Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Intelligent Design in Science Class - Sample curriculum please
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 91 of 108 (309925)
05-07-2006 5:33 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by Jman
05-07-2006 4:51 AM


Re: a tall order to do a whole curriculum
quote:
I know. You are correct. My ideas of meanings of terms are different than mainstream and that fact promotes misunderstanding. I suppose the main part that is so hard to "see" is that, as humans, we tend to polarize issues. We divide into camps and erect banners. Here we do this by separating into groups of "create" vs "evolve". My mind works differently.
The problem here is that "create" deals with the origins of life, whereas "evolve" simply explains why it is so diverse. To seperate into camps like this doesn't make sense, since these two things explain something different.
quote:
My "default position" is that if we bring everything to the center there are agreements to be discovered, and perhaps consensus.
That's backwards. We don't go to the centre and then find agreement, we must first find agreement and then move to the centre. Of course, like I said before, create and evolve explain two different things, and so they wouldn't be working toward the same centre anyway.
quote:
Agreement by scientists? I think they are mostly very spiritual people. Trained to think, they surely must agree that there is something which seems to be "always just out of reach". And, maybe that something is God. Of course they are also trained not to hypothesize unless there is some firm evidence. So they remain silent. I don't blame them.
Want to find me a scientist claiming that? Oh wait, your response will be: "No scientist will claim it because they 'remain silent.'" Which basically means you can make that statement and never have to back it up. Well, I guess I'd like to ask some scientists to say otherwise (proving both that they do not think God is the higher understanding they seek and that they don't "remain silent.") One stone for two birds... I'm feeling quite economical today.
quote:
Another appropriate thought might be: If we discover that there is a God what will we do with scientific investigation? Shall we give up and say: "God did it and that's good enough for me".
IF, IF, we discover there is a god, then the best thing to do would be to try to understand it, just like we tried to understand the atom when we realized its existance. And besides, who's to say that what one person might consider a discovered "god" really isn't a god at all. I mean, if we do discover this god, how will we know we have discovered it? You're giving a name to something that we haven't even discovered yet (sort of like Columbus leaving Spain saying "I'm off to America."--it just doesn't make sense).
quote:
Ahhh, solice in a flagon of ale! The sweet kiss of oblivion.
If you're trying to make a point with this, I certainly don't see it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Jman, posted 05-07-2006 4:51 AM Jman has not replied

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


Message 92 of 108 (310165)
05-07-2006 11:25 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by RAZD
05-05-2006 7:07 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
Can you explain why math is affected but other non-science courses aren't
Mathematics requires logical and critical thinking. Those teachers who encourage critical thinking build very good mathematicians.Other subjects like Physics, chemistry, which are mathematics based subjects also fall in this category.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by RAZD, posted 05-05-2006 7:07 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by inkorrekt, posted 05-07-2006 11:26 PM inkorrekt has not replied
 Message 94 by kuresu, posted 05-08-2006 12:06 AM inkorrekt has replied
 Message 95 by RAZD, posted 05-08-2006 7:20 AM inkorrekt has not replied

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


Message 93 of 108 (310166)
05-07-2006 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by inkorrekt
05-07-2006 11:25 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
Critical thinking can very well be applied to everyday life. It is not only applicable to Mathematics,but also other subjects.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by inkorrekt, posted 05-07-2006 11:25 PM inkorrekt has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2512 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 94 of 108 (310172)
05-08-2006 12:06 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by inkorrekt
05-07-2006 11:25 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
i'm not sure why I'm even responding.
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
you should recognize those words. They're yours.
Teaching of evolution has nothing to do with the performance in Maths.
Also your words. I've quoted them chronologically.
Please don't tell me I have to show you your own contradiction.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by inkorrekt, posted 05-07-2006 11:25 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by inkorrekt, posted 05-10-2006 8:02 PM kuresu has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 95 of 108 (310216)
05-08-2006 7:20 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by inkorrekt
05-07-2006 11:25 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
Mathematics requires logical and critical thinking. Those teachers who encourage critical thinking build very good mathematicians.Other subjects like Physics, chemistry, which are mathematics based subjects also fall in this category.
inkorrekt, msg 93 writes:
Critical thinking can very well be applied to everyday life. It is not only applicable to Mathematics,but also other subjects.
See that's where the problem is -- if you teach critical thinking in one school and not in the other, then the effect should be seen across the board in all classes.
I presume you are now also equivocating on the teaching of evolution as being a culprit, as you have not answered why the private schools that teach evolution also have the grade differences you note.
Please apply critical thinking to the concept you have presented.
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 92 by inkorrekt, posted 05-07-2006 11:25 PM inkorrekt has not replied

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


Message 96 of 108 (310878)
05-10-2006 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by kuresu
05-08-2006 12:06 AM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
I wrote that Teaching of Evolution has nothing to do with poor performance in Maths and Science. I also wrote that what is taught is not important. But, how it is taught is more important. I also insisted that Evolution must be taught. Here is the distinction: If evolution is taught as the only mechanism by which all living things originated, then there is a problem. On the other hand, if the teacher also tells the students that at present, there is no explanation as to how life came into existence, then the teacher is doing a perfect job. It will be even better if the teacher allows the students to question why should this be Evolution alone? Can there be any other way life could have come into existence?
I did not contradict anything. You did not understand what I meant. One more time.My emphasis was teaching Evolution with Critical thinking and Teaching Evolution without Critical thinking. Without allowing students to think critically not only of Evolution, but of any other subject does not help them to perform Mathematics and Science very well.The reason: These two subjects depend on Logic and reasoning

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by kuresu, posted 05-08-2006 12:06 AM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by crashfrog, posted 05-10-2006 8:05 PM inkorrekt has not replied
 Message 98 by kuresu, posted 05-10-2006 10:27 PM inkorrekt has replied
 Message 100 by RAZD, posted 05-12-2006 8:28 PM inkorrekt has replied

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


Message 97 of 108 (310881)
05-10-2006 8:05 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by inkorrekt
05-10-2006 8:02 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
On the other hand, if the teacher also tells the students that at present, there is no explanation as to how life came into existence, then the teacher is doing a perfect job.
By telling lies? How is that a "perfect job"? Are you sure you didn't mean to say "heckuva job?"
The truth is that there are many explanations for how life came into existence. We don't know which one is right. We do know that many of them are wrong. Saying that there are none at all would not be true.
Can there be any other way life could have come into existence?
Other way than what? Evolution is not a explanation for the origin of life.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by inkorrekt, posted 05-10-2006 8:02 PM inkorrekt has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2512 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 98 of 108 (310908)
05-10-2006 10:27 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by inkorrekt
05-10-2006 8:02 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
that's your new statement, but the switch to this position was without an explanation. Suddenly, you went from saying that teaching evolution leads to poor math scores to not teaching critical thinking leads to math scores. You also never fully explained why teaching evolution leads to bad math scores, and I'm guessing this is why you changed position--you realized what an illogical postion you held was.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by inkorrekt, posted 05-10-2006 8:02 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by inkorrekt, posted 05-11-2006 8:54 PM kuresu has not replied

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


Message 99 of 108 (311189)
05-11-2006 8:54 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by kuresu
05-10-2006 10:27 PM


Re: Links to other site's ID curriculum, if you can
I have tried to explain in as many simple ways I could. You keep on beating the same drum. i am sorry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by kuresu, posted 05-10-2006 10:27 PM kuresu has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 100 of 108 (311587)
05-12-2006 8:28 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by inkorrekt
05-10-2006 8:02 PM


waffling.
I wrote that Teaching of Evolution has nothing to do with poor performance in Maths and Science. I also wrote that what is taught is not important. But, how it is taught is more important. I also insisted that Evolution must be taught.
Message 73
inkorrekt, msg 73 writes:
...they have been taught (brain washed) that Evolution is a fact. The outcome is that our students do extremely poor in Maths and Science.
You implied a direct link between teaching evolution and poor performance.
If evolution is taught as the only mechanism by which all living things originated, then there is a problem.
Once again, evolution is not about first life, but about change in existing life over time. The science that deals with finding a "mechanism by which all living things originated" is called Abiogenesis.
But here's an easy solution to your concern on teaching evolution: develop an alternative scientific theory, based on observations of real evidence; use it to make predictions of things you would see if theory {NEW} were correct and theory {Just Evolution} was incorrect; look for evidence; document finding it; write peer reviewed paper demonstrating the power of theory {NEW} to predict actual occurances where theory {Just Evolution} failed; wait 10-50 years for it to get into textbooks.
The reason: These two subjects depend on Logic and reasoning
As does evolution. So far it is the only logical explanation that fits all the facts in a consistent and predictable manner.
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 96 by inkorrekt, posted 05-10-2006 8:02 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by inkorrekt, posted 05-12-2006 9:49 PM RAZD has not replied

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


Message 101 of 108 (311647)
05-12-2006 9:49 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by RAZD
05-12-2006 8:28 PM


Re: waffling.
As does evolution. So far it is the only logical explanation that fits all the facts in a consistent and predictable manner
This is where the problem is. Where does evolution stand if there are no assumptions, suppositions, predictions and extrapolations?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by RAZD, posted 05-12-2006 8:28 PM RAZD has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by EZscience, posted 05-12-2006 9:56 PM inkorrekt has replied

  
EZscience
Member (Idle past 5153 days)
Posts: 961
From: A wheatfield in Kansas
Joined: 04-14-2005


Message 102 of 108 (311650)
05-12-2006 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by inkorrekt
05-12-2006 9:49 PM


Re: waffling.
inkorrect writes:
Where does evolution stand if there are no assumptions, suppositions, predictions and extrapolations?
Do you realize you are arbitrarily outlawing the very foundations for formulating any testable theory when you spew forth such drivel?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by inkorrekt, posted 05-12-2006 9:49 PM inkorrekt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by RAZD, posted 05-13-2006 8:38 AM EZscience has not replied
 Message 104 by inkorrekt, posted 05-14-2006 3:09 PM EZscience has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 103 of 108 (311712)
05-13-2006 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by EZscience
05-12-2006 9:56 PM


Re: waffling.
I'm not sure that is what he meant. Of course I'm also not sure what he meant ...
Does he mean that there are "no assumptions, suppositions, predictions and extrapolations?" in the process of formulating theories in evolution, as in any science?
Or does he mean that there are "no assumptions, suppositions, predictions and extrapolations?" at all in evolutionary science?
Or does he mean that there are "no assumptions, suppositions, predictions and extrapolations?" in logic?

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 102 by EZscience, posted 05-12-2006 9:56 PM EZscience has not replied

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


Message 104 of 108 (311752)
05-14-2006 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by EZscience
05-12-2006 9:56 PM


Re: waffling.
Do you realize you are arbitrarily outlawing the very foundations for formulating any testable theory when you spew forth such drivel?
No one is outlawing anything. We are only asking simple questions. We are not getting any answers. First of all you know verywell that the foundation of evolution is based purely on Naturalism which is a philosophy and it is not even Science. Why are you still defending this holy cow?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by EZscience, posted 05-12-2006 9:56 PM EZscience has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by RAZD, posted 05-14-2006 4:09 PM inkorrekt has not replied
 Message 106 by kuresu, posted 05-14-2006 4:18 PM inkorrekt has not replied
 Message 108 by RAZD, posted 05-14-2006 9:07 PM inkorrekt has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 105 of 108 (311775)
05-14-2006 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by inkorrekt
05-14-2006 3:09 PM


Re: waffling.
WE???

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by inkorrekt, posted 05-14-2006 3:09 PM inkorrekt has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by EZscience, posted 05-14-2006 8:44 PM RAZD 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