|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: A Request for Tranquility Base | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5900 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
We're getting a tad off-track here. Not that I mind, but if I'm going to propose TB's lesson plan, I need him to flesh it out (examples, evidence, data, whatever). It really doesn't matter to me personally WHAT he presents - whether it represents a wide concensus or not. Without his input, even if idiosyncratic, I'll either end up recommending Zimmer's chapter on creationism (in "Evolution: Triumph of an Idea") or something off ICR's or AiG's website. And I get to pick it.
I asked TB for his input 'cause - in spite of the fact that, like every YEC, he holds ideas which I consider to be both wrong and internally inconsistent - he is one of the more, hmm, clear creationist writers on this board. TB: Are you willing to complete your lesson plan? I have only until next Monday (Columbus Day in the US). By Tuesday (your time) the school board meeting will be over, and it will likely be too late. Let me know one way or the other so I can make contingency plans.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Wow... flush with power ain't ya? ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5900 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
quote: Yep. Ain't it great? And given my evilutionist bias, you can figure the quality I'd pick. Muwahahahha!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tranquility Base Inactive Member |
Percy - I mainly agree with you. But don't be too surprised if some creationist stuff gets published mainstream somewhere down the track. It is an uphill battle but I personally consider that a possibility based on the nature of the data.
I am utterly convinced, as biased as I am, that the data is interpretable both ways. As for consensus. You're right. But the consencus of opinion of the American people (for example) is that evolutionists are also very biased and that that may be the reason for the mainstream bias. The American people know that evolution is considered a minastream near fact and yet about 50% or more of the public choose to beleive they are wrong. I am NOT arguing that science be decided on the basis of a vote but I think the survey data shows that the American people think your bias is responsible for your scientific consensus. I agree with the collective voice of the American people (in this instance).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tranquility Base Inactive Member |
Quetzal
I will complete it by Monday Australian time so it will definitely be complete by your Monday morning. I'll essentially add 2 or 3 specific examples in eacjh section, each with brief descriptions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22500 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
TB writes: "Creationist stuff" is supported by Biblical interpretations, while "mainstream stuff" is supported by evidence. Stuff in mainstream journals will be supported by evidence and be consistent with current understandings and so couldn't be considered "Creationist stuff," even if published by a Creationist. As Stephen Austin is finding, as long as he sticks to the evidence he can get published in mainstream journals. Funny thing, though. By sticking to the evidence his articles have no Creationist content whatsoever. In fact, the only way his Creationist leanings are evident in his mainstream publications is in the kinds of problems that attract his attention. Same with Michael Behe. I'll support any findings supported by evidence. I have no religious attachment to an ancient earth and will follow the tides of emerging evidence wherever they lead. Your own proposals are not only unsupported by evidence, they're contradicted by the evidence, and they require processes that range from the merely unlikely to the near impossible, bucking not only current scientific knowledge but often simple, everyday common sense, like your layers that are repeatedly deposited, dried, populated and reinundated, not to mention the layer sorting, fossil sorting and radiometric-age sorting in strict concert amidst a great flood. But hey, it's early days yet, right? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5900 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Outstanding TB. Thanks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tranquility Base Inactive Member |
A semi-final version of a trial 2 lesson creation syllabus is up at:
http://EvC Forum: A Request for Tranquility Base -->EvC Forum: A Request for Tranquility Base [This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 10-13-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5900 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Thanks TB. Perfect timing - I have a pre-board meeting at the school this afternoon (in about 5 minutes, actually). I'll run the outline past the Bio teacher to see what she thinks. Meantime, if you can recommend specific ICR/AiG articles you think could be included, (we have a bit more time for that), that'd be great as well.
One way or the other - thanks for your help and input.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5060 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
Wow, this board is really getting hard to keep up with.
I would be unable at this time to to write for kids the defense of this of TB's in the claim of GOULD that he correctly outscoped the vision on scales that geology by uniformitarinism may historicize even if I used division in Gould's notions of cyclic and linear (time) revisioning...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5900 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
TB: Thought you'd like to read the initial feedback from the reviewer of your lesson plan. Except as noted, the responses are verbatim.
* INTRODUCTION Discuss the possibility that mainstream science unjustifiably extrapolated from Darwin's evidence of small scale evolution to 'macroevolution'. Comments: - unjustifiably is meaningless without understanding if what would constitute justifiable extrapolation- will macro- and micro- discussion include a drawn line? (where does micro end?) - how do we distinguish features showing evidence of design? * DISTINCTNESS OF KINDS & ANATOMIES Comments: - again, there needs to be a line drawn — where do you mark rodents, for example?- discussion on anatomic differences should deal with true differences and not ones that appear different (wing/fin) * SYSTEMATIC JUMPS IN THE FOSSIL RECORD Comments: - fossil gaps isa fallacious argument. There has to be a mention of the necessity of gaps — maybe the discussion should be on trying to determine a reasonable gap — how big can the jumps be? What should we expect to find?- what would we expect a gradual transition to look like? * FOSSIL ORDER Quetzal’s note: this is the only section where the prof has substantial disagreement. To synopsize her argument against the feasibility of including discussion of the flood: 1. The Flood story is limited to a single religion, essentially a biblical literalist subset of Protestant Christianity, whereas the applicability of the other sections can at least reasonably be attributed to non-denominational/ID or any other form of divine/semi-divine special creation. 2. A detailed discussion of flood sorting mechanisms, geology, etc, could reasonably be expected to take more time than is available for the entire lesson plan. TB: I’ll leave it up to you what NOT including the Flood does to your case. * CONVERGENT FEATURES Comments: - to be scientific, though, discuss (again) expectations — what would we expect to find? Can we test this in any way? * CONCLUSIONS Comments: - at no point in the lesson plan has there been any definition of what would be suggestive of creation; Are there examples?- there is no discussion in the lesson plan on how to test creationism or what would disprove it
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Interesting... all the stuff we peg him on... ------------------http://www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
Is this an annual opportunity? I may have an interest in jumping on this next year if possible.
------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5900 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
quote: Sorry, TC. It may well be an annual exercise, but my board membership expires this Spring (it's only a two-year elected position) and I don't intend to stand for re-election).
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024