In memoir, NC Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson mulls 2024 run, calls for taking science, history out of elementary schools

-Keep science and history out of elementary school
-Global warming is fake
-Consolidate State Board of Education, Superintendent of Education, and local school boards
-Expand school vouchers
-Abortion is like killing your neighbor
-Christians are called to be led by men
-Acknowledging gay kids is demented

This guy always seems like a conservative caricature, trying to push the envelope and win the controversial take of the day award to make headlines for himself.

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

Is this platform electorally viable?

Civilized said:

---

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

---

No. What's truly scary is drag queen story time for children, teaching them that there are "70 genders", teaching them that they might actually need to switch their gender, teaching them that the Sodomite lifestyle is "acceptable", teaching them that it would have been "acceptable" for their mother to have murdered them in the womb, and to teach them that God "doesn't exist" and it is "scientific" to believe a preposterous lie about the universe and all life coming into existence by "random chance after a big explosion".

I think what he's really talking about is taking the FAKE "science" and "history" out of the schools.

Teach real science and history. Not the lies that the Marxist Left teaches as "science" and "history", in order to push their sick Satanic agenda.

Of course he really believes those things. And if we had real polling, it would be clear to see that most people in NC agree with him.

And this just popped in my mind, thinking about the fake "history" that the Marxist Left pushes.

When they talk about how slaves were counted as "2/3 rds of a person"...do these tards even realize that it was the Northern (non slave holding states) that wanted the slaves counted as "2/3 rds" (actually less) of a person? This was for the purposes of determining the number of representatives in Congress. The Southern (slave-holding) states wanted all of the slave population in their states counted as a full person, so that they could have more representatives. Meanwhile, the northern states would have preferred that slaves were counted as "zero persons", in order to limit the number of representatives from the southern states.

And while we're talking about real history, how about we teach about the fact that the Democrat party was the party of slavery and the party of the KKK. Robert Byrd anyone? Joe Biden's "mentor", by the way.

So if we talk about a political party wanting to "dehumanize" people, it was the Democrats. Oh, and what do you know...the Democrats would now have us believe that unborn children "are not human beings".

And most abortions are killing unborn black babies. Wow, what a coincidence.

Some things never change.

Amazing how the lefties always use "context" of how things are said in a negative way toward Conservatives but yet when the same thing is done to them it is labeled as "misinformation," "lies" or straight up propaganda.


Glad to see Civ showing his true colors and only posting his version of what was actually said.

He's a good little lefty!!

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

---

No. What's truly scary is drag queen story time for children, teaching them that there are "70 genders", teaching them that they might actually need to switch their gender, teaching them that the Sodomite lifestyle is "acceptable", teaching them that it would have been "acceptable" for their mother to have murdered them in the womb, and to teach them that God "doesn't exist" and it is "scientific" to believe a preposterous lie about the universe and all life coming into existence by "random chance after a big explosion".

I think what he's really talking about is taking the FAKE "science" and "history" out of the schools.

Teach real science and history. Not the lies that the Marxist Left teaches as "science" and "history", in order to push their sick Satanic agenda.

Of course he really believes those things. And if we had real polling, it would be clear to see that most people in NC agree with him.

---

Real science and history like flat-earth and fake moon landings?

You think most people in NC agree with Robinson about what?

BBW12OG said:

---

Amazing how the lefties always use "context" of how things are said in a negative way toward Conservatives but yet when the same thing is done to them it is labeled as "misinformation," "lies" or straight up propaganda.


Glad to see Civ showing his true colors and only posting his version of what was actually said.

He's a good little lefty!!

---

What was inaccurate?

Do you believe we should eliminate science and social studies from elementary school curriculums and just focus on reading, writing, and arithmetic?

Civilized said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

---

No. What's truly scary is drag queen story time for children, teaching them that there are "70 genders", teaching them that they might actually need to switch their gender, teaching them that the Sodomite lifestyle is "acceptable", teaching them that it would have been "acceptable" for their mother to have murdered them in the womb, and to teach them that God "doesn't exist" and it is "scientific" to believe a preposterous lie about the universe and all life coming into existence by "random chance after a big explosion".

I think what he's really talking about is taking the FAKE "science" and "history" out of the schools.

Teach real science and history. Not the lies that the Marxist Left teaches as "science" and "history", in order to push their sick Satanic agenda.

Of course he really believes those things. And if we had real polling, it would be clear to see that most people in NC agree with him.

---

Real science and history like flat-earth and fake moon landings?

You think most people in NC agree with Robinson about what?

---

What the Marxist-Leftist faux "scientific" Establishment claims about the nature of the universe is ONE THOUSAND times crazier than believing that the earth could be a flat plane instead of sphere.

The Left teaches these preposterous theories as "science" that everything in the universe, and all life forms, have just come into existence "by random chance", after all matter in the universe was condensed into the space smaller than a golf ball (or whatever), and then exploded and then 14 billion years passed, and then somehow the atoms and chemicals just magically one day randomly and accidently formed the first cells/proteins and DNA and life forms. And then those first amoebas or bacteria then magically turned into fish, who then crawled out of the ocean and formed apes, and then humans "evolved" from those apes.

That is what is crazy. The Big Bang and evolution theories are astronomical levels of lunacy.

But yeah, I'm "super duper crazy" for thinking that the earth might actually be a flat plane instead of a sphere. It's "soooo whacky" to question just the shape and dimensions of the earth. That's "so much more insane" than believing the faux "science" from the Marxist Establishment that says we are all evolved monkeys that just came into existence by random chance on a rock flying through space after a big explosion.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

---

No. What's truly scary is drag queen story time for children, teaching them that there are "70 genders", teaching them that they might actually need to switch their gender, teaching them that the Sodomite lifestyle is "acceptable", teaching them that it would have been "acceptable" for their mother to have murdered them in the womb, and to teach them that God "doesn't exist" and it is "scientific" to believe a preposterous lie about the universe and all life coming into existence by "random chance after a big explosion".

I think what he's really talking about is taking the FAKE "science" and "history" out of the schools.

Teach real science and history. Not the lies that the Marxist Left teaches as "science" and "history", in order to push their sick Satanic agenda.

Of course he really believes those things. And if we had real polling, it would be clear to see that most people in NC agree with him.

---

Real science and history like flat-earth and fake moon landings?

You think most people in NC agree with Robinson about what?

---

What the Marxist-Leftist faux "scientific" Establishment claims about the nature of the universe is ONE THOUSAND times crazier than believing that the earth could be a flat plane instead of sphere.

The Left teaches these preposterous theories as "science" that everything in the universe, and all life forms, have just come into existence "by random chance", after all matter in the universe was condensed into the space smaller than a golf ball (or whatever), and then exploded and then 14 billion years passed, and then somehow the atoms and chemicals just magically one day randomly and accidently formed the first cells/proteins and DNA and life forms. And then those first amoebas or bacteria then magically turned into fish, who then crawled out of the ocean and formed apes, and then humans "evolved" from those apes.

That is what is crazy. The Big Bang and evolution theories are astronomical levels of lunacy.

But yeah, I'm "super duper crazy" for thinking that the earth might actually be a flat plane instead of a sphere. It's "soooo whacky" to question just the shape and dimensions of the earth. That's "so much more insane" than believing the faux "science" from the Marxist Establishment that says we are all evolved monkeys that just came into existence by random chance on a rock flying through space after a big explosion.

---

Questioning the shape and dimensions of the earth is perfectly rational. The disconnect is that those questions were asked and answered 2,000 years ago.

Part of the curiosity of your worldview is if you question some of the most well-established and settled science out there, where would you ever draw the line? Everything in the physical universe is open to question at that point. Do you question additive physics, chemistry, or medical knowledge with the same fervor you question settled astronomy or other science?

If you were experiencing pain in your torso somewhere and the ultrasound revealed a tumor and the oncologist recommended surgery/radiation/chemo/whatever, would you question the diagnosis? The treatment? Suggest they use leeches for bloodletting instead?

Civilized said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

---

No. What's truly scary is drag queen story time for children, teaching them that there are "70 genders", teaching them that they might actually need to switch their gender, teaching them that the Sodomite lifestyle is "acceptable", teaching them that it would have been "acceptable" for their mother to have murdered them in the womb, and to teach them that God "doesn't exist" and it is "scientific" to believe a preposterous lie about the universe and all life coming into existence by "random chance after a big explosion".

I think what he's really talking about is taking the FAKE "science" and "history" out of the schools.

Teach real science and history. Not the lies that the Marxist Left teaches as "science" and "history", in order to push their sick Satanic agenda.

Of course he really believes those things. And if we had real polling, it would be clear to see that most people in NC agree with him.

---

Real science and history like flat-earth and fake moon landings?

You think most people in NC agree with Robinson about what?

---

What the Marxist-Leftist faux "scientific" Establishment claims about the nature of the universe is ONE THOUSAND times crazier than believing that the earth could be a flat plane instead of sphere.

The Left teaches these preposterous theories as "science" that everything in the universe, and all life forms, have just come into existence "by random chance", after all matter in the universe was condensed into the space smaller than a golf ball (or whatever), and then exploded and then 14 billion years passed, and then somehow the atoms and chemicals just magically one day randomly and accidently formed the first cells/proteins and DNA and life forms. And then those first amoebas or bacteria then magically turned into fish, who then crawled out of the ocean and formed apes, and then humans "evolved" from those apes.

That is what is crazy. The Big Bang and evolution theories are astronomical levels of lunacy.

But yeah, I'm "super duper crazy" for thinking that the earth might actually be a flat plane instead of a sphere. It's "soooo whacky" to question just the shape and dimensions of the earth. That's "so much more insane" than believing the faux "science" from the Marxist Establishment that says we are all evolved monkeys that just came into existence by random chance on a rock flying through space after a big explosion.

---

Questioning the shape and dimensions of the earth is perfectly rational. The disconnect is that those questions were asked and answered 2,000 years ago.

Part of the curiosity of your worldview is if you question some of the most well-established and settled science out there, where would you ever draw the line? Everything in the physical universe is open to question at that point. Do you question additive physics, chemistry, or medical knowledge with the same fervor you question settled astronomy or other science?

If you were experiencing pain in your torso somewhere and the ultrasound revealed a tumor and the oncologist recommended surgery/radiation/chemo/whatever, would you question the diagnosis? The treatment? Suggest they use leeches for bloodletting instead?

---

Civ, I am completely a Round-Earther; however, I'm not sure that was settled 2,000 years ago...

Wiki: Spherical Earth

Eratosthenes

Civilized said:

---

Questioning the shape and dimensions of the earth is perfectly rational. The disconnect is that those questions were asked and answered 2,000 years ago.

Part of the curiosity of your worldview is if you question some of the most well-established and settled science out there, where would you ever draw the line? Everything in the physical universe is open to question at that point. Do you question additive physics, chemistry, or medical knowledge with the same fervor you question settled astronomy or other science?

If you were experiencing pain in your torso somewhere and the ultrasound revealed a tumor and the oncologist recommended surgery/radiation/chemo/whatever, would you question the diagnosis? The treatment? Suggest they use leeches for bloodletting instead?

---

Wrong. It was never "settled 2,000 years ago". There was not even an "overwhelming consensus" among so-called "scientists" on this until around the early 1900s. And that consensus now (same as with the theory of evolution or Big Bang) is not evidence that the "consensus" is the correct view. That consensus is due to the fact that the "scientific" community and academia is controlled by a Marxist cabal which blackballs and prevents any dissent. There were still a very active debate among scientists and in academia up until the early 1900s, as to whether the earth was truly a sphere flying through space, or whether the earth was a flat plane with the heavenly bodies being the ones that moved about the earth.

The heliocentric model is still actually a theory. It is not "settled science". It is a theoretical model. Same as the theory of evolution or the Big Bang. Those are theories, and also not "settled science". But despite that, many so-called "scientific" circles and the Establishment media and other mouthpieces refer to the theory of evolution and the Big Bang theory as if they were "proven" and "settled scientific fact".

What you need to consider and ask yourself is why you trust people to tell you the truth about the nature of the universe, when these same people are peddling the most astronomically preposterous lies -- such as the theory of evolution, Big Bang, denying that unborn children are human, and now saying that there are 70 genders. These are not real scientists. They are propagandists, promoting an agenda (ie, the atheistic Marxist agenda). And they are willing to lie and present falsified "data" and "science" in order to promote that agenda.

I'm not "crazy" for questioning and denying the claims of arch liars like the faux "scientific" Establishment who peddle these totally preposterous lies.

You are truly crazy if you trust these people to actually tell you the truth.

If you want to debate the "flat earth" view specifically...then I'm all for that. As the earth is supposedly spinning and flying through outer space at hundreds of thousands of miles per hour, what keeps the atmosphere "velcroed" and attached to the earth? Why doesn't it blow away into the vacuum of space? As the earth is supposedly traveling millions of miles every day flying through space, why has the positions of the stars not changed in thousands of years of human history? How can the constellations stay the same? Shouldn't the position of the stars have changed at least some, as the earth moves billions/trillions of miles around, changing it's position relative to all these other stars? Or how are we able to see for many more miles than should be possible if the earth were a globe? How is the entire skyline of Chicago visible from 60 miles across Lake Michigan, when it should be hidden by over 2,000 feet of "earth's curvature" if the earth were a sphere?

Civilized said:

---

Wiki: Spherical Earth

Eratosthenes

---

The Eratosthenes observation doesn't prove one way or the other whether the earth is a flat plane or a sphere. The difference in the angles of the shadows could just as easily be explained by the fact that the earth is stationary flat plane and the sun is somewhat "close" to the earth (say, hypothetically, 500-1,000 miles high above the earth), and therefore causes different angles of shadow at the same time of day on two different places on the earth.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Wiki: Spherical Earth

Eratosthenes

---

The Eratosthenes observation doesn't prove one way or the other whether the earth is a flat plane or a sphere. The difference in the angles of the shadows could just as easily be explained by the fact that the earth is stationary flat plane and the sun is somewhat "close" to the earth (say, hypothetically, 500-1,000 miles high above the earth), and therefore causes different angles of shadow at the same time of day on two different places on the earth.

---

dear lord, so not only is the earth flat, but the sun is closer to the flat earth than we in NC are to Texas?

yeah, i'm amazed this foolishness is not taught in schools instead of that marxist spherical earth stuff.

Packchem91 said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Wiki: Spherical Earth

Eratosthenes

---

The Eratosthenes observation doesn't prove one way or the other whether the earth is a flat plane or a sphere. The difference in the angles of the shadows could just as easily be explained by the fact that the earth is stationary flat plane and the sun is somewhat "close" to the earth (say, hypothetically, 500-1,000 miles high above the earth), and therefore causes different angles of shadow at the same time of day on two different places on the earth.

---

dear lord, so not only is the earth flat, but the sun is closer to the flat earth than we in NC are to Texas?

yeah, i'm amazed this foolishness is not taught in schools instead of that marxist spherical earth stuff.

---

Yes, of course it's 93 bazillion miles away as your fake "scientific" priests tell you base on no evidence whatsoever. And the earth is 14 bazillion years old based on nothing more than pure theory. And we're evolved monkeys on a rock spinning at 1,000 miles per hour and flying through space at 490,000 miles per hour. And we all came into existence because it you wait a few million years, cooling rocks can just turn into millions of species of infinitely complex organisms due to nothing more than random chance.

"Science"......fiction

Ever wonder why the sun is so much easier to look at when it's low on the horizon, at sunset or sunrise? Contrast that with how bright it is near mid-day?

If the earth was 93 million miles away, then why would it matter? And it's going to travel through essentially the same amount of atmosphere if it's that far away at sunrise/sunset and midday.

However, if the earth is much closer to the earth...then when it's at midday it's going to be much, much closer to you than it is at sunrise and sunset. And if the sun is much closer to the earth (not 93 million miles away), then the sunlight is travelling through much more atmosphere at sunrise and sunset than at midday. The fact that the sunlight is travelling through around 5 times the amount of atmosphere at sunrise/sunset versus midday is the main factor is why the sunlight is around probably 4-5 times less bright at sunset/sunrise.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Wiki: Spherical Earth

Eratosthenes

---

The Eratosthenes observation doesn't prove one way or the other whether the earth is a flat plane or a sphere. The difference in the angles of the shadows could just as easily be explained by the fact that the earth is stationary flat plane and the sun is somewhat "close" to the earth (say, hypothetically, 500-1,000 miles high above the earth), and therefore causes different angles of shadow at the same time of day on two different places on the earth.

---

dear lord, so not only is the earth flat, but the sun is closer to the flat earth than we in NC are to Texas?

yeah, i'm amazed this foolishness is not taught in schools instead of that marxist spherical earth stuff.

---

Yes, of course it's 93 bazillion miles away as your fake "scientific" priests tell you base on no evidence whatsoever. And the earth is 14 bazillion years old based on nothing more than pure theory. And we're evolved monkeys on a rock spinning at 1,000 miles per hour and flying through space at 490,000 miles per hour. And we all came into existence because it you wait a few million years, cooling rocks can just turn into millions of species of infinitely complex organisms due to nothing more than random chance.

"Science"......fiction

Ever wonder why the sun is so much easier to look at when it's low on the horizon, at sunset or sunrise? Contrast that with how bright it is near mid-day?

If the earth was 93 million miles away, then why would it matter? Because it's going to travel through essentially the same amount of atmosphere if it's that far away at sunrise/sunset and midday.

However, if the earth is much closer to the earth...then when it's at midday it's going to be much, much closer to you at midday than it is at sunrise and sunset. And if the sun is much closer, the light is travelling through much more atmosphere at sunrise and sunset than at midday.

---

If this is a parody then I tip my hat to your commitment to the show. If not ... whew.

Civilized said:

---

In memoir, NC Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson mulls 2024 run, calls for taking science, history out of elementary schools

-Keep science and history out of elementary school
-Global warming is fake
-Consolidate State Board of Education, Superintendent of Education, and local school boards
-Expand school vouchers
-Abortion is like killing your neighbor
-Christians are called to be led by men
-Acknowledging gay kids is demented

This guy always seems like a conservative caricature, trying to push the envelope and win the controversial take of the day award to make headlines for himself.

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

Is this platform electorally viable?

---

I'm going to try and get away from the ridiculousness of this thread a bit. I like Mark Robinson because I believe that he believes in the positions that he has. Do I agree with him 100%? No. Do I think he would make a great Governor? Yes. So go point by point:

- history and science. I think it's important to keep science and history in early development education. Do I think it needs to be a huge factor in K-6? No, but an introduction into STEM education can be extremely helpful. But Robinson makes a great point and I think back to my early education and how the focus through 4th grade was reading, writing, and math. 5th and 6th grade was when civics/history and science classes were introduced. Feel like I turned out ok.

- Global warming - I do not think that he thinks it is fake, I think what he is pointing out is that we cannot create a religion out of global warming, which some people of the far left have done. We also cannot continue to predict these doom day scenarios without actual scientific back up. Mark Robinson is a conservative, the very definition of the word is to conserve. There is an inherent norm within the conservative movement to be conservationists when it comes to the land and the environment. But a discussion needs to be had on policy issues related to the environment to review the pros and cons of policy decisions that have an effect on every day life versus the natural position to conserve nature for the enjoyment of everyone and future generations.

- Education bureaucracy consolidation - for it. Tell me how these entities work together to provide the best education of the fundamentals of reading, writing, math, science, civics, history, languages, STEM and job training skills that children need to function in todays society and I'm all on board. The current system is a failure.

School vouchers - 110% for

Eliminate Abortion - generally, I do not think that government should be in the business of dictating moral decisions. Therefore I am in disagreement with Robinson here

The last two points fell propagandist to me. I would really like to read his book before forming an opinion. But to me, that sounds like people hearing scary words rather than listening to the message delivered.

I would like to have a further understanding on his position on free markets as well

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Wiki: Spherical Earth

Eratosthenes

---

The Eratosthenes observation doesn't prove one way or the other whether the earth is a flat plane or a sphere. The difference in the angles of the shadows could just as easily be explained by the fact that the earth is stationary flat plane and the sun is somewhat "close" to the earth (say, hypothetically, 500-1,000 miles high above the earth), and therefore causes different angles of shadow at the same time of day on two different places on the earth.

---

dear lord, so not only is the earth flat, but the sun is closer to the flat earth than we in NC are to Texas?

yeah, i'm amazed this foolishness is not taught in schools instead of that marxist spherical earth stuff.

---

Yes, of course it's 93 bazillion miles away as your fake "scientific" priests tell you base on no evidence whatsoever. And the earth is 14 bazillion years old based on nothing more than pure theory. And we're evolved monkeys on a rock spinning at 1,000 miles per hour and flying through space at 490,000 miles per hour. And we all came into existence because it you wait a few million years, cooling rocks can just turn into millions of species of infinitely complex organisms due to nothing more than random chance.

"Science"......fiction

Ever wonder why the sun is so much easier to look at when it's low on the horizon, at sunset or sunrise? Contrast that with how bright it is near mid-day?

If the earth was 93 million miles away, then why would it matter? And it's going to travel through essentially the same amount of atmosphere if it's that far away at sunrise/sunset and midday.

However, if the earth is much closer to the earth...then when it's at midday it's going to be much, much closer to you than it is at sunrise and sunset. And if the sun is much closer to the earth (not 93 million miles away), then the sunlight is travelling through much more atmosphere at sunrise and sunset than at midday. The fact that the sunlight is travelling through around 5 times the amount of atmosphere at sunrise/sunset versus midday is the main factor is why the sunlight is around probably 4-5 times less bright at sunset/sunrise.

---

LOL, whether its 1000 miles away or 93m miles away, it still has to travel thru the same atmosphere over earth --- and that atmosphere is much thicker at sunset/sunrise than it is at noon and includes refraction, etc. Basic science and physics.

Now, were it only 1000 miles away, we wouldn't know this, because the earth would have been burned away, but sure....I can't believe some of your cohorts who have similar "1000 miles away" beliefs haven't figured out how to put together a road trip.

BTW, how far away is the moon in this looney galaxy in your mind?

Many times I see a thread on this board and think "that's not something I really care about, but I wonder how many posts it will take for it to go off the rails?". I admit that somehow every time I'm amazed at how quickly either side can take a topic back to the same argument. Don't the same 5-6 of y'all get tired of having the same arguments on every topic? Seems exhausting to me.

Manny Sanguine said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

---

---

---

---

If this is a parody then I tip my hat to your commitment to the show. If not ... whew.

---

That's not an argument. It's just a hit and run smear job.

Give us a real argument. Enlighten us as to why the sun would be so much brighter at midday than at sunrise and sunset. If the sun is 93 million miles away, then it's basically the same amount of atmosphere it's travelling though at sunrise/sunset or midday. And it's at the same distance away (~93,000,000 miles).

But if the sun is much closer to the earth (say only around 500-1,000 miles above the surface of the earth), then there is a huge difference. At midday, the sun is only around 500-1,000 miles away. While at sunset/sunrise, it's around 5,000 miles away -- and is therefore the sunlight is travelling through 5 times the amount of atmosphere at sunrise/sunset versus at midday.

What we observe is a huge difference in the brightness of the sun at midday versus sunrise/sunset. It's not some very slight difference that would be consistent with a sun that is 93,000,000 miles away.

wilmwolf80 said:

---

Many times I see a thread on this board and think "that's not something I really care about, but I wonder how many posts it will take for it to go off the rails?". I admit that somehow every time I'm amazed at how quickly either side can take a topic back to the same argument. Don't the same 5-6 of y'all get tired of having the same arguments on every topic? Seems exhausting to me.

---

With GP and his flat earth / sun 500 miles away and some of his other theories (including suggesting science is wrong but no way you can question religion and its stories handed down over the centuries) its actually kind of humorous.

Not sure what I think, but this is the kind of response from the other side of the coin, when you see teachers posting crazy stuff on twitter. For some reason, a few teachers feel the need to go one step further and push their "beliefs", and not just teach. It scares people and this is the response.

ncsupack1 said:

---

Not sure what I think, but this is the kind of response from the other side of the coin, when you see teachers posting crazy stuff on twitter. For some reason, a few teachers feel the need to go one step further and push their "beliefs", and not just teach. It scares people and this is the response.

---

The response is not to teach vast swaths of information that's beneficial to students' academic and personal development?

Not sure what qualifies as "crazy stuff on twitter" but unless it's violent/illegal/clearly unethical a teacher's political beliefs shouldn't matter. And if it is violent/illegal/clearly unethical that likely breaches a teacher's contract and is a fireable offense anyway.

A professional teacher shouldn't be going off-grid and teaching personal beliefs outside of the curriculum; if they're doing that, the solution is for the principal to train and manage their staff better, not to issue statewide edicts to stop teaching the curriculum.

Look, I'm not going to go back and forth with this. Go on twitter and watch some of these few teachers that post crazy crap. It happens and parents get scared seeing and or hearing this stuff. I'm just trying to point out that when crazy one way happens crazy the other way happens.

LMAO, a real zoo here on this one.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Manny Sanguine said:

---

If this is a parody then I tip my hat to your commitment to the show. If not ... whew.

---

That's not an argument. It's just a hit and run smear job.

Give us a real argument. Enlighten us as to why the sun would be so much brighter at midday than at sunrise and sunset. If the sun is 93 million miles away, then it's basically the same amount of atmosphere it's travelling though at sunrise/sunset or midday. And it's at the same distance away (~93,000,000 miles).

But if the sun is much closer to the earth (say only around 500-1,000 miles above the surface of the earth), then there is a huge difference. At midday, the sun is only around 500-1,000 miles away. While at sunset/sunrise, it's around 5,000 miles away -- and is therefore the sunlight is travelling through 5 times the amount of atmosphere at sunrise/sunset versus at midday.

What we observe is a huge difference in the brightness of the sun at midday versus sunrise/sunset. It's not some very slight difference that would be consistent with a sun that is 93,000,000 miles away.

---

Taking you question as seriously as possible.

Here's a diagram of the position of the sun and an observer on Earth at sunrise/sunset versus midday (assuming a spherical Earth):


As you can see, at sunrise/sunset the sunlight has to travel through much more atmosphere than at midday. Thus the light reaching the observer is proportionally attenuated (i.e., less bright). Doesn't matter whether the sun is 93,000,000 miles away and 865,000 miles in diameter or 1000 miles away and 9.3 miles in diameter, the proportion of attenuation would be the same. (The distances and sizes I give are what would be required for the sun to have the same apparent size under the standard understanding of the location of the sun and your suggestion that the sun is 500-1000 miles away.)

A couple of questions so I can better understand your worldview.

• What is the greatest distance a manmade object has reached above the surface of the earth? Do you believe that manmade satellites are orbiting the Earth (i.e., those things that make all modern telecommunications - and much else - possible)?
• I have flown east to Europe and west to Asia. I know people who have flown east from Europe to Asia. How does that work if the Earth is a flat plane? Wouldn't one of us have crossed the edge?

hokiewolf said:

---

I'm going to try and get away from the ridiculousness of this thread a bit. I like Mark Robinson because I believe that he believes in the positions that he has. Do I agree with him 100%? No. Do I think he would make a great Governor? Yes. So go point by point:

- history and science. I think it's important to keep science and history in early development education. Do I think it needs to be a huge factor in K-6? No, but an introduction into STEM education can be extremely helpful. But Robinson makes a great point and I think back to my early education and how the focus through 4th grade was reading, writing, and math. 5th and 6th grade was when civics/history and science classes were introduced. Feel like I turned out ok.

- Global warming - I do not think that he thinks it is fake, I think what he is pointing out is that we cannot create a religion out of global warming, which some people of the far left have done. We also cannot continue to predict these doom day scenarios without actual scientific back up. Mark Robinson is a conservative, the very definition of the word is to conserve. There is an inherent norm within the conservative movement to be conservationists when it comes to the land and the environment. But a discussion needs to be had on policy issues related to the environment to review the pros and cons of policy decisions that have an effect on every day life versus the natural position to conserve nature for the enjoyment of everyone and future generations.

- Education bureaucracy consolidation - for it. Tell me how these entities work together to provide the best education of the fundamentals of reading, writing, math, science, civics, history, languages, STEM and job training skills that children need to function in todays society and I'm all on board. The current system is a failure.

School vouchers - 110% for

Eliminate Abortion - generally, I do not think that government should be in the business of dictating moral decisions. Therefore I am in disagreement with Robinson here

The last two points fell propagandist to me. I would really like to read his book before forming an opinion. But to me, that sounds like people hearing scary words rather than listening to the message delivered.

I would like to have a further understanding on his position on free markets as well

---

Agreed we need to keep science and history at all levels of education. There's not a cogent argument against this. Just because my grandmother taught the three R's as an elementary ed teacher in the 1940's and 50's doesn't mean my 3rd grade teaching wife should do the same in 2022. STEM is far too important now to in any way de-emphasize science education (at any age). Hell if it were up to me I'd be teaching kids Physics in 4th/5th grades.

Global warming - Robinson has called global warming science "junk science." The conversation needs to be "the earth appears to be demonstrably warming and we need to continue examining the causes, effects, and weigh the pros and cons of possible remediations." No panic, no religiosity, but also no dismissiveness of an obvious occurrence that is likely human-made or exacerbated, and that could have broad and potentially calamitous effects in decades to come.

Consolidation of educational administration at the state level seems ironically akin to the (objectionable to most conservatives) consolidation of power at the federal level. Nevertheless, there is clearly risk in consolidating the power at the state level and handing the governor the keys to the educational car. While our current system isn't exactly a bastion of efficiency or effectiveness, I don't want a single politician/political office having that much potential control over what gets taught, or how it gets taught, to kids around the state.

I'm not opposed to school choice/vouchers as long as the implementation was careful and monitored to avoid unintended regressive effects. It has the capacity to do the opposite - improve choices and outcomes for kids in underfunded schools - so I'm fine with thorough exploration of this.

Abortion - agreed.

Regarding the last two points, Robinson feels like a Baptist minister trying to impart conservative Christian family values on the state. Only problem is, it's not 1987. A majority of Republicans support gay marriage. A clear majority of Americans do. A majority of Americans support legal abortion up to a reasonable point in the pregnancy. Women should be standing beside men as equals in the church, workplace, everywhere. And yet...

Quote:

---

"We are called to be led by men," he said. "God sent women out … when they had to do their thing, but when it was time to face down Goliath, [He] sent David. Not Davita, David." He also said that when God sent Moses to lead the Israelites out of Egypt that he called "not Momma Moses. Daddy Moses."

He said that God "knew what he was doing when he made men big and hairy and ugly. It's because you're supposed to scare away predators, whether they are in the woods or standing in front of your elementary school."

---

Quote:

---

"There's no reason anybody anywhere in America should be telling any child about transgenderism, homosexuality, any of that filth.

---

Quote:

---

However, homosexuality is STILL an abominable sin and I WILL NOT join in 'celebrating gay pride' nor will I fly their sacrilegious flag on my page."

---

Those words definitely sound like the words of a shopping-center-church reverend but are they the words of an effective prospective leader of our state?

The thing that amazes me is we are debating the shape of earth. Or when it was proven. We need science in school. It does not need to be slanted to any point of political view or religious slant.It should just be science. History should never be forgotten. Those that do are doomed to repeat it.

Wolfpackrich1 said:

---

The thing that amazes me is we are debating the shape of earth. Or when it was proven. We need science in school. It does not need to be slanted to any point of political view or religious slant.It should just be science. History should never be forgotten. Those that do are doomed to repeat it.

---

Yeah, like communism. How many hundreds of millions have been murdered by Marxist-communist governments in just the last 100 years?

And why are Leftist political movements all over the world, including the Democrat party, seeking to implement tyrannical communist governments right now?

Folks, parents vote with their feet. At my wife's Kindergarten grade level, they have lost an entire class, due to numbers. What's the cause? Well, it's multiple reasons; however, the greatest reason is homeschooling. Parents appear to be sick of the education system, here in Wake County, or maybe it's just Cary.

I think, for now, what's happening in the education system, parents are not happy. Some have the ability (for some of the lefties "the privilege") to make a decision for an alternative education, for their kids…

Civilized said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

---

No. What's truly scary is drag queen story time for children, teaching them that there are "70 genders", teaching them that they might actually need to switch their gender, teaching them that the Sodomite lifestyle is "acceptable", teaching them that it would have been "acceptable" for their mother to have murdered them in the womb, and to teach them that God "doesn't exist" and it is "scientific" to believe a preposterous lie about the universe and all life coming into existence by "random chance after a big explosion".

I think what he's really talking about is taking the FAKE "science" and "history" out of the schools.

Teach real science and history. Not the lies that the Marxist Left teaches as "science" and "history", in order to push their sick Satanic agenda.

Of course he really believes those things. And if we had real polling, it would be clear to see that most people in NC agree with him.

---

Real science and history like flat-earth and fake moon landings?

You think most people in NC agree with Robinson about what?

---

I think most people in NC agree with Robinson that WRAL is crap news, and that they've painted a bullseye on Robinson for quite a few months now. I'd even go so far as to label the WRAL staff as blatant racists. Just for fun, of course.

Oldsouljer said:

---

Civilized said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

---

No. What's truly scary is drag queen story time for children, teaching them that there are "70 genders", teaching them that they might actually need to switch their gender, teaching them that the Sodomite lifestyle is "acceptable", teaching them that it would have been "acceptable" for their mother to have murdered them in the womb, and to teach them that God "doesn't exist" and it is "scientific" to believe a preposterous lie about the universe and all life coming into existence by "random chance after a big explosion".

I think what he's really talking about is taking the FAKE "science" and "history" out of the schools.

Teach real science and history. Not the lies that the Marxist Left teaches as "science" and "history", in order to push their sick Satanic agenda.

Of course he really believes those things. And if we had real polling, it would be clear to see that most people in NC agree with him.

---

Real science and history like flat-earth and fake moon landings?

You think most people in NC agree with Robinson about what?

---

I think most people in NC agree with Robinson that WRAL is crap news, and that they've painted a bullseye on Robinson for quite a few months now. I'd even go so far as to label the WRAL staff as blatant racists. Just for fun, of course.

---

I'm not here to extoll the virtues of WRAL but Robinson's not a victim.

A lot of the stuff he says is objectively inflammatory and he's been clear that's his intent. He wants these issues to be front and center as he begins making his push for governor; he wants his name in the news; and he stirs the pot by spouting off fire and brimstone rhetoric to achieve those goals. That's not on the media.

Civilized said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

Civilized said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

---

No. What's truly scary is drag queen story time for children, teaching them that there are "70 genders", teaching them that they might actually need to switch their gender, teaching them that the Sodomite lifestyle is "acceptable", teaching them that it would have been "acceptable" for their mother to have murdered them in the womb, and to teach them that God "doesn't exist" and it is "scientific" to believe a preposterous lie about the universe and all life coming into existence by "random chance after a big explosion".

I think what he's really talking about is taking the FAKE "science" and "history" out of the schools.

Teach real science and history. Not the lies that the Marxist Left teaches as "science" and "history", in order to push their sick Satanic agenda.

Of course he really believes those things. And if we had real polling, it would be clear to see that most people in NC agree with him.

---

Real science and history like flat-earth and fake moon landings?

You think most people in NC agree with Robinson about what?

---

I think most people in NC agree with Robinson that WRAL is crap news, and that they've painted a bullseye on Robinson for quite a few months now. I'd even go so far as to label the WRAL staff as blatant racists. Just for fun, of course.

---

I'm not here to extoll the virtues of WRAL but Robinson's not a victim.

A lot of the stuff he says is objectively inflammatory and he's been clear that's his intent. He wants these issues to be front and center as he begins making his push for governor; he wants his name in the news; and he stirs the pot by spouting off fire and brimstone rhetoric to achieve those goals. That's not on the media.

---

Chem, is it possible that Robinson is just passionate! With passion, I'm sure any of us would want certain issue, we hold special, to be front and center…

BTW, think about how the media, especially the local media, has gone woke. They create a heightened basis, in which needs to be tapped down. So, what you might consider "fire and brimstone rhetoric", is viewed by others, including me, this so-called rhetoric is a simple leveling of the playing field.

Perhaps you disagree with me; however, this liberal rhetoric needs to be beaten back A LOT!! It's out of control and some may feel threatened by a Robinson type, when others are happy to see someone fighting!

In summary, you gave your opinion on Robinson as you have no idea what's in his heart, do you?

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

Civilized said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

---

No. What's truly scary is drag queen story time for children, teaching them that there are "70 genders", teaching them that they might actually need to switch their gender, teaching them that the Sodomite lifestyle is "acceptable", teaching them that it would have been "acceptable" for their mother to have murdered them in the womb, and to teach them that God "doesn't exist" and it is "scientific" to believe a preposterous lie about the universe and all life coming into existence by "random chance after a big explosion".

I think what he's really talking about is taking the FAKE "science" and "history" out of the schools.

Teach real science and history. Not the lies that the Marxist Left teaches as "science" and "history", in order to push their sick Satanic agenda.

Of course he really believes those things. And if we had real polling, it would be clear to see that most people in NC agree with him.

---

Real science and history like flat-earth and fake moon landings?

You think most people in NC agree with Robinson about what?

---

I think most people in NC agree with Robinson that WRAL is crap news, and that they've painted a bullseye on Robinson for quite a few months now. I'd even go so far as to label the WRAL staff as blatant racists. Just for fun, of course.

---

I'm not here to extoll the virtues of WRAL but Robinson's not a victim.

A lot of the stuff he says is objectively inflammatory and he's been clear that's his intent. He wants these issues to be front and center as he begins making his push for governor; he wants his name in the news; and he stirs the pot by spouting off fire and brimstone rhetoric to achieve those goals. That's not on the media.

---

Chem, is it possible that Robinson is just passionate! With passion, I'm sure any of us would want certain issue, we hold special, to be front and center…

BTW, think about how the media, especially the local media, has gone woke. They create a heightened basis, in which needs to be tapped down. So, what you might consider "fire and brimstone rhetoric", is viewed by others, including me, this so-called rhetoric is a simple leveling of the playing field.

Perhaps you disagree with me; however, this liberal rhetoric needs to be beaten back A LOT!! It's out of control and some may feel threatened by a Robinson type, when others are happy to see someone fighting!

In summary, you gave your opinion on Robinson as you have no idea what's in his heart, do you?

---

Cary I think Robinson is passionate.

And, he's explicitly said that his fiery rhetoric is intentional. He wants to put these issues front and center. He wants to sell his book. And most of all, he wants to make these issues central to his upcoming gubernatorial run.

He's willfully thumbing his nose at the media and lib-tards hoping that he gets exactly the reaction he's gotten. He wants everyone to know (or to think) that he's principled and won't back down from a fight with the media or the woke left (which is an obvious parallel to, and likely inspired by, Trump's stance with the media and his political adversaries).

He's throwing chum in the water. No one should be surprised when the sharks eat the chum.

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

Civilized said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Even still, talk of eliminating science and history from elementary school is scary.

---

No. What's truly scary is drag queen story time for children, teaching them that there are "70 genders", teaching them that they might actually need to switch their gender, teaching them that the Sodomite lifestyle is "acceptable", teaching them that it would have been "acceptable" for their mother to have murdered them in the womb, and to teach them that God "doesn't exist" and it is "scientific" to believe a preposterous lie about the universe and all life coming into existence by "random chance after a big explosion".

I think what he's really talking about is taking the FAKE "science" and "history" out of the schools.

Teach real science and history. Not the lies that the Marxist Left teaches as "science" and "history", in order to push their sick Satanic agenda.

Of course he really believes those things. And if we had real polling, it would be clear to see that most people in NC agree with him.

---

Real science and history like flat-earth and fake moon landings?

You think most people in NC agree with Robinson about what?

---

I think most people in NC agree with Robinson that WRAL is crap news, and that they've painted a bullseye on Robinson for quite a few months now. I'd even go so far as to label the WRAL staff as blatant racists. Just for fun, of course.

---

I'm not here to extoll the virtues of WRAL but Robinson's not a victim.

A lot of the stuff he says is objectively inflammatory and he's been clear that's his intent. He wants these issues to be front and center as he begins making his push for governor; he wants his name in the news; and he stirs the pot by spouting off fire and brimstone rhetoric to achieve those goals. That's not on the media.

---

Chem, is it possible that Robinson is just passionate! With passion, I'm sure any of us would want certain issue, we hold special, to be front and center…

BTW, think about how the media, especially the local media, has gone woke. They create a heightened basis, in which needs to be tapped down. So, what you might consider "fire and brimstone rhetoric", is viewed by others, including me, this so-called rhetoric is a simple leveling of the playing field.

Perhaps you disagree with me; however, this liberal rhetoric needs to be beaten back A LOT!! It's out of control and some may feel threatened by a Robinson type, when others are happy to see someone fighting!

In summary, you gave your opinion on Robinson as you have no idea what's in his heart, do you?

---

Cary I think Robinson is passionate.

And, he's explicitly said that his fiery rhetoric is intentional. He wants to put these issues front and center. He wants to sell his book. And most of all, he wants to make these issues central to his upcoming gubernatorial run.

He's willfully thumbing his nose at the media and lib-tards hoping that he gets exactly the reaction he's gotten. He wants everyone to know (or to think) that he's principled and won't back down from a fight with the media or the woke left (which is an obvious parallel to, and likely inspired by, Trump's stance with the media and his political adversaries).

He's throwing chum in the water. No one should be surprised when the sharks eat the chum.

---

Civ, with all due respect, you response was gobblie goo…