aGENT Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 So please enlighten me as to what I am being myopic about. The fact that I saw you comparing pipeline benefits to Alchemy or Creationism as absurd? When you compare the benefits of something to the benefits of Alchemy or Creationism (especially coming from you) it really paints the picture that you don't see any benefits in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Because there's very few benefits for actual Canadians. The only tangible one being jobs that due to a lack of proper planning and execution (and will) of the government (federal and Alberta) are small amounts of low-value, short term jobs rather than lots of high-value and long term jobs. Their short sighted thinking in that regard doesn't come close to offsetting the inherent risks and future costs (both financially and environmentally) of having the pipeline. Not even close. If they can reconsider that aspect of it you'd have yourself a valid argument of pros vs cons. Until then it's a great big CONS vs itty bitty pros argument. In other words, not much of an argument in your case. The only winners in the current scenario are a couple politicians, foreign owned oil companies and a very small group of short term Canadian jobs. I'm sorry but a few short term jobs should never trump long term risks or benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 So please enlighten me as to what I am being myopic about. The fact that I saw you comparing pipeline benefits to Alchemy or Creationism as absurd? When you compare the benefits of something to the benefits of Alchemy or Creationism (especially coming from you) it really paints the picture that you don't see any benefits in it. You calling anyone loony is a laugh all by itself. I could give you an answer, but I think I'd rather give you this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 to be fair SS, I teach about anarchy when we study various political systems in grade 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Well, I've never said I was pro-pipeline, and as a matter of fact I don't think it is a good plan. However I was able to make that educated decision for myself because I have learned about both sides of the matter. So like I've said before, if they are going to teach it in the classroom, go ahead and teach about all the negatives and all of the risks, but don't ignore the fact that it does have potential benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dittohead Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Oil sands also equals a pretty freaking small sector of the work force...so how "most of those students" (being all the ones in BC who are being taught this?) will be working there is a bit of a mystery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 They'll be collecting welfare or working for minimum wage most likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 You're being myopic towards thinking that the benefits, being forwarded by propaganda, are on an equal credible informational footing as the science behind the risks to the pipeline. You don't seem to take the precedent of Michigan into factor in your thoughts about the benefits of pipelines running through sensitive environments. You clearly don't have a clue about anarchy, since you can't even bring yourself to support your claim that you do by telling me where and when you learned about it in secondary school, as you alluded that you did. And it's obvious that I don't see many benefits to Alchemy or Creationism, especially me, since I don't support fairytales being taught in general....but you obviously didn't comprehend my usage of sarcasm by comparing the benefits of those two things with this pipeline. Another example of myopic understanding. Right, i'm the epitome of lunacy, so it totally hilarious that I should call anyone loony. (That was sarcasm, in case your myopia flared up again) It's funny that you quoted me, because you didn't comprehend that I didn't refuse to answer you in that quote. I actually went on to answer your question, but the quote you used referred to my unwillingness to bend to your demand to answer either yes or no. I answered the question you put forth more wholely than a simple minded yes or no. Nice try, but ouch, that's as big a fail at a gotcha as I've seen in a very long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 What "both sides"? You still have yet to actually illustrate what all the ACTUAL wonderful benefits to this pipeline are exactly. And not the made up propaganda ones made by the invested parties. As far as I can tell the only tangible benefit to Canadians is a small amount of low-value, short term jobs. That's pretty damned easy for teachers to sum up in under thirty seconds and give the students the "balanced information" you're looking for. I'd be QUITE surprised if teachers weren't in fact mentioning that very fact. So what exactly is your problem then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted October 4, 2012 Author Share Posted October 4, 2012 pretty much sums up your ignorance on the subject........the BCTF does't provide teachers with any curriculum or mandate about materials to support the curriculum. I'm no union guy, but people on the outside have a very skewed idea of what the BCTF is and does for it's members, kids and schools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Of course the BCTF doesn't provide curriculum; the BC Ministry of Education does. However, teachers are taking unvetted materials found on the BCTF site, and adding that into curriculum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Man oh man, but it is too easy to pick out the folks here who "missed the bus" on the whole idea of "No Child Left Behind" .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Opening up trade to the Asian Market would be a great economic boost. The plan also does include full-time work. Again, I'm not pro-pipeline, I don't think that the benefits outweigh the negatives. But just because we may not see the benefits as worth it, doesn't mean that some students may not think that they are. My problem is the people stating these even these facts would be a pointless endeavour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dral Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Would you rather have teachers telling students what absolutely is or is not factual/moral/just/true/right or would you rather have teachers teaching students how to think critically for themselves? The quote at the end of the article is nice - “I don’t think it’s wrong for teachers to tell kids what their views are, but the danger comes when those views are presented as fact,” Also, comparing this to teaching Creationism in biology class is silly. There are actually are two sides to the pipeline issue (admittedly, one side isn't very good), but there aren't two sides to biology. It's more like refusing to teach trigonometry in math. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Alright, I can admit some of my points were pretty weak, its what happens when an argument just goes around in circles. I'll just end it with this, teachers in public should NOT be teaching students about issues with a one-sided political agenda. If teachers really want students to better prepare for life after school they will allow them to develop their own critical thinking skills, and not just present their own views as facts. University and Post-Secondary is the time to pick and choose what you learn based on your own ideologies, but secondary school is the time to get students ready to decide what ideology they will have, not force them upon one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Alright, I can admit some of my points were pretty weak, its what happens when an argument just goes around in circles. I'll just end it with this, teachers in public should NOT be teaching students about issues with a one-sided political agenda. If these teachers really wanted students to better prepare for life after school they would allow them to develop their own critical thinking skills, and not just present their own views as facts. University and Post-Secondary is the time to pick and choose what you learn based on your own ideologies, but secondary school should be the time to get students ready to decide what ideology they will have, not force them upon one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 I think its getting worse. What teachers are you speaking of? By using past tense it sounds like you have evidence that this has already happened. This is how anti-teacher rhetoric gets started. You have offered nothing but assumptions and conjecture yet the way it is phrased it seems like you are trying to pass them off as fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remy Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 I think its getting worse. What teachers are you speaking of? By using past tense it sounds like you have evidence that this has already happened. This is how anti-teacher rhetoric gets started. You have offered nothing but assumptions and conjecture yet the way it is phrased it seems like you are trying to pass them off as fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 You know what amazes me? I've read some of your posts from the various religious threads, and you've been a voice of reason. Then, in this thread, I see you acting as a voice of reason yet again. It's almost as though there's something to it, you know? Where reasonable, logical people see eye to eye on multiple issues. It's a beautiful thing, honestly. I chalk up anti-teacher sentiment to anger and frustration, generally stemming from some non-teacher related issue. By and large, the hard-working students will get good grades, and the slackers will fail. We try, as teachers, to help all of our students, but we have far less say in the matter than we'd like. Occasionally, we have an effect. It can be rare, but it's what makes the job worthwhile for many of us. The funny thing about it, is the notion that any teacher goes to work out of greed. Trust me, I've seen the paycheques ... if teachers are greedy, they are waaaaaay off in their choice of profession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Alright, I can admit some of my points were pretty weak, its what happens when an argument just goes around in circles. I'll just end it with this, teachers in public should NOT be teaching students about issues with a one-sided political agenda. If teachers really want students to better prepare for life after school they will allow them to develop their own critical thinking skills, and not just present their own views as facts. University and Post-Secondary is the time to pick and choose what you learn based on your own ideologies, but secondary school is the time to get students ready to decide what ideology they will have, not force them upon one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.