I’m not going to have time this weekend to do a lot of blogging, so here’s an open thread where you can discuss whatever is on your mind: District 150, Lincoln’s 200th birthday, President Obama’s visit to Peoria, great zombie literature, or whatever.
February 12th 1809… the birthday of one of the greatest contributors to social change…
Charles Darwin.
Yes, he contributed to social change all right. From the social Darwinists of the Gilded Age, to the Nazis and eugenics/abortionist crowd, he germinated more destructive, murderous and otherwise bad ideas than almost anybody you can think of. Other than that, his theory remains the biggest scientific hoax in history, despite Al Gore’s valiant efforts to take the crown with “global warming.”
kcdad… nice call!
I’m, with The Mouse on Darwin. Abraham Lincoln is the one who should be remembered while Charles Darwin should be forgotten.
Mouse… please tell me your post is sarcasm. Do you seriously think that natural selection is “the biggest scientific hoax in history”?! What on earth could you possibly base that claim on? It’s ridiculous enough to say that evolution by natural selection is unsupported by evidence, but to call it a hoax is absurd. Do you call General Relativity a hoax? The germ theory of disease? The atomic theory of matter?
Re: Darwin and natural selection/evolution–
1.Okay, who here understands the difference between microevolution and macroevolution? The first, which is evolution with a species/group has been scientifically shown to exist. The second, which is evolution between/beyond a species/group has NOT been scientifically shown to exist.
2. If Darwin is correct about natural selection, there should be NO efforts to save species from extintion. Think polar bears. If the climate is changing, for whatever reason, and polar bears cannot adapt, they deserve (according to Darwin/natural selection) to become extinct. Hard, but true. So, where do environmental activists who try to save every animal currently in existence go to back up their efforts??
3. General Relativity is NOT related to evolutionary theory.
4. Neither is the germ theory of disease (although it is distantly related) or the atomic theory of matter. Those are NOT Darwin-relevant.
All science is not a matter of blind faitn (think religion) so do not try to bring unrelated matters into a discussion of evolution.
And yes, I was a college biology and secondary ed major with a minor in history.
Um, PJS is reporting that Cahill is OUT at D150. There remain contract issues to work out. Also, the latest rumor, repeat RUMOR, is that Cheryl Sanfilip is out as well, First part of report is confirmed, second part is NOT so do not report it as fact.
My question: what about Hinton? Could Cahill have done what he did for 4 years without the supernintendent knowing about it? UMMM, I think not.
Hot, I heard that Sanfilip is not being asked to leave, but is leaving on her own, perhaps going to work in another local school district. And yes, Hinton needs to go… and a few more!!! I am still in disbelief that they have not immediately asked the consultants to leave, especially with their economic woes… if the consultants cared about the districts economics, they would go too, not putting any more stress on our community and our taxes. Is doesn’t take a Six Sigma decision to figure that out! Could all of this be why Jim hasn’t blogged for a few days?
ben: he is basing it on Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh.
“And yes, I was a college biology and secondary ed major with a minor in history.”
…. no effort to save the polar bears.. or the man lying on the street, homeless… right?
Hotinthecity,
Just because you received your Bio-Hist-Second Ed, etc degree from a Baptist community college in Burnthebooks, Mississippi, doesn’t really qualify you to comment on Darwin.
Can you please name ONE scientist, from Aristotle to Hawking, whose theories/research based conclusions have always been 100% correct? Stop judging Darwin’s work by today’s standards.
By the way, that living organisms ‘adapt’ is a scientifically proven fact.
Oh……………
Lets not confuse ‘adaptation’ with ‘evolution.’
hotinthecity points out one of the great ironies: Darwin’s most passionate defenders today wouldn’t think of writing off the polar bear or the homeless man. They all have to be saved. If you really believe Darwin’s theory, such an effort is both wrong, and will be in vain. It’s survival of the fittest. Let them die. Or, better yet, help them die. Some of us prefer John Locke and Thomas Jefferson. The belief that every human being was created equal; endowed by God with individual rights. We also know that survival of the fittest is nonsense. In the real world, who lives and who dies has little to do with “natural selection”. Were the 50 people who died in that plane crash in Buffalo “unfit”. Of course not. That’s as ridiculous as the superstitious people who would say those 50 offended God and he struck down the plane.
Do you think that the President’s needling of Schock on live national TV was payback to the originator of the “Obama as socialist” meme?
Darwin vs. Creation, etc. I highly recommend the book “The Language of God” by Francis S. Collins, who was the head of the Human Genome Project–a scientist involved in the study of human DNA, etc. This book is his very interesting theory that reconciles evolution with his own belief that God is the creator, etc.
Sharon,
Good book.
Mouse,
You make several good points. ‘Defending’ extremes is never good for business, but lets not confuse Darwin’s theories with Social Darwinism………
Locke and Jefferson’s interpretation of “equal” may have been a bit….skewed, if not in keeping with the times.
“Darwin’s most passionate defenders today wouldn’t think of writing off the polar bear or the homeless man.”
– Passion? This is like saying Allah’s most passionate defenders wouldn’t think twice about blowing a hotel [and themselves] up in the name of god…..
Passion = Good Passion = Evil
“Darwinism” and “Social Darwinism” are directly connected, new voice, that’s the point. The people who justified the social/economic conditions during the late 19th. century took their ideas directly from Darwin. The “Greed is Good” mentality is Darwinism. Get rid of the weak, the stupid, the inconvenient. The ideals of Darwinism, and those of Locke, Jefferson, and Lincoln (and Jesus, of course) are irreconciliable.
Mouse,
You make the point very well that I was trying to make about Darwinism. It sounds harsh, but if, for example, the polar bears cannot adapt, according to Darwinism, they should not survive. Attempts to manipulate nature interfere with natural selection. Climate change is a natural process; the earth has been swinging between colder and warmer eras for millenia, long before man has been able to measure and record. There will be changes in temperature, plant life, weather patterns, etc., as has happened before and will happen again. Adapt or die out, according to Darwin.
BTW — That doesn’t mean that we should have no compassion for others or that we should be careless with natural resources, etc.
New voice, you assume thing about me that are completely untrue. It is interesting how anyone who deviates from the “true believers” regarding Darwin is characterized as some backwoods, redneck, seven-days-of-creation conservative. The fact that anyone questions a theory (still unproven in major aspects) does not mean they are anti-science. And there is a significant difference between adaptation within a species and mivroevolution (intraspecies) both of which have been scientifically proven, and macroevolution (inter-species or cross-species), which has not.
I think everyone that Hinton bought in plus Hinton himself need to go. Clean the administration building out and start fresh. Hinton, Hannah, Broderick also there should be a new Chief of Police in the district someone that has a backbone. Chief Ron Scales needs to go.
Add to that list Mary O’Brian….. he brought her on board too
I’m not arguing that changes aren’t needed in District 150. I’m just wondering from where all these new people will come. For sure, I don’t think the district can afford to buy out any more contracts. Paying one salary per position is enough. Maybe we should just settle for considerably more transparency in the future. Do any of you doubt that blogs have had much to do with Cahill’s departure? We all need to get busy with FOIAs for pertinent info.
What happened to the vote of no confidence? Or are teachers too afraid of losing their jobs to start one?
Darwinism is a term used for various movements or concepts related to ideas of transmutation of species or evolution, including ideas with no connection to the work of Charles Darwin. The meaning of Darwinism has changed over time, and depends on who is using the term.
The term Darwinism was coined by Huxley in 1860, and was used to describe evolutionary concepts, including earlier concepts such as Malthusianism and Herbert Spencer’s – the man who coined the term “Survival of the Fittest.”
I hear what you are saying Mouse, but I will argue that ‘Darwinism’ and/or ‘Social Darwinism’ has nothing to do with Darwin’s work.
Hotinthecity,
My apologies. I am not a “true believer”. Actually, it was this type of language that set me off. Sure, their are members of both camps – extreme supporters of Darwin’s theories, and those who adhere to anyone of a number of I.D. theories, etc. Whether Darwin’s theories are correct or not is NOT the point! His contributions to [life] science are irrefutable.
Like I said, you cannot judge Darwin by todays’ standards. I would also argue that Darwin would not have approved of the way his theories, etc were twisted by a bunch of pseudo-scientific ‘social scientists’.
Are you going to kill Aristotle because his ‘periodic table’ consisted of four elements [earth, air, water, fire]?
…and yes..those who still support Darwin’s ideas whole-heartedly, need a reality check.
Imaswede: First of all, the teachers would have to have strong union leadership before any such vote could even be considered. Secondly, as far as the superintendent is concerned, a superintendent search shouldn’t be speeded up–one is already underway–and the district certainly shouldn’t risk buying out another contract. I think the departure of Cahill, the slowing down of the decision to close a high school, etc., the committee to look over the budget, an April election with the possibility of electing new union leadership–all are steps in the right direction. Personally, I think the administration and board realize that the public (I think, with much thanks to the blogs) is beginning to take a more active interest in what is happening to their tax dollars. My personal opinion is that a little patience might be in order now–to see if a saner plan for saving money might be pursued at this point–with more transparency and more deliberation. Meanwhile, I would like to see more of you on the blog filing FIOA requests on issues that are cause for concern. I hear a lot of talk about consultants. Has anyone filed an FOIA to find out who they are and how much they are paid, etc.? You don’t have to leave your computer to file an FOIA–it’s a very simple process–and anyone can do it. Obama recently stated that FOIA is the best way to bring transparency to government. Maybe everyone isn’t like our recently departed governnor who evidently failed to respond to many FOIA requests. I would but I already file more than my fair share. Once you get the information, you need to find an outlet for publishing your findings–the blog and/or other media. I have used my findings to write a couple of letters to the editor in the Community Word and a couple in the West Peoria News.
Sharon –
Yes. I requested that information on January 30, and D150 informed me it would take longer than 7 days to get the information. I’ll post it as soon as I receive it.
Glad to hear it, C.J. Blogging provides the perfect opportunity for giving the public the information they deserve to have. I have one pending that is also taking longer than 7 days. I understand why my mine is taking longer. I just hope I can afford it–if it’s taking this long that means more pages at 25 cents each.
Why does D150 charge $.25 / page (after the x number of free pages as I recall) vs. other bureaucracies charging a flat $.10/page unless color copies or oversized?
Karrie, that’s interesting – 10 cents?? My first time around, I made the mistake of not looking at the copies before I left (and I had even been warned) and ended up paying $50.00 and every other page was blank (except for one line of nothing at the top).
@ hot in the city: The terms “microevolution” and “macroevolution” have no basis in science. It is a distinction made only by people trying to argue against natural selection. Give your “microevolution” enough time, along severe selection pressure and/or population separation, and voila you get massive genetic drift and a new species or two or three.
@ many ppl: Evolution by natural selection and social Darwinism are related only in name. The former is a fantastic model for explaining the diversity of life on this planet. The latter is a social policy that says we should take a no-holds-barred approach to survival of the fittest. The validity of one has nothing to do with the validity of the other.
@ hot in the city: My point about Germ Theory, Atomic Theory, and GR is that they are all, along with evolution by natural selection, among the basic pillars of our understanding of the world around us. They are all backed by mountains of evidence. If you accept the validity of GR, which we as regular folk have no way to ‘see’ or ‘prove’ in our own daily lives, why wouldn’t you accept other theories backed by similar evidence and experimentation by the same the same scientific process?
Evolution is one of those issues that is so plagued by buzzwords, rhetoric, and politics that it’s often difficult to clear away the forest and discuss the specifics of the issue. It’s unfortunate that any such conversation is forced to wander hither and yon by zealots, but never allowed to dive right into the heart of the matter.
Evolution is not The Holy Truth From Above; it is a theory that, like germ/atomic/GR theories does a great job of explaining observations while also allowing us to make predictions about the future. If you feel that (a) one cannot derive predictions/experiments from it, or (b) you have in fact already seen it dis-proven through experimentation, I suggest you write a paper on it. You’d be a rock star overnight (well, okay only amongst scientists and other educated types, but famous nonetheless :-). Maybe someday we’ll look upon natural selection as we currently do Newtonian gravity (i.e. a kick-ass approximation, but not as powerful or deep as the current state-of-the-art understanding). I don’t know about you, but I hardly think Newtonian gravity is a failure – it may be deprecated and overshadowed by GR, but that doesn’t make Newton’s work any less groundbreaking or brilliant; it moved science forward by generations and we should all be thankful for that.
I’m on a time out from any and all Blog Peoria blogs. My home IP address appears to have been banned. Could someone ask Mr. Pundit when my timeout will be lifted? I’d like to be able to read East Bluff Barbie, Morton Malaise, KiD, Keep Passing Open Windows, and my other friends’ blogs.
The Mouse seems to be creating one of the more outrageous standards for valuing a particular thinker: What some who believed him did with that information. Darwin talked about natural selection, some Nazi’s used that reasoning to kill Jews, therefore Darwin is bad. By that line of argument, shouldn’t Christ be put in the same boat? Apart for Nazis being, for the most part, CHRISTIANS (and likely using their belief in Christ as some level of justification for their actions), the teachings of Christ and the Bible in general have been used as a basis for all sorts of horrible things from the Inquisition to slavery. What a few — or even thousands — do “in your name” doesn’t disqualify the work.
But keep your myopic standard, Mouse. It’s what keeps you in the 19th century and not fully evolved.
MOUSE:
“hotinthecity points out one of the great ironies: Darwin’s most passionate defenders today wouldn’t think of writing off the polar bear or the homeless man.”
If you go back and read hotinthecity”s post, the irony is that he didn’t mention the homeless.
“2. If Darwin is correct about natural selection, there should be NO efforts to save species from extintion. Think polar bears. If the climate is changing, for whatever reason, and polar bears cannot adapt, they deserve (according to Darwin/natural selection) to become extinct. Hard, but true. So, where do environmental activists who try to save every animal currently in existence go to back up their efforts??”
THAT is what he wrote. He was being critical of people who wish to protect the polar bears and other species “unable to adapt”… like homeless people. He presumes we should do NOTHING to save these unadaptable members of our planet. “HARD, BUT TRUE.”
It is those defenders of Darwin that seem to care the most for the poor, sick and downtrodden… and the critics who want to ironically say “survival of the fittest”.
You have to be on your toes when you read my posts: irony, sarcasm and rhetoric are the tools of this rascal.
NV:”…and yes..those who still support Darwin’s ideas whole-heartedly, need a reality check.”
Which ideas are in need of a reality check… Darwin created theories, not truths. Since when would a person of your obvious intelligence, wit and critical abilities (not to mention highly evolved fashion sense) criticize supporting the formulation of theories based upon observation?
kcdad,
Philosophy….from a godless communist?
Sure, I ‘support’ a number of Darwin’s theories. I do, however realize we are not dealing in absolutes……………………..
What would the world be without a good theory or two?
I simply warn against taking an extreme position, one way or the other. Dare I say it all boils down to a matter of faith? NOT blind faith to be sure! Faith belongs to the individual my commie-pinko friend. It is all open to interpretation.
What Ben wrote sounds good to me. No need for me to carry on………………..
?? ????????!
hot in the city wrote: “You make the point very well that I was trying to make about Darwinism. It sounds harsh, but if, for example, the polar bears cannot adapt, according to Darwinism, they should not survive. Attempts to manipulate nature interfere with natural selection. Climate change is a natural process; the earth has been swinging between colder and warmer eras for millenia, long before man has been able to measure and record. There will be changes in temperature, plant life, weather patterns, etc., as has happened before and will happen again. Adapt or die out, according to Darwin.
BTW — That doesn’t mean that we should have no compassion for others or that we should be careless with natural resources, etc.”
kcdad — THAT is what I wrote. Go back and look.
Interesting that you left off the last sentence quoted above to make your point. I was not being critical of those who make efforts to save anyone of anything, just pointing out that doing so did not fit into Darwinism. Maybe you should get off your toes for a while and take a deep breath! 😉
People can dispute elements of Darwin’s theories, as many others, and still recognize the scientific advances he did make. There is a difference.
new voice — apology accepted. I have been guilty of the same thing. I think we agree more than we disagree.
kcdad,
When I quote above, I am referring to the sceond post I wrote on this subject, not the first. It was a follow-up to my previous comment. I realized after I posted that you were only looking at the first one. But please consider the totality of comments before passing judgment. Thanks. Now back to Bradley bkb and getting Valentine’s day dinner going.
Those of you interested in District 150 need to take a trip over to the Peoria Pundit and Anti-Pundit’s blogs (where Hot in the City and I have just been).
“BTW — That doesn’t mean that we should have no compassion for others or that we should be careless with natural resources, etc. ”
Do you mean this????
How can that statement and this one be issued by the same mind?
“2. If Darwin is correct about natural selection, there should be NO efforts to save species from extintion. Think polar bears. If the climate is changing, for whatever reason, and polar bears cannot adapt, they deserve (according to Darwin/natural selection) to become extinct. Hard, but true. So, where do environmental activists who try to save every animal currently in existence go to back up their efforts??”
Or did you mean that we should should only have compassion for things that look like us?
NV:”I simply warn against taking an extreme position, one way or the other. Dare I say it all boils down to a matter of faith? NOT blind faith to be sure! Faith belongs to the individual my commie-pinko friend. It is all open to interpretation.”
yeah… faith… that is what Darwin based his theories on… that is what Einstein based his theories on… that is what Jenner, Salk, Edison, Galileo, Hawking, Marx, Santayana, Ortega y Gassett, Friere and every other genius based their theories on.
I got an extreme position waiting for ya! ;^)
kcdad,
What I was saying is that if you are a “true believer” in Darwinism and natural selection that you should NOT intervene. I was not advocating that position or its natural extensions.
As a thinking and compassionate person, I believe we should all act as we believe. I personally do whatever I can to alleviate human misfortune, knowing that it is acting against the strict tenets of natural selection. If I see an injured animal I will do whatever I can to save it. My psychotic cat was taken in off the streets as I could not stand to see him perish. My youngest son spent time in a neonatal intensive care that cost multiple thousands of dollars. We paid our cost and would have paid more to get him healthy. My husband and I donate (not your business) dollars to charities and other organizations.
I never said I agreed with natural selection or survival of the fittest, I was just pointing out the discrepancies between that belief and the climate change/social darwinist viewpoint. Whether or not I personally held those views was not the issue. I do not.
Quick Summary of the Stimulus Bill
Approximate cost of stimulus bill: $787 Billion
Projected number of jobs created: 3.5 Million
Approximate cost/job: $224,529
Approximate number of pages of text of bill: between 1000-1700
(depending on the news source you read and how many supplemental attachments you find)
Approximate cost/page of text of bill: $500-750 Million
Approximate cost of line items in text of bill NOT devoted to specific “shovel-ready” state and local infrastructure projects: $600 Billion
Maximum tax credits to middle class households: $800/couple, $400/single
Approximate amount of debt incurred per capita (without interest): $2575
Time Congressmen were given to read through the bill before final vote: 10 hours
And the response of the majority leadership: Doing nothing would have been much worse than doing something.
Check out this outstanding forum letter in the PJStar by Woodruff teacher Tom Hayes. Way to go Tom!
http://www.pjstar.com/opinions/x250109722/In-the-Spotlight-Closing-schools-wont-help-District-150
sorry to all, just got news 2day that my dad is really ill again (multiple strokes and hear attacks) in Chi so I prob won’t post much. But I’ll be reading! And working in D150 schools.
um,” heart attacks.”
I’m sorry, I’m kinda stressed. This time they think it’s another heart attack even though he has an internal defibrillator (think Dick Cheney) installed. It was due for a battery change in November but he held off due to $$. My mom was a teacher in Chicago schools and my dad owned restaurants. When Mom died he lost her pension and he had to give up the restaurants due to health.
I think he’ll be ok as he is an old and tough Marine. Let’s hope and pray, even you darwinists! He needs to see his first great-grandchild.
Hot in the city- You and your family will be in our thoughts and prayers. Please keep us posted of your Dad’s progress and check in when you can.
Hot in the City: My prayers go with you, also.
Perhaps when your father gets well, AND HE WILL….he can join you in our brilliant discussions!
kcdad,
For someone just released from the Gulag…….? You must have read more than a few books!
“…yeah… faith… that is what Darwin based his theories on… that is what Einstein based his theories on… that is what Jenner, Salk, Edison, Galileo, Hawking, Marx, Santayana, Ortega y Gassett, Friere and every other genius based their theories on.”
– Are we confusing theories ‘unproven’ and ‘proven’ here? Isn’t a theory a proposed explanation whose status is still CONJECTURAL, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of fact. Philosophically speaking though, ARE their any absolute truths? Do we not take EVERYTHING on faith?
Look how many people around Peoria have been convinced that a multi-million dollar museum is the answer to all of Peoria’s economic woes!
That is faith with a capital F!
Ha! Your father was a Saxon dog.
Hot in the City.. you have my thoughts and prayers…