Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 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:   Intelligent Design in Science Class - Sample curriculum please
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 61 of 108 (303612)
04-12-2006 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by inkorrekt
04-11-2006 10:40 PM


Fine tuning of orbits?
If their motion is altered even by a fraction, it will affect the weather pattern of our planet.Life will become extinct if the temperature shifts outside the norms. Our planet maintains the necessary conditions so that plant and animal life will be sustained.
I refer you to a message I posted elsewhere. It included the following:
quote:
Discover Financial Services
Circles of Life
How far out of whack can the orbit of a planet like Earth get before we all die?
By William Speed Weed
DISCOVER Vol. 23 No. 11 | November 2002
There is nothing further to see at the above cited, if you are not a subscriber (which I am). But the article can maybe be looked up at your local library.
I'm not up to doing a major review right now, but the essence of the article is that there could be considerable variation in the earths orbit (could be much more eliptical), and earth would still be habitable.
Perhaps that topic would be a better place to pursue that theme?
Moose
Added by edit: I just checked the "Discover" link again. There is now quite a bit of content available there, even if you are not a subscriber.
This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 04-12-2006 05:14 PM

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith
"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by inkorrekt, posted 04-11-2006 10:40 PM inkorrekt has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by RAZD, posted 04-12-2006 9:06 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 62 of 108 (303696)
04-12-2006 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Minnemooseus
04-12-2006 5:08 PM


Re: Fine tuning of orbits?
Heh. That's just exactly the article I thought of when I read inkorrekt(again)'s comment.
Glad to see it's back in the public realm, as I had an old bookmark to it when it first came out. Thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Minnemooseus, posted 04-12-2006 5:08 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
inkorrekt
Member (Idle past 6081 days)
Posts: 382
From: Westminster,CO, USA
Joined: 02-04-2006


Message 63 of 108 (304426)
04-15-2006 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Coragyps
02-05-2006 7:55 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
Like plate tectonics, or organic chemistry, or observations of quasars, or how airplane wings give lift had to be
.
These are not difficult. They are already available from Beka Publications. However, these are based on creation. ID has no problem with Real Sciences like Physics, Chemistry, biology and mathematics. They should be available.I am sure there are people working on this. As far as peer review and publications are concerned, any publication in scientific journals on ID is next to impossibility. For example, a paper got published in a prestigious journal and the editor who approved this got reprimanded and the policy has changed(not to publish anything related to ID).
We live in free country. There is competition and free market everywhere except in Education. Here again, it is selective.
Regarding teaching Science,there was a recent news article: A Science teacher showed an antiamerican video in a Tax funded public School in a Science class. There was an outcry from the parents. The parents were informed that action was taken only to pacify the parents. The teacher is still enjoying his freedom to teach non academic subjects in Science classes. Non academic subjects can be taught everywhere whereas any challenge to Evolution is not allowed.
In the prevailing situation, any text book on ID may never be approved in public Schools. That is understandable. The only places where it can be taught is in private schools.
This message has been edited by inkorrekt, 04-15-2006 01:26 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Coragyps, posted 02-05-2006 7:55 PM Coragyps has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 04-15-2006 2:15 PM inkorrekt has replied
 Message 65 by ReverendDG, posted 04-15-2006 2:34 PM inkorrekt has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 64 of 108 (304447)
04-15-2006 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by inkorrekt
04-15-2006 12:48 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
For example, a paper got published in a prestigious journal and the editor who approved this got reprimanded and the policy has changed(not to publish anything related to ID).
Cite for that assertion about the change in policy? I'm familiar with the situation in question and it's my recollection that the editor was admonished for violation of a policy that was already in place; that is, you couldn't cherry-pick the review jury for your own little pet paper, or promote a paper whose connection to the mission of the journal was tenuous at best.
There's no flat-out "no ID" policy at that journal or any other; such a policy would be all but unenforceable in the first place. What constitutes an "ID paper", anyway?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by inkorrekt, posted 04-15-2006 12:48 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by inkorrekt, posted 04-18-2006 7:15 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 65 of 108 (304456)
04-15-2006 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by inkorrekt
04-15-2006 12:48 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
Regarding teaching Science,there was a recent news article: A Science teacher showed an antiamerican video in a Tax funded public School in a Science class. There was an outcry from the parents. The parents were informed that action was taken only to pacify the parents. The teacher is still enjoying his freedom to teach non academic subjects in Science classes. Non academic subjects can be taught everywhere whereas any challenge to Evolution is not allowed.
link please for this

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by inkorrekt, posted 04-15-2006 12:48 PM inkorrekt has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Modulous, posted 04-15-2006 3:33 PM ReverendDG has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 66 of 108 (304461)
04-15-2006 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by ReverendDG
04-15-2006 2:34 PM


Link?
Link?
This is the closest news article I can find that bares any resemblence to inkorrekt's story. (hunting around google.news). As you can tell from the actual story, it is quite different from inkorrekt's version of things, so it might be the case that the story I found was not the story inkorrekt meant. However, I'd have thought that two similar cases happening at a similar time might draw comment from some, but I find no such linkage to another story.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by ReverendDG, posted 04-15-2006 2:34 PM ReverendDG has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by ReverendDG, posted 04-16-2006 10:27 AM Modulous has not replied

  
DominionSeraph
Member (Idle past 4754 days)
Posts: 365
From: on High
Joined: 01-26-2005


Message 67 of 108 (304516)
04-15-2006 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by ReverendDG
03-08-2006 10:04 PM


ReverendDG writes:
humans do not design things that reproduce.
Not exactly true.
Kevin Kelly -- Chapter 15: Artificial Evolution
quote:
Ray seeded his world (which he called "Tierra") with a single creature he programmed by hand -- the 80-byte creature -- inserted into a block of RAM in his virtual computer. The 80 creature reproduced by finding an empty RAM block 80 bytes big and then filling it with a copy of itself. Within minutes the RAM was saturated with copies of 80.
But Ray had added two key features that modified this otherwise Xerox-like copying machine into an evolution machine: his program occasionally scrambled the digital bits during copying, and he assigned his creatures a priority tag for an executioner. In short he introduced variation and death.
Kevin Kelly -- Chapter 15: Artificial Evolution
quote:
"I started with a creature 80 bytes large," Ray remembers, "because that's the best I could come up with. I figured that maybe evolution could get it down to 75 bytes or so. I let the program run overnight and the next morning there was a creature -- not a parasite, but a fully self-replicating creature -- that was only 22 bytes! I was completely baffled how a creature could manage to self-replicate in only 22 instructions without stealing instructions from others, as parasites do. To share this novelty, I distributed its basic algorithm onto the Net. A computer science student at MIT saw my explanation, but somehow didn't get the code of the 22 creature. He tried to recreate it by hand, but the best he could do was get it to 31 instructions. He was quite distressed when he found out I came up with 22 instructions in my sleep!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by ReverendDG, posted 03-08-2006 10:04 PM ReverendDG has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by RickJB, posted 04-16-2006 3:42 AM DominionSeraph has not replied

  
DominionSeraph
Member (Idle past 4754 days)
Posts: 365
From: on High
Joined: 01-26-2005


Message 68 of 108 (304520)
04-15-2006 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by nator
04-09-2006 8:39 AM


Re: ID in History class!!!!!
schrafinator writes:
I would actually say that the ID/Creationist explanation is simplistic rather than simple.
I'd say that it's not even an explanation.
Here:
A few years ago I was doing a high-speed run down the center lane of a 5 lane road in my Firebird. (2 lanes in each direction plus a center "turn only" lane.) I fishtailed it, did a 180, and ended up squirting between two oncoming cars while going backwards at 90mph.
"I meant for that to happen."
Does that explain anything? I don't think so.
Same goes for an IDist taking something that happened and saying, "Some intelligent being meant for that to happen."
This message has been edited by DominionSeraph, 04-15-2006 10:51 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by nator, posted 04-09-2006 8:39 AM nator has not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 4990 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 69 of 108 (304541)
04-16-2006 3:42 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by DominionSeraph
04-15-2006 10:30 PM


Interesting stuff!...
Fascinating article - a good post!
This message has been edited by rjb, 04-16-2006 03:43 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by DominionSeraph, posted 04-15-2006 10:30 PM DominionSeraph has not replied

  
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 70 of 108 (304587)
04-16-2006 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by Modulous
04-15-2006 3:33 PM


Re: Link?
Thanks Mod
I just find claims like that strange so i wanted some real info since sometimes people do tend to read them a certain way

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Modulous, posted 04-15-2006 3:33 PM Modulous has not replied

  
inkorrekt
Member (Idle past 6081 days)
Posts: 382
From: Westminster,CO, USA
Joined: 02-04-2006


Message 71 of 108 (305050)
04-18-2006 7:15 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by crashfrog
04-15-2006 2:15 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
What constitutes an "ID paper", anyway?
Any paper that is antithetical to the theory of evolution and which does not invoke God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 04-15-2006 2:15 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Wepwawet, posted 04-18-2006 8:56 PM inkorrekt has replied

  
Wepwawet
Member (Idle past 6108 days)
Posts: 85
From: Texas
Joined: 04-05-2006


Message 72 of 108 (305066)
04-18-2006 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by inkorrekt
04-18-2006 7:15 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
quote:
Any paper that is antithetical to the theory of evolution and which does not invoke God.
So you admit that ID doesn't even have a stated hypothesis? Just a claim to the default position.
If every last part of the Theory of Evolution were to be proven categorically wrong tomorrow, it would not lend a single particle of support to Intelligent Design. If ID is science it must stand or fall on its own merits. Before you get anywhere you have to come up with something better than we have now.
Admit it...ID isn't even bad science. It's just a smokescreen for dominionists who are so insecure in their own faith that they cannot reconcile God and the world with their eyes open.
Even if we allowed you to lie to the kids and tell them that Darwin was all wrong, what actual scientific basis do you have that will justify allowing you to suggest to our children that an intelligent designer is responsible for life and organic diversity?

When science and the Bible differ, science has obviously misinterpreted its data.
- Henry Morris, Head of Institute for Creation Research

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by inkorrekt, posted 04-18-2006 7:15 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by inkorrekt, posted 04-30-2006 5:45 PM Wepwawet has not replied

  
inkorrekt
Member (Idle past 6081 days)
Posts: 382
From: Westminster,CO, USA
Joined: 02-04-2006


Message 73 of 108 (308008)
04-30-2006 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Wepwawet
04-18-2006 8:56 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
Even if we allowed you to lie to the kids and tell them that Darwin was all wrong, what actual scientific basis do you have that will justify allowing you to suggest to our children that an intelligent designer is responsible for life and organic diversity?
Children will believe anything that is taught.In the public school, they have been taught (brain washed) that Evolution is a fact. The outcome is that our students do extremely poor in Maths and Science. On the other hand, in private schools and even home schools where they teach CRITICAL THINKING, students do far better in MAths and Science when compared to the brain washed students in the public schools.Why is this?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Wepwawet, posted 04-18-2006 8:56 PM Wepwawet has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by ReverendDG, posted 04-30-2006 8:26 PM inkorrekt has not replied
 Message 75 by RAZD, posted 04-30-2006 9:44 PM inkorrekt has replied

  
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 74 of 108 (308068)
04-30-2006 8:26 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by inkorrekt
04-30-2006 5:45 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
Children will believe anything that is taught.In the public school, they have been taught (brain washed) that Evolution is a fact.
baseless claim, science classes teach what is considered the theory that science has shown to be correct
. The outcome is that our students do extremely poor in Maths and Science. On the other hand, in private schools and even home schools where they teach CRITICAL THINKING, students do far better in MAths and Science when compared to the brain washed students in the public schools.
another baseless claim, and a non sequitur at that! Could it be that rather than evolution be at fault it could be a general disintrest in science and math? Rather than blaming something that doesn't have anything to do with how education works, you could understand a fundimental problem with education.
that is, people do not want to have progress or teach children things they do not understand, that includes evolution, physics, higher maths and better understanding of english.
that is why public schools are terrible not because of some theory but peoples overall fear of science
as for private schools, they have more free-rein with students and not as many ignorent parents, so you can stop with this baseless arguement
home schooled children can be as stupid as public school children if the teacher is a moron too, and critical thinking is non-existant there too
Why is this?
ignorant parents, and school boards that crumble to them
This message has been edited by ReverendDG, 04-30-2006 08:29 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by inkorrekt, posted 04-30-2006 5:45 PM inkorrekt has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 75 of 108 (308095)
04-30-2006 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by inkorrekt
04-30-2006 5:45 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
Leaving aside your totally insulting and unsubstantiated claim of brainwashing in public schools, you arejust plain wrong in your conclusion that the cause of poor performance is due to teaching evolution.
To add to what ReverendDG said ... Private schools can also dismiss students that don't meet the academic standards, public schools can't and end up with the private school cast-offs. This biases and skews the data on education.
in private schools ... students do far better in MAths and Science
... assuming for the purpose of analysis that your claim here is based on some valid evidence in some schools somewhere (I haven't seen it) ...
(1) How does teaching evolution impact the education in math? Evolution has nothing to do with math education, so there should be no correlation to performance in math education.
(2) Private schools that teach evolution (the non-religious ones eh?) have no such correlation with poor performance in maths and sciences.
For your conclusion to be valid (that teaching evolution is the cause of poor grades) then both (1) and (2) should NOT happen. They do.
Thus your conclusion is totally invalid.
Enjoy.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by inkorrekt, posted 04-30-2006 5:45 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by inkorrekt, posted 05-02-2006 9:18 PM RAZD has not replied
 Message 77 by inkorrekt, posted 05-02-2006 9:34 PM RAZD has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024