Hayden

<img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Starboy

Yes Peez of course. The �known� I am referring to is the factor that decides the scientific controversy. I make this addition to scigirls post because to many Christians it is not obvious that nature is the final deciding factor when it comes to science. They are therefore very willing to accept answers to scientific questions based on an appeal to the authority of god rather than the authority of nature. I will be the first person to agree with you that there is no such thing as scientific �truth�.

I do find it interesting that you do not distinguish the corroboration of theories vs. the validity of fact interpreted in the light of those theories. Prior to the theory of evolution the �fact� you refer to was not obvious, only in the light of the theory did the fossil and natural record make sense.

Fact confirms/disconfirms theory, theory interprets fact.

Starboy

KnightWhoSaysNi

Hi Sciteach,

First, let me just say that I'm currently a teacher in training and some day soon I'll be in front of a high school classroom like yourself.

As a professional colleague, I'd have to say that it is your responsibility to teach science in accordance to what is accepted by the concensus of the scientific community. It is irresponsible and a disservice to your students to teach pseudoscientific claptrap from religious idealogues from the Discovery Institute or ICR as an "alternative scientific theory." This is like teaching holocaust revisionism as an alternative historical theory in a social studies class on WWII, or astrological signs as an alternative to psychology.

When your students graduate and go on to university to take biology, geology, or anthropology, many will learn from their course work and their professors that their high school teacher was full of it, and it may contribute to undermining their faith if they're religious. Many will even feel resentful for being 'hoodwinked.' This was my feeling after taking a geology course and learning the hard way that that 7th grade video I saw on "evidence for the Genesis Flood" was full of crap.

When you studied for your BEd, you probably learned about "inquiry based" teaching. Here's something to ask yourself, and perhaps your students:

Why is it that the vast majority of the scientific community, from all cultural and religious backgrounds, are virtually unanimous in the acceptance of evolutionary biology? There are also countless articles and research projects on evolution in the peer reviewed scientific literature in biology, medicine, genetics, and paleontology. Why is this so, and nothing supporting 'intelligent design' in this literature? Do you think this is anywhere near an indication that 'intelligent design' is a competing 'scientific theory' on the same footing as evolution?

Here's some convincing evidence for macro-evolution, if you haven't seen it yet:

<a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/" target="_blank">29 Evidences for Macro-evolution</a>

Hmm, it's time for the <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001509" target="_blank">chimp/human chromosome challenge</a>.

[ October 08, 2002: Message edited by: Nightshade ]</p>

galiel

"Oy." It's a Yiddish exclamation of dismay, a groan of anguish, or, in general, the sensation one gets when contemplating the possibility that Sciteach is more (less?) than just an irritating fundie troll and that some young minds will have to put up with his anti-science so that they can grow beyond him and unlearn his nonsense in following years.

Come to think of it, that merits a full "Oy vey."

HRG

You mean, Monet painted them to Debussy's music ?

(sorry, could not resist ...)
HRG

Hayden

Oh, okay. I didn't mean that I thought he was qualified to teach biology, but he's involved in some sort of science, somehow...

I wonder what the bible says about lightning... Or rainbows, come to think of it.

HR

Edited to add: I agree that he's trolling with this thread, however.

[ October 09, 2002: Message edited by: Hayden ]</p>

Oolon Colluphid

That is due to:

(a) simply not knowing what the evidence is by which its factual status has been arrived at. For just a tiny taster, a mere surface scratch of the evidence, have a good long read through these <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/" target="_blank">29+ Evidences for Macroevolution</a>. Actually, I�d suggest you don�t come back here, and certainly don�t step in front of a class, till you know what it is you�re rejecting. How can you reject something you don�t understand and know so little about?

(b) ignorance of what a scientific fact is. Gould summed it up quite succinctly:

Evolution, meaning shared ancestry of all life on earth, and its diversity being due to descent with modification, is such a fact. It is as much a fact as the earth going round the sun, and is based on the same sort of evidence: tons and tons of coherent inferences from millions of observations.

Beyond that, I suggest you look into basic epistemology.

To whom? Literal biblical creationism is disproven to all except religious zealots, who won�t shift from their beliefs at any price. Ask Osama.

Theories are explanations. Remove the theory, and you still have all the evidence to explain. Why, for instance, do all marsupials, from kangaroo to koala, marsupial mole to wombat and thylacine, give birth to the same sort of very undeveloped young, which then grow in a pouch, and why are marsupials (with but one exception) only found in Australasia?

And this is wrong how? It is not simply that they�re shared, it�s the pattern of this commonality. There is a nested hierarchy of traits, which was obvious even to the ancients and which Linnaeus used to base taxonomy on -- long before Darwin. See for instance here: <a href="http://tolweb.org/tree/home.pages/popular.html" target="_blank">http://tolweb.org/tree/home.pages/popular.html</a>

Ah, the old �no transitional fossils�, perhaps? Fragmentary for sure. Do a Google for �taphonomy� to see why. But not some: despite the fragmentary nature of the record (you�d have every creature that ever lived perserved, would you?), there are literally tons of fossils, not a single one of which contradicts evolution. Just down the road (in American terms ) from me there are Jurassic cliffs full of them.

Not necessarily, and define complexity. (The Burgess Shale fauna was already pretty damned complex.) What is shows is patterns, like fish always coming before mammals, ferns before flowering plants.

Then what�s the bloody point? You�ve made your mind up. Why did you bother to come here then?

Ah, design... ( @ the regulars).. let me tell you a bit about your creator�s designs.

He put eyes that do not work on animals that do not need them since they live in total darkness.

He gave the nautilus a very good pinhole-camera eye, but no lens.

He gave the Chinese grass carp special pharyngeal teeth to grind its food, but no enzyme or gut bacteria to digest cellulose.

He gave us our post-auricular muscles -- the muscle that in other mammals moves the ears to point towards sounds -- the better for us to wiggle our ears with.

He gave pythons and whales bits of pelvis.

He gave humans a broken version of the gene for making our own vitamin C. A gene that is broken in exactly the same way in apes. Thus condemning those without adequate diets to scurvy.

He gave birds turned-off genes for making teeth and full fibulas, which no bird has.

He gave mammals a tidal respiratory system that is less efficient than the through-flow one of birds. He even used this design for bats.

He routed the nerve that works the mammalian larynx (in the neck) from the spine in the neck, down under the aorta by the heart and back up again. Even in giraffes. And used this same flawed design (using more materials than necessary) over and over, in however many �kinds� of mammal there are.

He put female parts in male flowers.

He put the opening of the human larynx (leading to the trachea) off from the pharynx, thus condemning millions to choking to death on their food.

He put the human birth canal through the pelvis as with other mammals despite our huge heads, thus condemning millions more to a range of birth complications.

He formed mammalian sperm such that it can only be made at lower-than-body temperature, yet had testes develop inside the body. And the canal they pass down to get to the scrotum leaves a weakness through which the gut commonly herniates.

He gave mitochondria their own separate genome. Everything else, from brains to livers, is coded for in nuclear DNA. And he gave mitochondria a genome very similar to that of a bacterium.

He formed many organisms to be utterly dependant on other organisms. Such as phorid flies, ichneumon wasps, and the human body louse and the bacterium that causes epidemic typhus.

He formed Ebola Zaire, hookworms, sand fleas, tapeworms, tongue worms, anthrax, cholera, influenza and bot flies. And HIV.

He put wings on flightless beetles.

He put wings on kiwis.

He gave us DNA containing vast quantities of complete rubbish.

He gave humans a pocket in the gut which is very prone to blockage leading to life-threatening rupture.

He gave us a jaw too small for all our teeth.

And so on. And on. References and more details for all these available on request.

Where�s the sublime grandeur, eh pal?

TTFN, Oolon

[Edited for annoying tyops]

[ October 09, 2002: Message edited by: Oolon Colluphid ]</p>

Babylon Sister

Oolon: You continue to impress me. Your simple, clear, concise replys are always a pleasure to read. I wish my verbal cupboards were always so well stocked.

Wyz_sub10

God works in mysterious ways. Who are we to question him?

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go and separate the cotton from the wool in my closet.

In all seriousness, it makes me sick to my stomach that someone like scitech is responsible in part for educating kids. His ignorance is exactly what's wrong with schools in North America. I would never let my child's head be filled with his nonsense and mythological rhetoric, not to mention allowing him to transfer his unashamed stupidity to any hungry minds.

[ October 09, 2002: Message edited by: Wyz_sub10 ]

[ October 09, 2002: Message edited by: Wyz_sub10 ]</p>

Duvenoy

<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

Well said, Oolon!

If I were into praying, I would pray a prayer that sciteach would never set foot in any science class except as a student under a very strict and highly knowledgable instructor; one who I'd like to study under myself.

doov