Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   20 years of the Creation/ID science curriculum
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 16 of 305 (451503)
01-27-2008 9:15 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Tanypteryx
01-27-2008 8:58 PM


Re: critical thinking skills
Well, I may getting stretched too thin to answer all you have posted, but I do see credible ID theories and believe ID in general matches the view of reality shown in quantum physics and ideas like the participatory universe of Wheeler's.
But regardless, take a look at some textbooks. Criticisms of evo models are generally not presented, and it's not a straw man argument. Even basic things such as the fact some evolution occurs does not validate that observed processes of evolution equate macroevolution, and this is pretty important because leaving this criticism out leaves students somewhat brainwashed. Darwin's finches, peppered moths, natural selection don't amount to a hill of beans really as evidence for the Theory of Evolution, and students need to be encouraged to think about that.
A good example people can grasp is to view dog breeds. You can breed dog versions. heck, you can argue you can breed dog species as all canine "species" can interbreed, but that raises another issue of where the term "species" is used in a misleading manner sometimes.
But what happens with pure-bred dogs? They are in-bred and over time, it's not a good thing, is it? Evolution occurs but it decreases the breed's ability to evolve further by limiting genetic variation in the breed.
So really every time evos point out natural selection, Darwin's finches, peppered moths, it needs to be pointed out that there is a very strong argument that all of these things are strong evidence against Darwin's theory of evolution, and not for it.
But that argument and a ton of others, which are not straw man arguments, will not be taught to students because it is not allowed, by force of law and politics.
Btw, not trying to divert the topic but just show an example of criticism that is not included. Students are taught to accept Darwinism as fact without considering the arguments against the assumptions of evolutionary models.
Edit to add: I had not read percy's post just prior. Sorry for wandering. I think if IDers had their way, what we would have is much more critical thinking and much more research of the basic assumptions of many things such as whether the universe is essentially material and physical or not, and whether natural selection is an evolutionary or conservative process, etc, etc,....I think students would be smarter and science would significantly progress.
Edited by randman, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-27-2008 8:58 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by molbiogirl, posted 01-28-2008 3:25 PM randman has not replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 17 of 305 (451664)
01-28-2008 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by randman
01-27-2008 8:42 PM


Re: you prove my case
I am just curious randman, have you read either the decision or the trial transcripts in its entirety?
Do you know of an understand the controversy regarding the "cdesign proponentist" situation that was uncovered during the trial?
This does relate to this thread because as we saw in Dover, IDers first attempt to inject ID into the classroom after rebranding the movement choose "Of Pandas and People" as their first text. This is the kind of thing we would expect to see, at least at first, if IDers got their way. 20 years from now it might be different but this is where it would likely begin.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by randman, posted 01-27-2008 8:42 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by randman, posted 01-28-2008 4:32 PM Jazzns has replied

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 18 of 305 (451721)
01-28-2008 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by randman
01-27-2008 9:15 PM


Re: critical thinking skills
Since this ...
Edit to add: I had not read percy's post just prior. Sorry for wandering. I think if IDers had their way, what we would have is much more critical thinking and much more research of the basic assumptions of many things such as whether the universe is essentially material and physical or not, and whether natural selection is an evolutionary or conservative process, etc, etc,....I think students would be smarter and science would significantly progress.
... is the only relevant bit of your post, I would suggest you edit your post and delete the OT clutter.
Remember. The OP says:
So let us try to imagine what America is like 20 years after the creation/ID science curriculum becomes the law of the land.
We are not debating the specifics of ID or evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by randman, posted 01-27-2008 9:15 PM randman has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 305 (451728)
01-28-2008 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Modulous
01-27-2008 9:57 AM


short OT question
hurnan beings
Did you run OCR software?
'Cause these are the kinds of typos I see when I run it.....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Modulous, posted 01-27-2008 9:57 AM Modulous has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Percy, posted 01-28-2008 4:13 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 20 of 305 (451736)
01-28-2008 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by New Cat's Eye
01-28-2008 3:48 PM


Re: short OT question
Catholic Scientist writes:
Did you run OCR software?
'Cause these are the kinds of typos I see when I run it.....
Modulous was quoting the Wedge Document from the Discovery Institute, which they never put online at their own website. Someone somewhere got a copy of it and scanned it in, and that's the version that appears at many websites. Modulous was cut-n-pasting from one of these websites.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-28-2008 3:48 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-28-2008 4:20 PM Percy has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 305 (451742)
01-28-2008 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Percy
01-28-2008 4:13 PM


Re: short OT question
Hi Percy,
Someone somewhere got a copy of it and scanned it in, and that's the version that appears at many websites.
I bet they ran OCR software...
People don't manually typo 'rn' instead of an 'm', just sayin'.
Of course it doesn't matter or anything, I was just wondering.
Thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Percy, posted 01-28-2008 4:13 PM Percy has not replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 22 of 305 (451747)
01-28-2008 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Jazzns
01-28-2008 11:24 AM


Re: you prove my case
Hmmm.....wandering off-topic is something I've been warned about so discussions of Dover should be on a different thread, I suppose.
I think considering the narrow confines of the OP, my answer that I think critical thinking skills would improve and science move forward is the sum of the matter....not sure how I can add anything else here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Jazzns, posted 01-28-2008 11:24 AM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Jazzns, posted 01-28-2008 4:41 PM randman has replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 23 of 305 (451749)
01-28-2008 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tanypteryx
01-26-2008 2:22 PM


Not a stable situation
I don't think that creation would survive 20 years in the event that it might "win" the argument and get let into schools. Setting aside the fact that in order to do that they would have to get one of the most significant amendments of the Constitution overturned, creationism and ID are so superficial as to be laughable with respect to their educational depth.
First of all, they could not make any inroads into college biology, geology, or astronomy. You might get a little bit of ID but where reality is concerned, it is poison to pseudo-science.
Worse case, what you really get is an elimination of science from K-12. I mean, how long does it take to say "godditit"? Rather than 2-3 years in high school dedicated to each of the main science fields you would just have 1 very superficial general "science" class that give basic neutral facts and then the creo or ID evangelizing. What text book are they going to use. Pandas is CLEARLY inadequate yet the only evidence we have of creationists trying to introduce an actual curriculium. If that is the best they have, then it is pretty much sad.
After that, market forces take over. As less and less US students are graduating with advanced science degrees the money will go elsewhere where they are not retarded enough to let religion into the science classroom. Either the US at that point would reject the dogma or fall into scientific obscurity.
Real conservatives would not let it get that bad and real liberals would be fighting it the entire time. As soon as it starts obviously affecting the bottom line, you will get people in the middle, the ones who maybe lean towards ID or creo but are not dogmatic about it, to get serious about kicking the priests and charlatans out of the education system.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-26-2008 2:22 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 24 of 305 (451754)
01-28-2008 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by randman
01-28-2008 4:32 PM


Re: you prove my case
The point distilled from that which is on topic is simply that the only evidence we have of IDers trying to get into the classroom is by mandating a rebranded creationist text.
So the only thing we can hypothesize about is that the first year of the 20 years would be more of the same. It may grow and change after that, if it could survive external pressures, but the beginning would basically be long-refuted mischaracterizations of evolution.
So Dover gives us one ancedote about what kind of "critical thinking" ID would encourage if it was let it. What makes you think this sort of approach would be better? What alternative would your propose and how likely do you think it would be that the ID community would take your approach as opposed what they did in Dover?
I'll either bump or start a thread where you can answer questions specific to your knowledge of Dover. We can discuss Dover however as an example of what the ID movement would likely do in this imaginary 20 year scenario.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by randman, posted 01-28-2008 4:32 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by randman, posted 01-28-2008 4:51 PM Jazzns has replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 25 of 305 (451761)
01-28-2008 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Jazzns
01-28-2008 4:41 PM


Dover is on-topic?
this was the comment by admin
Please let's keep discussion focused on the topic. Those who view the scenario of this thread favorably should describe the favorable aspects, those who do not should describe the unfavorable aspects. For example, while Dover can provide some hints of the direction such an outcome might take when projected out 20 years, the judge's ruling in the legal case is definitely wandering too far afield, as is the existence of technical literature concerning ID.
Take it up with admin if you think Dover is applicable. I have stated my reasons why I think ID would help students, namely by better developing their critical thinking skills.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Jazzns, posted 01-28-2008 4:41 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Percy, posted 01-28-2008 4:57 PM randman has not replied
 Message 28 by Jazzns, posted 01-28-2008 5:08 PM randman has not replied

Trixie
Member (Idle past 3705 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 26 of 305 (451763)
01-28-2008 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tanypteryx
01-26-2008 2:22 PM


Aims determine 20 year destination
I think your post has two questions, related but separate. Firstly, what do the Creationists and ID proponents want and secondly if they get what they want, where would the USA be in 20 years.
To determine what they want can be difficult, but a good place to start is with some of the testimony given at the Dover trial by IDists and Creationists. From my reading of the transcript I would suggest the following
1. A widening of the definition of scientific theory so as to include certain subjects currently not included.
The current definition from the National Academy of Sciences is
..a well-substantiated explanation of some aspects of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences and tested hypothesis.
Quoted from Eric Rothschild and agreed with by Michael Behe, Dover transcript Page not found | ACLU Pennsylvania page 34, lines 15-19
This does not include ID so to get it included, the definition would be widened to
...cover hypotheses, but it can also include ideas that are in fact well-substantiated and so on. So while it does include ideas that are synonymous or in fact are hypotheses, it also includes stronger senses of that term.
Quoted from Michael Behe, Dover transcript, link as above, page 38, lines 10-14
What is meant by this new definition is apparent in the following exchange, which follows straight on from the above quote.
Rothschild: And using your definition, intelligent design is a scientific theory, correct?
Behe: Yes
Rothschild: Under that same definition astrology is a scientific theory under your definition, correct?
Behe: Under my definition, a scientific theory is a proposed explanation which focuses or points to physical, observable data and logical inferences. There are many things throughout the history of science which we now think to be incorrect which nonetheless wouls fit that--which would fit that definition. Yes, astrology is in fact one, and so is the ether propagation of light, and many other--many other theories as well.
Quoted from Dover Transcript, link as before, pages 38, lines 15-end and page 39, lines 1-2
2. The inclusion of God into the science curriculum
The Discovery Institute's own document, known as The Wedge Document states in it's "Five Year Plan Summary" that the Intelligent Design Movement's goal is to replace science as is currently practiced with "theistic and Christian science". The full text of The Wedge strategy can be found at the following link
http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.html
3. The inclusion of morality in science curricula
This is one of the points stated as a five year objective in The Wedge Document
Positive uptake in public opinion polls on issues such as sexuality, abortion and belief in God
So, to try to answer the second part - where would the USA be in 20 years' time if the Creation/ID "science" became the law of the land?
It's difficult foretell the future, but I predict that critical thinking skills would decline. New information which came to light would be assessed, not on evidence, but on whether it "fitted" with the ID/Creationist agenda. Inconvenient evidence would be quietly ignored. Whole areas of research would be off-limits because it would not conform to the ID ideas, areas such as abiogenesis. Transitional fossils would be off-limits since, by the definition of the IDers, they don't exist.
Areas of medical treatment and research which deal with positive views of homosexuality or supported abortion would be off limits (and possibly contraception, maybe).
If the definition of science was changed to include such subjects as astrology, then I believe that science education in the USA would end up an international laughing stock. While it's one thing to use analysis of the position of the planets and moons when working out the best time and route to get the next NASA probe to Saturn , or to determine the best time of year to count the number of eggs laid by a given species of bird, or when a woman's next period might be due, I do not believe that it will help in determining the causes of cancer or discovering cures for HIV. Neither do I believe that it will give more accurate data with regard to paternity testing or disease susceptibility testing.
If the cdesign proponentists get their way, science will suffer, medicine will suffer and people will suffer. People will suffer because if they don't agree with what will be taught, they will be ostracised as atheists - this has in fact already happened in some cases. This false dichotomy will cause society to split along what will appear to be religious lines. Taken far enough, this may even lead to genuine, "old-school" (for want of a better word)scientists being barred from employment in scientific fields.
To finish on a lighter note, the IDists can't tell you when the next bus is due, but the ToE can make a fair stab at what species you'll be when the bus finally turns up

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-26-2008 2:22 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Tanypteryx, posted 01-30-2008 3:40 PM Trixie has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 27 of 305 (451764)
01-28-2008 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by randman
01-28-2008 4:51 PM


Re: Dover is on-topic?
I think Jazzns is aware that Dover is off-topic, because he said in the very message you replied to:
Jazzns writes:
I'll either bump or start a thread where you can answer questions specific to your knowledge of Dover.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by randman, posted 01-28-2008 4:51 PM randman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Jazzns, posted 01-28-2008 5:09 PM Percy has replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 28 of 305 (451775)
01-28-2008 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by randman
01-28-2008 4:51 PM


Why can't we use Dover as evidence
I don't want to debate ABOUT Dover in this thread. I started a PNT regarding the Dover specific questions I asked you earlier.
But I see no reason why we cannot use Dover as evidence of what the ID movement would do if they win.
Dover is what they tried to do. Why if in this hypothetical would they do something different? You basically ignored all my rational for how this is on topic.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by randman, posted 01-28-2008 4:51 PM randman has not replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 29 of 305 (451776)
01-28-2008 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Percy
01-28-2008 4:57 PM


Re: Dover is on-topic?
It might be nice if you could "slip into admin mode" to rule on weather my line of questioning that USES dover as an example to address the OP as topic.
This way randman cannot dodge the questions by appealing to dubious off-topic status.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Percy, posted 01-28-2008 4:57 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Percy, posted 01-28-2008 8:09 PM Jazzns has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 30 of 305 (451835)
01-28-2008 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Jazzns
01-28-2008 5:09 PM


Re: Dover is on-topic?
Jazzns writes:
It might be nice if you could "slip into admin mode" to rule on weather my line of questioning that USES dover as an example to address the OP as topic.
I don't think it takes a moderator to see that taking the plans Dover was putting in place and projecting them forward in time has got to be one of the most valuable ways to see what things might be like in 20 years.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Jazzns, posted 01-28-2008 5:09 PM Jazzns has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024