It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by FyreByrd
This is fun. Yeah, I did bad mouth your single source - and I did check on him..... hense the derogatory comment.
Physically lazy maybe - but never intellectuallly.
But - wait now you are naming other sources - kinda of late to the party.
...
Originally posted by FyreByrd
Again - What is YOUR POINT????
...
Originally posted by FyreByrd
...
How is this indoctronation?? (or however you spell it) do you even know what the word means?
Oh - maybe because it indroctronates kids in the scientific method perhaps. A system that has worked for centuries, in many different secular cultures. In need up an update true - what do you think we should teach children?
indoctrination
teaching someone to accept doctrines uncritically.
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Ok, I can see that you don't understand the difference between "teaching" the scientific method and "indoctrinating" the scientific method.
Let me try to help you a bit. This can be done quite easily btw.
indoctrination
teaching someone to accept doctrines uncritically.
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Now you are accusing me of ad hominem attack?... After your first try to dismiss this, for some reason after I started posting more sources corroborating my argument you stated in your second post, and I quote:
Originally posted by FyreByrd
You base you opinion on a radom you tube video and not verifiable facts? Some ignorant "Christian Nation" freek out of Utah.
...
edit on 29-5-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Originally posted by FyreByrd
You are welcome to do as you wish. I generally post things for discussion to hear different sides to an issue to help me come to an often temporary opinion.
When I have a strong opinion on an issue or topic, I site many sources both for and against - to get information out - not my opinion. And I DON"T FREAK OUT ALL OVER THE PLACE.
Really?... Ironic, I have looked at your threads and only see you providing one source, and sometimes just your opinion...
In at least one thread of yours you ask people to be civil, and actually, let me quote you...
Originally posted by FyreByrd
...
Please be civil. Just 'Denying Racim" is just Denial and doesn't make it true. We all have prejudces of one sort or another and until we acknowledge them and look at them in the light of day, we'll never be whole.
Originally posted by tport17
...
Once again, teachers are not out there trying to indoctrinate your children. It does give me a giggle when these threads pop up though.
Common Core Standards is "an international effort" to change Americans into the progressive idea of "world citizens", it is an international effort to "globalize" every person on this planet. To "shape" future generations to believe and follow the "progressive agenda" that the world elites have been trying to implement for so long, and it seems they have won if we don't do anything about it before it is too late.
As stated in the IBO website, their goal is:
Our four programmes for students aged 3 to 19 help develop the intellectual, personal, emotional and social skills to live, learn and work in a rapidly globalizing world. There are more than 1,102,000 IB students at 3,588 schools in 145 countries.
Originally posted by wildtimes
And,....
that's a problem...why????
Intellectual,
personal,
emotional,
and
social skills,
TO LIVE, LEARN, and WORK in a rapidly globalizing world.
It is happening, and all your moaning and whining is not going to stop it.
Beyond that, you have a wrong and skewed understanding of what 'we Progressives' are trying to accomplish. Stop listening to Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Fox News. It's messing with your head.
I don't expect (or want) a response. Just wanted to put my rebuttal out there.
You are mistaken, in a very serious and dangerous way.
In his first term as President, Wilson persuaded a Democratic Congress to pass major progressive reforms. Historian John M. Cooper argues that, in his first term, Wilson successfully pushed a legislative agenda that few presidents have equaled, remaining unmatched up until the New Deal.[1] This agenda included the Federal Reserve Act, Federal Trade Commission Act, the Clayton Antitrust Act, the Federal Farm Loan Act and an income tax.
...
...
No doubt a great deal of nonsense has been talked about the inalienable rights of the individual, and a great deal that was mere vague sentiment and pleasing speculation has been put forward as fundamental principle.
...
...
The New Deal produced a political realignment, making the Democratic Party the majority (as well as the party that held the White House for seven out of nine Presidential terms from 1933 to 1969), with its base in liberal ideas, the white South, traditional Democrats, big city machines, and the newly empowered labor unions and ethnic minorities. The Republicans were split, with conservatives opposing the entire New Deal as an enemy of business and growth, and liberals accepting some of it and promising to make it more efficient. The realignment crystallized into the New Deal Coalition that dominated most presidential elections into the 1960s, while the opposition Conservative Coalition largely controlled Congress from 1937 to 1963. By 1936 the term "liberal" typically was used for supporters of the New Deal, and "conservative" for its opponents.
...
Janet Napolitano on Foreign Policy
Democratic AZ Governor; Designee for Secretary of Homeland Security
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence.
Napolitano adopted the manifesto, "A New Agenda for the New Decade":
Build a Public Consensus Supporting US Global Leadership
The internationalist outlook that served America and the world so well during the second half of the 20th century is under attack from both ends of the political spectrum. As the left has gravitated toward protectionism, many on the right have reverted to “America First” isolationism.
Our leaders should articulate a progressive internationalism based on the new realities of the Information Age: globalization, democracy, American pre-eminence, and the rise of a new array of threats ranging from regional and ethnic conflicts to the spread of missiles and biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons. This approach recognizes the need to revamp, while continuing to rely on, multilateral alliances that advance U.S. values and interests.
A strong, technologically superior defense is the foundation for US global leadership. Yet the US continues to employ defense strategies, military missions, and force structures left over from the Cold War, creating a defense establishment that is ill-prepared to meet new threats to our security. The US must speed up the “revolution in military affairs” that uses our technological advantage to project force in many different contingencies involving uncertain and rapidly changing security threats -- including terrorism and information warfare.
...
Napolitano is Lying to Americans About Her Department’s Rightwing Extremism Report; TMLC Files Suit
...
Napolitano tried to blunt the public furor over the Report by a half-hearted apology to veterans, but she left out of her apology all of the other Americans her Department has targeted because of their political beliefs. In fact, officials in DHS now admit that their internal office of civil liberties objected to the language in the extremism report, but the Department issued it anyway.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center stated, “Janet Napolitano is lying to the American people when she says the Report is not based on ideology or political beliefs. In fact, her report would have the admiration of the Gestapo and any current or past dictator in the way it targets political opponents. This incompetently written intelligence assessment, which directs law enforcement officials across the country to target and report on American citizens who have the political beliefs mentioned in the report, will be used as a tool to stifle political opposition and opinions. It will give a pretext for opponents of those Americans to report them to police as rightwing extremists and terrorists. You can imagine what happens then.”
The Report specifically mentions the following political beliefs that law enforcement should use to determine whether someone is a “rightwing extremist”:
Opposes abortion
Opposes restrictions on firearms
Opposes lax immigration
Opposes the policies of President Obama regarding immigration, citizenship, and the expansion of social programs
Opposes continuation of free trade agreements
Opposes same-sex marriage
Has paranoia of foreign regimes
Fear of Communist regimes
Opposes one world government
Bemoans the decline of U.S. stature in the world.
Upset with loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to China and India
. . . and the list goes on
...
National service bill makes 'volunteerism' compulsory
The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act (S. 277) has passed the senate and moves to the house.
By Lucy Hugel
Thursday, the U.S. Senate sent back to the House an amended bill to "expand and improve opportunities for service," legislation modeled on President Obama's campaign promise to establish "universal voluntary citizen service."
...
How could expanding community service programs have such a radical effect in the land of liberty? To understand this, one must see how the plan aims to smuggle in compulsory service.
Under these proposed initiatives, service begins in youth. By providing grants to public and private schools that offer "service-learning" programs, the act creates financial incentives for elementary and secondary schools to expand service-related projects, thus making the school or the state the bad cop in enforcing compliance.
In college, the press for service continues; students will be urged to perform substantial community service in exchange for educational grants. Furthermore, financial incentives for the colleges or universities will tie federal funds to campuswide service initiatives, providing an additional, indirect attack on the college-going population.
The call for service then extends to adults, as the plan triples the size of the AmeriCorps program, developing several new "Corps" specifically tailored to support other items from the administration's agenda.
Finally, senior citizens will be called upon to serve in the Senior Corps, also marked for expansion.
National service would become pervasive and virtually unavoidable -- and that is the goal.
But what about those Americans who don't want to serve? Remember, this plan was launched under the guise of volunteerism. Yet it will ensure compliance by linking financial benefits to service requirements -- by making certain federal funds are conditional upon the "donation" of labor.
Don't confuse this plan with benevolence toward others. Many Americans enjoy volunteering time or donating money to a worthy cause of their own choosing. One must distinguish, however, between these actions willingly taken and a law that would forcibly draft all Americans into involuntary servitude -- something outlawed by the 13th Amendment.
...
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Originally posted by FyreByrd
...
How is this indoctronation?? (or however you spell it) do you even know what the word means?
Oh - maybe because it indroctronates kids in the scientific method perhaps. A system that has worked for centuries, in many different secular cultures. In need up an update true - what do you think we should teach children?
Ok, I can see that you don't understand the difference between "teaching" the scientific method and "indoctrinating" the scientific method.
Let me try to help you a bit. This can be done quite easily btw.
indoctrination
teaching someone to accept doctrines uncritically.
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
If you "indoctrinate" children, or adults about the "scientific method" you are brainwashing them not to learn new theories or methods in science... You are making them accept old scientific methods and theories which could for all intent and purposes be wrong...
Throughout the history of science there has been many times when new evidence, and newly acquired knowledge has shown that old scientific methods, which once were thought to be 100% correct, were completely wrong... Even in this day and age we are learning and acquiring new evidence and scientific methods which have completely destroyed, or updated old scientific theories.
What you actually should do, if you are a teacher or a professor, is "teach", not "indoctrinate."
edit on 30-5-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: add comments.
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by wildtimes
Oh, and btw, to respond your question directly, the problem is how they are using your "emotions", and the emotions of children to impart the globalization views that tptb want you, and children to believe in and follow to the letter.
No government, or group, outside from family, should be trying to shape children's "emotions". By doing this it is very easy to "shape" the beliefs and values of people since childhood, and in this manner people can be indoctrinated to believe, for example, that people should be giving up individual rights "for the good of the collective."
People can be very easily controlled through their emotions, and that's what tptb are doing, and have already done in many cases.
Even YOU in your response here are not only using your own emotions, but you are trying to instill the same response on other members to try to dismiss FACTS by using emotional responses instead of engaging your cognitive thinking and making a rational counter-argument...
So thank you for making my point...
edit on 31-5-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: add comments.
Originally posted by hamburgerler
I joined ATS just to address this post, because it is so completely ignorant.
The scientific method is an intellectual tool that will allow people to think independently, because science is based upon challenging and questioning science itself. The scientific method is not a doctrine, it is a formula
that can be applied to any thing you'd wish to examine or question.
...
Originally posted by hamburgerler
I have read through this thread and it appears that you are the person who is driven by emotion, fear.
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Originally posted by hamburgerler
I have read through this thread and it appears that you are the person who is driven by emotion, fear.
So proclaims the person posting one liners, and giving no proof whatsoever about his/her claims...
Nice try at making ad hominem attacks and derailing the thread...
Originally posted by hamburgerler
OK, fine... I should let you clarify your position then.
What is YOUR problem with the scientific method?
What makes it evil?
Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Originally posted by hamburgerler
OK, fine... I should let you clarify your position then.
What is YOUR problem with the scientific method?
What makes it evil?
Where in the world did I write the scientific method is evil?...
I was clarifying the difference between "teaching" and "indoctrinating" the scientific method...
The scientific method, as pretty much everything else in human history, has evolved and changed...
When a teacher or professor "indoctrinates" or has "indoctrinated" in the scientific method, such teacher or professor has, or is teaching that everything that is believed at that particular time about the scientific method and it's findings is the truth and the only truth.
The scientific method in and of itself is neither good nor bad. Never did I write what you claim about my comments in this thread or any other.
edit on 31-5-2013 by ElectricUniverse because: errors.