Was the world better today or 100 years ago?

Page 5 of 5 [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

01 May 2012, 6:43 pm

Vigilans wrote:
AdamAdam wrote:
American schools teach that the Salem Witch Trials were in 1912? :scratch:

Weren't they in the seventeenth century? :lol:


No, not as far as I know, do they teach that anywhere lol I am just messing around, which Joker may have missed


LOL yes I did miss that hahahahahahah I feel so dumb :lol:



donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

02 May 2012, 5:52 am

ruveyn wrote:
TM wrote:


Ben Franklin owned no slaves. The northern Founders were not only not slave owners, they opposed slavery on moral or ethical grounds.

ruveyn


I am sorry but that's just wrong. Sure, he freed them - at the end of his life.



DC
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Aug 2011
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,477

02 May 2012, 10:13 am

Joker wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
AdamAdam wrote:
American schools teach that the Salem Witch Trials were in 1912? :scratch:

Weren't they in the seventeenth century? :lol:


No, not as far as I know, do they teach that anywhere lol I am just messing around, which Joker may have missed


LOL yes I did miss that hahahahahahah I feel so dumb :lol:


That is ok, just pretend you misread it as the Saudi Witch Trials, then you can pick and choose the date, 2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007...



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

02 May 2012, 10:16 am

donnie_darko wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
TM wrote:


Ben Franklin owned no slaves. The northern Founders were not only not slave owners, they opposed slavery on moral or ethical grounds.

ruveyn


I am sorry but that's just wrong. Sure, he freed them - at the end of his life.


I never implied that Northern folks were not racially prejudiced. But most of them opposed slavery on principle.

Why do you think we have a civil war over the issue?

The motive for secession was the prohibition of slavery in the territories. The Kansas Nebraska mini-war was over that exact issue.

ruveyn

ruveyn



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

02 May 2012, 10:22 am

Teaching in elementary schools was better 100 years ago. Compare McGuffy's reader to the Dick-and-Jane crap they teach in the lower grades now.

Back in those days youngsters were taught to write legibly and grammatically. Now they text each other.

ruveyn



Oldout
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Age: 76
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,539
Location: Reading, PA

02 May 2012, 11:14 am

Are you against online discusson groups ? Especially for students ?



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

02 May 2012, 11:46 am

ruveyn wrote:
donnie_darko wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
TM wrote:


Ben Franklin owned no slaves. The northern Founders were not only not slave owners, they opposed slavery on moral or ethical grounds.

ruveyn


I am sorry but that's just wrong. Sure, he freed them - at the end of his life.


I never implied that Northern folks were not racially prejudiced. But most of them opposed slavery on principle.

Why do you think we have a civil war over the issue?

The motive for secession was the prohibition of slavery in the territories. The Kansas Nebraska mini-war was over that exact issue.

ruveyn

ruveyn


Not to get off subject, but crackers in the deep south still insist on the absurdity that the Civil War - or what they call "the war between the states" - was really about states rights.
Yeah, the right to keep other human beings in bondage.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

02 May 2012, 12:34 pm

Oldout wrote:
Are you against online discusson groups ? Especially for students ?


Not at all. But during the off hours. School is there to treat the deficiency of knowledge and to cure ignorance.

ruveyn



Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

02 May 2012, 12:45 pm

DC wrote:
Joker wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
AdamAdam wrote:
American schools teach that the Salem Witch Trials were in 1912? :scratch:

Weren't they in the seventeenth century? :lol:


No, not as far as I know, do they teach that anywhere lol I am just messing around, which Joker may have missed


LOL yes I did miss that hahahahahahah I feel so dumb :lol:


That is ok, just pretend you misread it as the Saudi Witch Trials, then you can pick and choose the date, 2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007...


:lol: that was funny



Aelfwine
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 3 May 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 184

04 May 2012, 9:24 am

I think this is not a question about technology or the standard of living.
Your life is good for you if you're okay, and when you have freedom.
And you could have a good life without a high standart of living.
But also I think that the life as an person with Asperger would be more difficult in the past.



Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 59
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

04 May 2012, 9:54 am

ruveyn wrote:
Teaching in elementary schools was better 100 years ago. Compare McGuffy's reader to the Dick-and-Jane crap they teach in the lower grades now.

Back in those days youngsters were taught to write legibly and grammatically. Now they text each other.

ruveyn


I can't argue about the handwriting. It generally takes a back seat to keyboard skills these days. However, the Dick and Jane era stuff is no longer taught in lower grades now. It wasn't when I went to school in the 70's and reading texts for 1st grade readers have gotten even more complex since then. I googled up a McGuffy reader for 1st graders for comparison. It is written slightly above Dick and Jane and well below a modern 1st grade reader.

http://mcguffeyreaders.com/pics/1stread2.jpg

"Here is John

There are Ann And Jane

Ann has a new book

It is the first book

Ann must keep it nice and clean"

That is slightly above Dick and Jane readers which begin with "See Dick run. See Jane run. Run Jane run". The McGuffy reader is somewhat less repetitious and introduces more new words.

But here's a modern 1st grade reader with reading comprehension questions that today's 1st grader is supposed to be able to fill out (in admittedly terrible handwriting):

http://www.superteacherworksheets.com/r ... _TZZMD.pdf


It's very long so I'll only quote a bit-

"My dog found a ball.

It was a yellow ball

My dog loves to chew.

He chewed the yellow ball."

Today's 1st grader- unlike the McGuffy era 1st grader from the mid-1800's- must contend with two syllable words and also be able to go back and forth between present and past tense.