Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Quality Control the Gold Standard
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 149 of 238 (285932)
02-12-2006 2:27 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by Evopeach
02-10-2006 2:28 PM


Re: Going back off topic
Evopeach writes:
quote:
Movies are an avenue of education and cultural change as is all state screen and sound.
Indeed, but the science in movies is typically piss poor. As we would say when Geordi came up with the "particle-of-the-week" that was causing trouble on the Enterprise, "Doubletalk generators at maximum, Captain."
quote:
As in Jarassic Park.. not Quark.
And people think that the scene of Jurassic Park really could come to pass when it's all a bunch of hooey.
quote:
As in the hundreds of computer games, books and media forms presenting dinosaurs and cave men etc. and all things evolutionary.
...except that paleontology shows us that dinosaurs and humans never existed at the same time.
quote:
See evolutionary theory is so non-mathmatical, so soft and squishey, no qualitative and plastic that people with no scientific training at all can be indoctrinated with out understanding tensor analysis or partial differential equations.
Incorrect. Evolutionary theory is heavily mathematical. It's why we have population biology. You need a heavy dose of statistical theory in order to be able to do it.
quote:
So every level of education from pre-school through college teaches science that assumes evolution is true and proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
(*chuckle*)
When was the last time a pre-school class did any sort of biology? And since when did the typical high school biology class spend any real time on the subject? Quick: Which of us remember the evolution part of our high school bio class? Now, how many of us remember having to remember the steps of the Krebs cycle or vaguely remember the names of the organelles in the cell such as "Golgi apparatus" and "endoplasmic reticulum"? Most high school biology is concerned with the cell and dissection, not foundational concepts.
quote:
Certainly not on TV documentaries, NOVA, sci-fi, A&E, NPR or any other outlet
You really haven't watched all of those outlets, have you? Go turn on Discovery or the Learning Channel and just see how many programs they run regarding ghosts, astrology, and angels. Turn on SciFi and see how many programs about extraterrestrials and alien abductions show up. And since when did A&E become the Science Channel?
There are some good moments out there. It was good to see Discovery replay the Cosmos series and the Science Channel doesn't seem to fall prey to pseudoscience nearly as often, but they are niche-market channels. You wouldn't tune in unless you were already interested in the subject.
quote:
Those bad biology books and such are written by evos and reviewed by evos
BWAHAHAHA!
You really think the typical high school biology text was written by a biologist? Are you really that naive? High school textbooks are written by the publishers who know that unless they can convince Texas to buy the book, they aren't going to sell any of them.
And with the ex-governor of Texas claiming that "intelligent design" should be taught in public schools, what do you think those publishers are going to do?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Evopeach, posted 02-10-2006 2:28 PM Evopeach has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by crashfrog, posted 02-12-2006 12:57 PM Rrhain has not replied
 Message 156 by Evopeach, posted 02-13-2006 11:49 AM Rrhain has replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 181 of 238 (286753)
02-15-2006 3:23 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by Evopeach
02-13-2006 11:49 AM


Re: Going back off topic
Evopeach responds to me:
quote:
Funny I jest took a look at two Biology books
Titles, please? I'd like to look them up.
Here's the title of my college bio textbook:
Life: The Science of Biology, Second Edition, by Purves/Orians.
Now, who are Purves and Orians? Well, Bull Purves was professor of Biology at Harvey Mudd College...and the prof from whom I took Biology. Gordon Orians is from the University of Seattle. The book was reviewed by 42 people, including Lynn Margulis, first wife of Carl Sagan and proponent of endosymbiotic theory.
But, none of those reviewers wrote the book. In fact, Purves and Orians didn't really collaborate that much. The majority of the book was written by Purves and covers basic biology from cellular dynamics through evolutionary theory while Orians wrote the sections on population biology. Oh, they certainly listened to their comments and the feedback from the first edition, but the book is theirs, not the reviewers'.
And let us not forget, just because someone's name is on the cover does not mean they had anything to do with the book. This was a fairly big scandal not so long ago as authors finally got a look at the books that bore their names and couldn't find anything that they had written inside.
And then there's just the fact that the books are piss poor. The AAAS did a review of the common science textbooks used for junior high school and not one textbook series from any of the publishers managed to get a good score in the life sciences. And this wasn't an issue of whether they covered evolution. It was rating things such as the ability to state a definition clearly, identifying what the purpose of a section was, etc.
The process by which a textbook is usually written, especially for primary and secondary education, is that the publisher decides to write a book. But, they don't have any authors so they hire a content provider. The content provider, however, doesn't have any authors, either, so they hire freelancers, assigning them topics and the state standards they are trying to meet. The freelancers, independently, write the various sections which is returned to the content provider. The content provider does some fact checking then edits and compiles the book and sends it to the publisher.
Do you really think that a public school biology textbook is "written by evos and reviewed by evos"? Please.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by Evopeach, posted 02-13-2006 11:49 AM Evopeach has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by Evopeach, posted 02-15-2006 5:55 PM Rrhain has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 182 of 238 (286755)
02-15-2006 3:45 AM
Reply to: Message 171 by Evopeach
02-14-2006 5:16 PM


Re: Going back off topic
Evopeach writes:
quote:
And such puts my figure which I have said was an estimate in thr range of 4100 plus.
Incorrect. 4013 to one significant figure is 4000, not 5000. Your error is more than 20%. And despite your claim that because there was no decimal point, that means the error term can be as much as 999, that isn't the way scientists actually calculate error terms. Instead, error terms are calculated statistically or to be within one measurable unit, depending upon the method of mensuration.
For example, suppose you are using a ruler to measure a distance. You should be able to measure the distance to within +/- 1 of the smallest gradations. In fact, you really ought to be able to eyeball half of one of those gradations, possibly a third.
I daresay counting students is something that you can get down to the individual student. And since students don't come in fractional amounts, claiming "5000" students indicates you may be off by as much as 999 students is to be disingenuous at best. If the count were 4013, any rounding would be to 4000, not 5000. Too, you wouldn't say that you started with 4013 and then went to 5000 in order to have one significant figure with an error term. Instead, you'd say 4013 +/- 1 student.
quote:
And if you think there has been any lessening of evolutionary teaching in high schools in Texas and California or anywhere else you are just intellectually dishonest.
You obviously don't live in California. Let me introduce you to the little town of Vista, CA, just north of San Diego and kitty-corner to the San Diego Wild Animal Park.
Let us not forget the recent flap regarding the California high school that was going to teach "intelligent design" as a "philosophy" class...except that it was going to be the only subject involved with the only presentation being that it was absolutely true and taught by a minister's wife.
quote:
He did of course turn down my offer to fly Duane Gish in from So Cal and sponsor all expenses for a debate at Rice on his turf.
That's because Gish is a fraud and a hack. Why would anybody waste his time and insult the intelligence of the students?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 5:16 PM Evopeach has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by Evopeach, posted 02-15-2006 5:36 PM Rrhain 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