
post-secondary expenses, the education budget pulls way ahead.
Discussion deleted (independent/parochial schools, State schools)...
False, again. Across the US and internationally, independent and
parochial schools cost less to operate and do a better job than State
schools, on average.
Sure, in the US they do, because public schools are starved of funds.
Internationally, you have no idea what you're talking about.
Two points: State (government, generally) schools in the US get more
than enough money. Government schools in the US receive more money per
pupil than independent/parochial schools. US taxpayers spend more, per
pupil, than taxpayers in all but one or two other countries. See OECD
__Education at a Glance__ and TIMSS __Mathematics Achievement in the
Middle School Years__.
"The educational apartheid dividing state and independent schools
was laid bare yesterday by new research into the achievements of bright
children. The most able children are only half as likely to achieve top
grades at A level in state schools as they are in the fee-paying
sector, a government adviser told head teachers. Pupils in private
schools who were among the country's brightest 5 per cent at age 11
were virtually certain to get three A grades in their A levels at 18,
putting them in contention for places at Oxford and Cambridge. But only
a third of the most able 5 per cent went on to achieve the same results
in state schools.
"The research was presented by David Jesson, an education evaluator
based at York University, who said that the state system was suffering
a "severe talent drain". He told heads at the annual conference in
Birmingham of the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust (SSAT), which
represents 2,422 state secondary schools, that Britain's future
economic success depended on identifying and nurturing such children.
"The findings present a huge challenge to Ruth Kelly, the Education
Secretary, as she fights to win Labour support for reform of secondary
schools. Many backbench MPs are suspicious that plans to turn
comprehensives into independent trust schools will lead some to
introduce 'backdoor selection' of bright children.
"Professor Jesson's findings came from research that tracked the
progress of the brightest 5 per cent of pupils between 1999 and 2004,
based on scores in national curriculum tests of English, mathematics
and science at age 11 in primary schools. He was given access to the
data by the Department for Education and Skills (DfES). Professor
Jesson said that it was a myth that the brightest children attended
private schools. In fact, of the 37,500 children in the top 5 per cent,
30,000 went on to state secondaries and 7,500 were educated privately.
By the age 16, all 7,500 in fee-paying schools had achieved at least
five GCSE grades A* or A. But only 20,000 of the original cohort in
state schools reached this standard.
"The professor said that 13,000 students in state schools achieved
three A grades at A level. In independent schools, the number was
7,600. 'At age 11, 7 per cent of all pupils are in independent schools.
By age 16, 25 per cent of those achieving five A* or A grades are in
independent schools. At 18, 33 per cent of those with three As at A
level are in independent schools, and 44 per cent of Oxbridge
entrants,' Professor Jesson said. 'There is the evidence not merely of
a state-independent school divide, but of a state-independent divide on
pupils who are similar. This is evidence of a severe talent drain.'
"Oxbridge admitted 3,500 candidates from the state sector in 2004
and 2,600 from independent schools. Bright children in independent
schools therefore had a 1-in-3 chance of getting into Oxbridge compared
with a less than 1-in-8 chance for students in the state sector."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1890398,00.html
Internationally? See the studies of Lassibile and Giomez, Lockheed and
Jiminez, and Herman Brutsaert's study comparing State schools to
parochial schools in Belgium.
no tax subsidy at all. Benjamin Franklin attended school for two years,
Here we go. Welcome to the middle ages, people. Stay at home and don't
look too hard at the sun. And those people over there, who talk
different and look different, kill them.
Two points:
I. Compulsory schooling, homeschooling, and "the middle ages":
Want something more contemporary?...
a) "Why do I tell you this little boy's story of medusas, rays, and sea
monsters, nearly sixty years after the fact? Because it illustrates, I
believe, how a naturalist is created. A child comes to the edge of deep
water with a mind prepared for wonder....Hands-on experience at the
critical time, not systematic knowledge, is what counts in the making
of a naturalist. Better to be an untutored savage for a while, not to
know the names or anatomical detail. Better to spend long stretches of
time just searching and dreaming." (E.O. Wilson, __Naturalist__ p.
11-12).
"Adults forget the depths of languor into which the adolescent mind
descends with ease. They are prone to undervalue the mental growth that
occurs during daydreaming and aimless wandering. When I focused on the
ponds and stream lying before me, I abandoned all sense of time." (E.
O. Wilson, __Naturalist__ p. 86-87).
b) "The aim of public education is not to spread enlightenment at all;
it is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe
level, to breed a standard citizenry, to put down dissent and
originality. School days, I believe, are the unhappiest in the whole
span of human existence. They are full of dull, unintelligible tasks,
new and unpleasant ordinances, and brutal violations of common sense
and common decency." --H.L. Mencken
c) "There is too much education altogether, especially in American
schools. The only way of educating is to be an example--of what to
avoid, if one can't be the other sort." --Albert Einstein--, __The
World As I See It__, p.22 (Citadel Press).
"Give into the power of the teacher the fewest possible coercive
measures, so that the only source of the pupil's respect for the
teacher is the human and intellectual qualities of the latter."
--Albert Einstein--, __Ideas And Opinions__, p. 61, (Three Rivers
Press).
II. "And those people over there, who talk different and look
different, kill them."
Homeschooling and violence:...
a) [Roland Meighan, "Home-based Education Effectiveness Research and
Some of its Implications", __Educational Review__, Vol. 47, No.3,
1995.]
"The issue of social skills. One edition of Home School Researcher,
Volume 8, Number 3, contains two research reports on the issue of
social skills. The first finding of the study by Larry Shyers (1992)
was that home-schooled students received significantly lower problem
behavior scores than schooled children. His next finding was that
home-schooled children are socially well adjusted, but schooled
children are not so well adjusted. Shyers concludes that we are asking
the wrong question when we ask about the social adjustment of
home-schooled children. The real question is why is the social;
adjustment of schooled children of such poor quality?"
"The second study, by Thomas Smedley (1992), used different test
instruments but comes to the same conclusion, that home-educated
children are more mature and better socialized than those attending
school." ...p. 277
"12. So-called 'school phobia' is actually more likely to be a sign
of mental health, whereas school dependancy is a largely unrecognized
mental health problem"....p.281
b) From: Hyman and Penroe, __Journal of School Psychology__.
"Several studies of maltreatment by teachers suggest that school
children report traumatic symptoms that are similar whether the
traumatic event was physical or verbal abuse (Hyman, et.al.,1988;
Krugman & Krugman, 1984; Lambert, 1990). Extrapolation from these
studies suggests that psychological maltreatment of school children,
especially those who are poor, is fairly widespread in the United
States...."
"In the early 1980s, while the senior author was involved in a
school violence project, an informal survey of a random group of inner
city high school students was conducted. When asked why they
misbehaved in school, the most common response was that they wanted to
get back at teachers who put them down, did not care about them, or
showed disrespect for them, their families, or their culture...."
"...schools do not encourage research regarding possible emotional
maltreatment of students by staff or investigatiion into how this
behavior might affect student misbehavior...."
"...Since these studies focused on teacher-induced PTSD and explored
all types of teacher maltreatment, some of the aggressive feelings were
also caused by physical or sexual abuse. There was no attempt to
separate actual aggression from feelings of aggression. The results
indicated that at least 1% to 2% of the respondents' symptoms were
sufficient for a diagnosis of PTSD. It is known that when this
disorder develops as a result of interpersonal violence, externalizing
symptoms are often the result (American Psychiatric Association,
1994)."
"While 1% to 2% might not seem to be a large percentage of a
school-aged population, in a system like New York City, this would be
about 10,000 children so traumatized by educators that they may suffer
serious, and sometimes lifelong emotional problems (Hyman, 1990; Hyman,
Zelikoff & Clarke, 1988). A good percentage of these students develop
angry and aggressive responses as a result. Yet, emotional abuse and
its relation to misbehavior in schools receives little pedagogical,
psychological, or legal attention and is rarely mentioned in textbooks
on school discipline (Pokalo & Hyman, 1993, Sarno, 1992)."
"As with corporal punishment, the frequency of emotional
maltreatment in schools is too often a function of the socioeconomic
status (SES) of the student population (Hyman, 1990)."
c) "Furthermore, according to a report for UNESCO, cited in Esteve
(2000), the increasing level of pupil-teacher and pupil-pupil violence
in classrooms is directly connected with compulsory schooling. The
report argues that institutional violence against pupils who are
obliged to attend daily at an educational centre until 16 or 18 years
of age increases the frustration of these students to a level where
they externalise it." --Clive Harber, "Schooling as Violence",p. 9,
__Educatioinal Review__V. 54, #1.
d) "...It is almost certainly more damaging for children to be in
school than to out of it. Children whose days are spent herding animals
rather than sitting in a clasroom at least develop skills of problem
solving and independence while the supposedly luckier ones in school
are stunted in their mental, physical, and emotional development by
being rendered pasive, and by having to spend hours each day in a
crowded classroom under the control of an adult who punishes them for
any normal level of activity such as moving or speaking. (DfID, 2000,
pp 12, 13)" Quoted in Clive Harber, "Schooling as Violence",p. 10,
__Educatioinal Review__V. 54, #1.
e) "Violence at school is a prevalent problem. According to a
national survey of school proncipals (National Center for Educational
Statistics, 1998), over 200,000 serious fights or physical attacks
occurred in public schools during the 1996-1997 school year. Serious
violent crimes occurred in approximately 12% of middle schools and 13%
of high schools. Student surveys (Kann et al, 1995) indicate even
higher rates of aggressive behavior. Approximately 16.2% of high school
students nationwide reported involvement in a physical fight at school
during a 30-day period, and 11.8% reported carrying a weapon on school
property (Kann et al, 1995)."
"Research on victims of violence at school suggests that repeated
victimization has detrimental effects on a child's emotional and social
development (Batsche & Knoff, 1995; Hoover, Oliver, & Thomson, 1993;
Olweus, 1993). Victims exhibit higher levels of anxiety and depression,
and lower self-esteem than non-victims (eg., Besag, 1989; Gilmartin,
1987; Greenbaum, 1987; Olweus, 1993). [Karen Brockenbrough, Dewey G.
Cornell, Ann B. Loper, "Aggressive Attitudes Among Victims of Violence
at School", __Education and the Treatment of Children__, V. 25, #3,
Aug., 2002]
f) "Results showed that the over-representation of Black males that
has been cited consistently in the literature begins at the elementary
school level and continues through high school. Black females also were
suspended at a much higher rate than White or Hispanic females at all
three school levels." [Linda M. Raffaele Mendez, Howard M. Knoff;
__Education and the Treatment of Children__, V. 26, #1, Feb. 2003.
g) [__San Francisco Chronicle__, 2005-Nov.-01]
"The UC Berkeley-Stanford study found that all children who attended
preschool at least 15 hours a week displayed more negative social
behaviors such as trouble cooperating or acting up, when compared with
their peers. The discrepancies were most pronounced among children from
higher-income families."
"Children from lower-income families lagged behind their peers who
didn't attend preschool an average of 7 percentage points on the
measure of social behavioral growth. But children from higher-income
families lagged 9 percentage points behind their peers. These wealthier
children did even worse when they attended preschool for 30 hours or
more: They trailed their peers by 15 percentage points."
" 'It's not clear why children from higher-income families exhibit
more negative behaviors than their stay-at-home peers. Fuller
speculated their peers might be in enriching home environments that
include things like trips to the library as well as dance and music
lessons. Other studies have found childcare centers negatively affect
children's social development', said Jay Belsky, director of the
Institute for the Study of Children, Families and Social Issues at
Birkbeck University of London, in an e-mail interview."
" 'It is time to come to grips with what all too many have denied
for all too long, namely, that all disconcerting news about adverse
effects cannot be attributed to low-quality care, which has been more
or less the mantra of the field of child development and the child-care
advocacy community for decades,' Belsky said."
"Criminal violence emerges from social experience, most commonly brutal
social experience visited upon vulnerable children, who suffer for our
neglect of their welfare and return in vengeful wrath to plague us. If
violence is a choice they make, and there- fore their personal
responsibility, as Athens demonstrates it is, our failure to protect
them from having to confront such a choice is a choice we make, just as
a disease epidemic would be implicitly our choice if we failed to
provide vaccines and antibiotics. Such a choice-to tolerate the
brutalization of children as we continue to do-is equally violent and
equally evil, and we reap what we sow. ..." Richard Rhodes, __Why they
Kill: The Discoveries of a Maverick Criminologist__.
"I'm sorry I have so much rage, but you put it in me." --Dylan Klebold
Take care. Homeschool if you can.
http://www.rru.com/~meo/hs.minski.html (One page. Marvin Minsky comment
on school. Please read this.)
http://www.educationevolving.org/pdf/Adolescence.pdf
http://www.schoolchoices.org (Massive site. Useful links).
http://www.educationnews.org/School-Corruption-Betrayal-of-Children-and-the-Public-Trust.htm
http://www.allianceforschoolchoice.org/research_other.php
http://harriettubmanagenda.blogspot.com/
http://www.mackinac.org/article.asp?ID=6853
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneblog/columns/barone_050921b.htm
(teacher training is useless)
http://www.friedmanfoundation.org/index.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 10:59:43 AM |
|
|
Martin Kess wrote:
Specific creationists lied under oath. Secularists have done the
same, and so have people from every demographic.
Dispite popular belief, creationists aren't bad people.
Undereducated, sure, but I think we need to realize that this is the
voice of a few people, not everyone. Yes, the Dover people are scum,
but one can't make generalizations based on that. In the end of the
day though, they're just human beings.
You lie. No scientists lied about evolution in courts
fighting these massive liars.
You lie.
--
"There is a word in Newspeak," said Syme. "I don't
know whether you know it: duckspeak, to quack like
a duck. It is one of those interesting words that
have two contradictory meanings. Applied to an
opponent, it is abuse; applied to someone you agree
with, it is praise."
-George Orwell "Nineteen Eighty-Four"
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 06:21:20 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:59:43 -0600, in alt.atheism , wbarwell
<wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> in <11qj2dtrrucvq49@corp.supernews.com>
wrote:
Martin Kess wrote:
Specific creationists lied under oath. Secularists have done the
same, and so have people from every demographic.
Dispite popular belief, creationists aren't bad people.
Undereducated, sure, but I think we need to realize that this is the
voice of a few people, not everyone. Yes, the Dover people are scum,
but one can't make generalizations based on that. In the end of the
day though, they're just human beings.
You lie. No scientists lied about evolution in courts
fighting these massive liars.
You lie.
Please show where he said that scientists lied about evolution in
courts fighting creationists. I don't see it in his post so you will
have to show me to convince me.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 05:59:00 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 10:59:43 -0600, wbarwell <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com>
wrote:
Martin Kess wrote:
Specific creationists lied under oath. Secularists have done the
same, and so have people from every demographic.
Dispite popular belief, creationists aren't bad people.
Undereducated, sure, but I think we need to realize that this is the
voice of a few people, not everyone. Yes, the Dover people are scum,
but one can't make generalizations based on that. In the end of the
day though, they're just human beings.
You lie. No scientists lied about evolution in courts
fighting these massive liars.
You lie.
Hoo-bloody-ray!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 03:55:41 AM |
|
|
Martin Kess wrote:
Specific creationists lied under oath. Secularists have done the same,
and so have people from every demographic.
Dispite popular belief, creationists aren't bad people. Undereducated,
sure, but I think we need to realize that this is the voice of a few
people, not everyone. Yes, the Dover people are scum, but one can't
make generalizations based on that. In the end of the day though,
they're just human beings.
The purpose of imposing creationism on schools under the phony
name of "intelligent design" is to spread ignorance and increase
the influence and power of religious leaders.
The purpose of science is to reduce ignorance and to empower the
individual, which is anathema to the desires of the religious.
Religions that reject the big bang, abiogenesis, and evolution are
not ignorant, they are malicious.
Bob Dog
Atheist #153 = 1^3 + 5^3 + 3^3
EAC's chief cook and brainwasher
-----
"Sooner or later the despairing Churches will try to get
a world-alliance with something like Fascist tyranny to
check the growth of Atheism. It is their one hope."
- Joseph McCabe
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 12:20:26 AM |
|
|
On 20 Dec 2005 21:37:56 -0800, "Martin Kess" <MartinKess@gmail.com>
wrote:
Specific creationists lied under oath. Secularists have done the same,
and so have people from every demographic.
Dispite popular belief, creationists aren't bad people. Undereducated,
sure, but I think we need to realize that this is the voice of a few
people, not everyone. Yes, the Dover people are scum, but one can't
make generalizations based on that. In the end of the day though,
they're just human beings.
Name one creationist that does not lie outright, knowingly, to support
their dogma.
Just one.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Kess" |
|
| Title: Re: Judge says creationists lied under oath |
21 Dec 2005 12:49:41 AM |
|
|
My grandmother.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
