Well, if we keep teaching Creationism in school, instead of actual science, as well as keep perpetuating the whole "both sides" nonsense, the US will certainly wind up as a big goose egg.
waldteufel · 26 June 2011
She's wonderful. Watch all of her stuff on Youtube. You'll love it.
ogremk5 · 26 June 2011
What about Newton? Why do we still teach Newton when we know he's wrong, huh? Can't explain that.
apokryltaros · 26 June 2011
ogremk5 said:
What about Newton? Why do we still teach Newton when we know he's wrong, huh? Can't explain that.
Who gives a fig about him?
Karen S. · 27 June 2011
Too funny! So let's play Duck Duck Goose in science class!
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 27 June 2011
Tide goes in, tide goes out.
You can't explain that, so how can you teach it? Or if you do, at least teach both explanations (ok, Ptolemy didn't actually explain it at all, but what do you say to O'Reilly's brilliant observation?).
In all seriousness, I would point out that at least there were two competing planetary models once, both of which did have explanatory value during the primitive state of pre-Newtonian physics. ID/creationism has never been so much an explanation as an anthropocentric placeholder. Paley might have at least been a serious attempt, but wasn't all that convincing even to pre-Darwin biologists, which is one reason why Darwin's explanatory theory quickly took over biology at least in the aspect of common descent with modification.
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad said:
ID/creationism has never been so much an explanation as an anthropocentric placeholder.
I call your attention to an essay published by Spencer in 1852, at WikiSource:
The Development Hypothesis
goliardo · 28 June 2011
Not everybody is so sure that the Sun is the center of the Solar System.
Some people ask some interesting questions:
http://johnmartin2010.blogspot.com/
http://www.galileowaswrong.blogspot.com/
mrg · 28 June 2011
goliardo said:
Not everybody is so sure that the Sun is the center of the Solar System.
Oh PLEASE don't say that ... the last time Pandas ran an article on ge0centr1$t$, one showed up and gish-galloped interminable and completely incomprehensible cut-and-paste lists of their claims.
Frank J · 30 June 2011
mrg said:
goliardo said:
Not everybody is so sure that the Sun is the center of the Solar System.
Oh PLEASE don't say that ... the last time Pandas ran an article on ge0centr1$t$, one showed up and gish-galloped interminable and completely incomprehensible cut-and-paste lists of their claims.
Give him (her?) a break. Cutting and pasting is hard work. At least one ge0centr1$t, Tony Pagano (Talk.Origins regular for ~15 years) has learned the ID strategy of not making any alternate that can be easily falsified, but demanding that "Darwinists" convince him of heliocentrism. I asked him several times why he doesn't make the same demand of heliocentric YECs and OECs, and he has refused to answer.
It's all about the science. It really is. ;-)
Atheistoclast · 30 June 2011
Teach kids that the peer-reviewed literature on evolutionary theory is full of controversy and dispute.
Science is full of internal debates. This is what differentiates it from dogma.
DS · 30 June 2011
Atheistoclast said:
Teach kids that the peer-reviewed literature on evolutionary theory is full of controversy and dispute.
Science is full of internal debates. This is what differentiates it from dogma.
Agreed. That is exactly what the peer reviewed literature is for. That is exactly how I teach.
Of course, when a question has been answered conclusively and there is no longer any real controversy, then one should no longer pretend that there is. It is then sufficient to point out historical controversies and their resolutions. Unless you are intimately familiar with all of the literature, at least on a given subject, this will be very difficult, especially on the leading edge of science. That's why amateurs and wannabes don't have the right to determine what is an actual controversy and what is not.
John · 21 July 2011
I endorse RBH's original observation. I'm in love too. It's almost as funny as Gary Shteyngart's original trailer for his novel "Super Sad True Love Story":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfzuOu4UIOU
Can't wait for this lovely young woman to discuss the theory that the Apollo moon landings were a hoax staged by NASA and Hollywood!
13 Comments
apokryltaros · 26 June 2011
Well, if we keep teaching Creationism in school, instead of actual science, as well as keep perpetuating the whole "both sides" nonsense, the US will certainly wind up as a big goose egg.
waldteufel · 26 June 2011
She's wonderful. Watch all of her stuff on Youtube. You'll love it.
ogremk5 · 26 June 2011
What about Newton? Why do we still teach Newton when we know he's wrong, huh? Can't explain that.
apokryltaros · 26 June 2011
Karen S. · 27 June 2011
Too funny! So let's play Duck Duck Goose in science class!
https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 27 June 2011
Tide goes in, tide goes out.
You can't explain that, so how can you teach it? Or if you do, at least teach both explanations (ok, Ptolemy didn't actually explain it at all, but what do you say to O'Reilly's brilliant observation?).
In all seriousness, I would point out that at least there were two competing planetary models once, both of which did have explanatory value during the primitive state of pre-Newtonian physics. ID/creationism has never been so much an explanation as an anthropocentric placeholder. Paley might have at least been a serious attempt, but wasn't all that convincing even to pre-Darwin biologists, which is one reason why Darwin's explanatory theory quickly took over biology at least in the aspect of common descent with modification.
Glen Davidson
TomS · 27 June 2011
goliardo · 28 June 2011
Not everybody is so sure that the Sun is the center of the Solar System.
Some people ask some interesting questions:
http://johnmartin2010.blogspot.com/
http://www.galileowaswrong.blogspot.com/
mrg · 28 June 2011
Frank J · 30 June 2011
Atheistoclast · 30 June 2011
Teach kids that the peer-reviewed literature on evolutionary theory is full of controversy and dispute.
Science is full of internal debates. This is what differentiates it from dogma.
DS · 30 June 2011
John · 21 July 2011
I endorse RBH's original observation. I'm in love too. It's almost as funny as Gary Shteyngart's original trailer for his novel "Super Sad True Love Story":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfzuOu4UIOU
Can't wait for this lovely young woman to discuss the theory that the Apollo moon landings were a hoax staged by NASA and Hollywood!