Jimmy Higgins

Actually, I thought it would be better to do a 90 minute film paralleling one of my favorite movies of all-time, 12 Angry Men. Instead of the 12 people being in a jury, they are the members of a school committee, deciding whether or not ID should be taught in science classes. You'd have the Henry Fonda on his own in the beginning, with 11 different stages of creationism belief from mistaken and easily corrected to downright repugnant Hovindism (J Lee Cobb's character).

What I like most about this idea, is that it would target the whole spectrum of creationist beliefs, from those who were raised on it, but can be swayed with reason to born-agains who are dead sure, they'll never be wrong again to the theives of the line of Hovind. So you can work on all the varying degrees of ignorance and perhaps make a difference in atleast the people that will listen. Like Fonda says to the old man in the movie, that he shouldn't worry about the ignoramus, because he can't hear him, he never will be able to. Also, we may be able to expose the strife that does exist between the creationist camps.

KC

THe ID community has their own drama along those lines (in the form of a play, which I saw performed), called 'The Rule', where a teacher fights with a schoolboard to teach alternatives to evolution. Guess who wins?

Cheers,

KC

Vesica

First of all, it won't work...any more than arguments or a video would convert you to anything.

Second:
I was thinking this morning about the best way to convince people to accept evolution.

Accept which part of evolution? No one on these boards seems to differentiate between the part and the whole of either evolution or believing in Creation (which should not be considered synonymous with supporting Creation Science).

Just curious.

Happy Wonderer

I hope that you are wrong -- if a person can't be convinced by an argument then there is really not much hope for them as a participant of the human experiment. To quote a bumper sticker If you can't change your mind, are you sure that you have one?"

There is only one part of the theory of evolution , which is a biological theory of the origin of species. In other words, it is an answer to the question "why is there such a wonderful variety of critters on Earth?" Although the word evolution is sometimes used in other contexts to indicate "growth" (eg. the "evolution of solar systems"), the "theory of evolution" only describes life.

The theory of evolution does not attempt to answer any of the following questions:

Where did the first cell come from?
How was the Earth formed?
Why is there a universe?
What acts are moral?
How is the mind related to the body?
What existed before the Universe?
Is Earth the only planet to support life?
Did the unverse begin in a "big bang?"

You can have whatever ignorant views you like about the answers to those questions and still accept the theory of Evolution. You'd possibly be annoying to physicists, astronomers, or psychologists, but you won't annoy biologists as long as you accept the theory (or law) of evolution as the best explanation of the data that we have.

HW

[ November 14, 2002: Message edited by: Happy Wonderer to add "the theory of evolution everywhere"; sloppy wording confuses people.]

[ November 14, 2002: Message edited by: Happy Wonderer ]</p>

Biff the unclean

Okay then, don't hit them with the heel of your hand. Maybe try a mallet of some sort...or a small crow bar

Happy Wonderer

Sorry, I'll try harder next time

HW

luvluv

sci-girl:

I still don't see why you care whether anyone accepts it or not.

Why does a person going about their life, doing their work (which, for most of us, has nothing to do with science) even need to have an opinion on evolution?

Jack the Bodiless

Why does a person going about their life, doing their work (which, for most of us, has nothing to do with mathematics beyond adding/subtracting) even need to have an opinion on algebra?

Why does a person going about their life, doing their work (which, for most of us, has nothing to do with geography) even need to have an opinion on the shape of the Earth?

...etc.

Of course, if there was an organized movement to ban algebra and impose flat-Earth doctrine: maybe even you might care a little about that.

Or would you?

luvluv

Well, this thread was not about BANNING the teaching of evolution, but about CONVINCING PEOPLE TO BELIEVE IT. Why should any of you care whether or not people beleive it?

I would certainly be against someone banning the study of anything, but that still fails to justify a proselytizing evolutionist. Seems kinda silly to me. What does it matter to you if every non-scientist in the world goes to their grave not believing in evolution?

pz

What an odd comment. Do you think scientists are some kind of autonomous, non-human sprouts that do not interact with non-scientists? That they don't send their kids to public schools where they play and learn with non-scientists, and are taught be non-scientists?

It matters. The world would be a better place if everyone, including non-scientists, were better educated and more aware of the way the world works.

This is also true of fields other than science. It would also be a better world if everyone were able to read and appreciate poetry, or sing, or paddle a kayak. We all have to do our part to elevate our fellow humans.

And while I don't think it is necessary that everyone be experts in evolutionary biology, I do think it is our duty to at least try to stomp out actively moronic ideas like creationism. This problem is greater than someone just admitting that they aren't particularly interested in biology, and haven't studied it much (which is OK) -- creationists are people who peddle lies. What they claim is flatly, incontrovertibly, obtusely wrong. It's anti-education. It stupidifies (if that were a word) people. We wouldn't have to shove the definitions of "allele" or Hox genes or Hardy-Weinberg equilibria down people's throats if there weren't this virulent strain of ignorance going around.