Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think this person should not be a biology teacher?

250 replies

baublegirl454 · 15/01/2017 19:53

My son is yr 8, and had had concerns about his biology teacher for a while. She has often been totally unprepared for their lessons so they are told to just read from their textbooks, she can't use the whiteboard & often sets incomprehensible homework or on subjects that they haven't studied yet. She is new, so we hoped these were just teething issues and would improve. Howe er, DS came home on Friday and announced that she has said that she doesn't believe in Evolution and (I quote) 'I don't believe an explosion (I.e. The Big Bang) could create a house'
WTF????
Would we be unreasonable to approach the school about this?!

OP posts:
GinIsIn · 18/01/2017 19:57

I assumed, clearly eroneously, that you were bright enough to be talking about the evolution of knowledge over the ages, and the people who had put forward all the theories that lead to where we are today, not just the bullshit at the beginning. Clearly I credited you with too much intelligence on that score, so I apologise.

I am not going to bother discussing this any further, and will simply say that no, you absolutely do not honour modern science by giving credence to previous rubbish and speculation.

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 20:31

My conclusion:

Seems too many people jump on the anti-creationism bandwagon to associate themselves with the 'intelligent scientists' without really appreciating what science is all about.

Stay open minded! That's the only scientific method that works.

I lived through the central dogma and I ain't going to be fooled by another!

Reverse Transcriptase anyone?

amispartacus · 18/01/2017 20:36

Anyway, I've done my fair share of DNA sequencing and I know how similar life on Earth is, at the most fundamental level. You have to admit, it can look like there was a single spark (god? bang?) that 'created' the whole lot

Or...maybe there were some cells that were similar and those cells gradually evolved from the basic design, DNA mutated, some mutations were pretty good and others were useless.

It is amazing how similar organisms are at the fundamental level. How processes are very similar. Complicated.

But if it was God..well, who made God? Because God would have to be very complicated.

To quote God..'Have you heard of the Big Bang? I pressed Go'

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 20:36

Fenella Maxwell

Good time to bow out. Wink

With all due respect, gibberish won't save you.

Sounds like you're just swapping gods ...

amispartacus · 18/01/2017 20:37

Reverse Transcriptase anyone

Yes...I've done RT-PCR. So what about it?

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 20:40

amispartacus

Or...maybe there were some cells that were similar and those cells gradually evolved from the basic design

What "basic design"? Who was the "designer"?

BTW - DNA/RNA (scientists are not sure which) came before whole cells. You have made a quantum leap.

amispartacus · 18/01/2017 20:43

BTW - DNA/RNA (scientists are not sure which) came before whole cells. You have made a quantum leap

Gee. Thanks for explaining that. Were there mitochondria as well? What other organelles were there? Did bacteria possibly emerge from mitochondria? What role did sulphur play? How did the electron transport chain work out?

Please tell me more?

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 20:45

RT -PCR - love it! Great!

You weren't around when Crick touted RNA to DNA as impossible, then? (All transposed recently to make the old fella look good/god, I expect.)

amispartacus · 18/01/2017 20:46

How did the lipid walls form? What happened once the idea of a walled organelle occurred?

But yes. Evolution of cell structure, the development of RNA / DNA, proteins and all the biochemical pathways is fascinating. And it is very complicated.

But evolution and 3000 million years is a very very very long time to get to where we are now.

amispartacus · 18/01/2017 20:47

You weren't around when Crick touted RNA to DNA as impossible, then

I met the chap at LMB.

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 20:49

amispartacus

Among other things, I think you have the bacteria-mitochondria relationship mixed up.

(I sincerely hope you are not a Biology teacher - I have had to clear up the fallout from such confusions before.)

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 20:52

amispartacus

I met the chap at LMB

Did you make his tea?

I hope you're not another starry-eyed 'important-scientist-is-better-than-reason' groupies?

amispartacus · 18/01/2017 20:54

I think you have the bacteria-mitochondria relationship mixed up

It's late at night.

I sincerely hope you are not a Biology teacher - Why? Just a late night slip up?

If you are a biology teacher, what do you think of evolution vs intelligent design?

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 20:56

But evolution and 3000 million years is a very very very long time to get to where we are now.

What?

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 20:59

No disrespect, but I try to stay open minded.

I am a biologist. I am a scientist (the nastiest kind).

  • I don't know the answers to anything. But, I like to ask questions when people are cock-sure.
amispartacus · 18/01/2017 20:59

What

Let me explain to you.

Evolution - the idea that organisms evolve
3000 million years - well it's 3800 million years when the earliest single celled organisms have been found.

So that's a very long time for life to evolve in complex ways to where we are now.

Does that help?

amispartacus · 18/01/2017 21:02

No disrespect, but I try to stay open minded

Fine - so what do you think intelligent design means?

I think that life evolved gradually over a very long time without 'outside help' from a designer.

Evidence points to that theory.

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 21:02

No.

You seem to think you know the answer to 'How long is a piece of string?'

We have no means to calibrate.

(.... for now)

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 21:04

*I think that life evolved gradually over a very long time without 'outside help' from a designer.

Evidence points to that theory.*

No, actually 'evidence' doesn't make mention of a designer. That is a MSM add-on.

amispartacus · 18/01/2017 21:04

You seem to think you know the answer to 'How long is a piece of string

Now that's a complex question.

We have no means to calibrate

What are you trying to say about 3800 million years?

SuperPug · 18/01/2017 21:04

Aargh. It wouldn't be ok if an RE teacher said it/ it was an RE lesson as mentioned by some people on this thread.
I teach RS and we look at creationism as ONE type of Christian belief but also apply critical evaluation which is really what the subject is about.
RE lessons shouldn't be about indoctrination and I'm afraid there are some significantly outdated views with regards to the current focus of the subject.
On a separate note- the teacher does sound incompetent and perhaps this is not the right role for them.

amispartacus · 18/01/2017 21:06

No, actually 'evidence' doesn't make mention of a designer. That is a MSM add-on

Do you think that there is a 'designer'?

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 21:46

Do you?

amispartacus · 18/01/2017 21:59

Do you

No. I do think that life is amazing. I am stunned by how complex it is. But I don't believe in a designer.

It is amazing though. So amazing.

counterpoint · 18/01/2017 22:10

I agree with you amispartacus.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.