Education

Aye , we've all been a bit 'erroneous.....'

If you didn't feel like you knew what was going on and don't like getting between two people in a conflict, then why did you reply to me? To lecture me? The point is she appears not to support the very claim she made here when it serves her own interests elsewhere. We have a long history on this so you would not understand exactly what is happening. Then again some of it happened again just recently.It is hypocrisy for her to make this criticism to creationists when she herself says research means nothing. She has done this before and I warned her before that I would always remind her when she is being hypocritical.I actually enjoy EvC debates, and it upsets me that so many on the evo side simply punk on creos, yet can openly be observed using the same methods in their own posts. I will note it when I see it.But lets get to the actual question of use or dismissal of research.I do believe that creationists are quick to dismiss evidence out of hand when it counters their pet theories. While it can be argued that they do it more often, they do not do it in every subject.People that believe in evolution may do it less, but are also capable of making the same kind of mistakes. That's why I said it was an individual by individual basis and all tied up in which pet theories they simply reject science, or bend science, for.As some creos are fond of pointing out some scientists rejected evidence of an expanding universe at the time just because of preconceptions, More recently we have evo psych (an entire evolutionary field) which uses the same form of logic as ID to make its claims and turns a deaf ear to scientists who explain rather carefully where they are going wrong.Schraf has made errors both in that, as well as dismissing much scientific research (or vastly misusing it) in sexual topics (socio-psychological).That creationists do not always fail can be shown in the fact that there are scientists, some very good ones, who are creationist. I don't like how they handle facts regarding evolution, but that is no different from how evolutionary scientists handle facts in other subjects (and sometimes including evolution).To wrap it up, the point is when a person on the evo side engages in such behavior, boldly so, and even refuses to change their way when confronted with the fact of their behavior (giving an apologetic that all data can be biased), then it is hypocrisy to confront creos with that same charge in an attempt to get them to change their way.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

That's exactly where your misunderstanding lies.First you talk about a "massive body of evidence for Evolution" and then you talk about opinions. Evidence and opinions are two completely different things.Everybody is entitled to have an opinion on evolution, but nobody is entitled to have an opinion on the evidence. You can't just say, "In my opinion, the earth is a cube". Opinions are worthless if they contradict the evidence. Yes, the experiments are controlled. Worthless opinions have no bearing on the experiments.We are talking about education here. The OP asked:

quote:

---

Do people see a lack of knowledge in science as a possible cause for their inability to understand what evolution truly is?

---

It seems pretty clear that you have a lack of knowledge of what science is, regardless of your education. I said in Message 12 that there seems to be a different thought process involved as well. You are an excellent example of that with your refusal to understand that "belief" is irrelevant to science. No you don't. Take my aerodynamics example again: I never have to "believe" that airplanes can fly because I can see them fly. There is a difference between belief and evidence. But belief is not important from an educational point of view. Evidence is important. NO.You can not "choose whichever evidence you want". You have to look at all of the evidence and choose a conclusion based on all of the evidence.It isn't just semantics. You seem to have a very fundamental misunderstanding of how science works.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I understand how science works. You come up with a theory, test it,and publish the results. That's fine, I'm not arguing with that. What you seem to misunderstand is that I'm not talking about the validity of science, nor how people arrive at their conclusions based on scientific methods. I'm talking about peoples perception. You know that there are people out there who see your evidence, and even though it seems incontrovertible to you, they still reject it. And then you and crash frog , and others go, "wel they are just wrong"...Whatever you say about evidence and method and validity and proof, it can still be rejected by other people.You said;-"But belief is not important from an educational point of view. Evidence is important."I agree that evidence is important and that you should look at evidence and decide in a objective way, but the world does not work that way. Go to a faith based school and ask them. I know what you are saying about the fact that science is based on evidence, I accept that, I've agreed with you about the way it works, but my point still stands, whatever the evidence, and however well it is backed up, if you have other beliefs and they don't match the evidence, some people will still reject it. That is why we are here on these boards. If everyone was as logical as you and went , "hmm let me look, oh yes that is obviously good evidence and disproves my belief, or supports it, so I will accept that", then we wouldn't be having this discussion.Please understand , I'm not disputing the way science works. I'm talking about what people do with the information afterwards.If you don't see that some people don't think the same as you about how it all works then you are being conceited.This message has been edited by RobertFitz, 12-16-2005 07:08 PM

Went to a Faith based school. And they taught us to look at the evidence and to go with the conclusions based on the evidence. Anything else is not only bad science, it's worse theology.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Okay, this is nit picking, but it's important. You come up with a hypothesis.A hypothesis is not a theory. The "Theory of Evolution" is not just something that someone made up which hasn't been tested. If it way, we wouldn't teach it, and if we did it'd be called the "Hypothesis of Evolution".When schools insist on saying "The theory of evolution is just a theory", they think that they are putting ToE down.But a "theory" is bigger than a "Law". The "Law of Gravity" is just a law.

...Thank you sir...In addition: I’d conjecture *expertise* in "academic minutiae" (vs. say “academia” of science) has ensnared many doting “scientists” (or whatever they are) into trying to *checkmate* anyone who doesn’t *comply* with their railing biases.The same research-educators rail at any minor grammatical flatulencies in others; then they turn around and blatantly fart about what “science” *truly* is (research vs. applied ...etc.)Farting boldly: “the NAS states unequivocally that creationism has no place in any science curriculum at any level.” (http://nationalacademies.org/evolution/)... Sounds more like dogmatic *science* hype than scientific method to me.--------------------------------------------------------------------
“Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.”

Well, ignoring the sophomoric wording of your statement, as a Christian I would agree that it is true that "There is no place for Creationism in any science curriculum at any level.”This message has been edited by jar, 12-16-2005 07:07 PM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

But we're not talking about people who insist that black is white. We're talking about education. And they are wrong. You seem to think that evidence being rejected by some people actually means something. All it means is that they are wrong. But the world does work that way. Airplanes are designed that way. Airplanes are not designed by opinion. Airplanes are not designed by people saying, "I think both wings should be on one side".The people with the "wrong" opinions are a hindrance to the way the world works, not a part of it. It isn't a popularity contest. It doesn't matter one bit if some people reject the evidence. The evidence is still the evidence. Schools have to teach based on the evidence. We are having this discussion because you seem to think everybody with a hare-brained opinion has some significance to education. Education can't consider every hare-brained idea. It can only deal with facts. What people do with the information afterwards - besides using it for practical purposes such as building airplanes - is teach it in the schools. My point is that we can not allow people who reject the evidence to force their unfounded ideas into the schools. Have you been paying no attention at all? I have said since my first post on this thread that there is a completely different way of thinking by creationists. It is not based on evidence, it is based on belief. I have never said that that kind of thinking doesn't exist. I've been trying to tell you that it must be disregarded when it comes to education.Goober down t' the fillin' station is welcome to have whatever opinions he wants, but he is not welcome to poison childrens' minds with them.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

quote:

---

Or perhaps you will admit that you knowingly took schrafinators comments out of context simply to piss her off.

---

Holmes' little attempts to poke me with sticks, pull my braids, snap my bra strap, or whatever else he thinks he needs to do to get my attention only stir me to the eyerolling stage these days.That is far from "pissed off" for me.But thanks for calling him out, Flies. I certainly wasn't going to put in the effort.

So what's going on between you and Holmes, Schrafinator?

quote:

---

So what's going on between you and Holmes, Schrafinator?

---

I think he's terribly frustrated because he wants me but can't have me.So, he follows me around EvC, trying in the only way he knows how to get my attention.It's kind of sweet, but a little creepy.

Did you make some negative comment relating to homosexuality or such things?

quote:

---

Did you make some negative comment relating to homosexuality or such things?

---

Erm, no, I don't think so.Why do you ask? (I'm confused)This message has been edited by schrafinator, 12-16-2005 10:17 PM

Did you make a negative comment about "hedonism"?