61
   

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

 
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 09:07 am
@rosborne979,
Quote:
farmerman wrote:
Several people think its a joke...


I read ros's link and I thought it quite funny. It's the intensity of the thrum the writer conveys I think. It's still funny even if the author wasn't taking the piss.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 09:15 am
@rosborne979,
Quote:
I don't think it's a joke. Far from it. Functional science education is a requirement for the health of our society (in my opinion).


I don't know why ros said "in my opinion". It's everybody's opinion I think apart from a few sea-weed chewers on the wilder coasts.

The argument is not about that principle at all and it's amazing that after all this time on these educational threads ros should still think it is.

The argument is about which functional science education is a requirement for the health of our society; whatever that might mean despite how wonderful it sounds.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 09:25 am
@wandeljw,
Quote:
The state Department of Education did not return a call for comment on the bill.


I can't say I blame them. One rather hopes that the DoE has more important fish to fry than getting involved in the mushy peas.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 03:46 pm
I seriously doubt the NASCAR folk are really concerned about the science and math aptitudes of their kids.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 06:05 pm
@Lightwizard,
Along with a large number of others who don't think trying to milk funds out of Congress with scientific mumbo-jumbo is a proper way to use up their precious time.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Nov, 2009 07:11 pm
Your the champion of scientific mumbo-jumbo and would make Congress' "give-aways" to science look pale compare to your tab at the pub.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 07:23 am
Quote:
In Turkey, fertile ground for creationism
(By Marc Kaufman, The Washington Post, November 8, 2009)

ISTANBUL -- Sema Ergezen teaches biology to Turkish students interested in teaching science themselves, and she has long struggled with her students' ignorance of, and sometimes hostility to, the notion of evolution.

But she was taken aback when several of her Marmara University students recently accused her of being an atheist, or worse, for teaching anything but the doctrine that God created the Earth and everything on it.

"They said I was a liar if I called myself a Muslim because I also accepted evolution," she said.

What especially disturbed -- and amused -- the veteran professor was that the arguments for creationism presented by some of the students came directly from the country where she was educated in the biological sciences years before -- the United States. Translated and adapted for a Muslim society, the purported proofs that Darwinism and evolution were wrong came directly from American proponents of Christian creationism and its less overtly religious offshoot, intelligent design.

Ergezen's experience has become increasingly common. While creationism and intelligent design appear to be in some retreat in the United States, they have blossomed within Muslim Turkey. With direct and indirect help from American foes of evolution, similarly-minded Turks have aggressively made the case that Charles Darwin's theory is scientifically wrong and is the underlying source of most of the world's conflicts because it excludes God from human affairs.

"Darwin is the worst Fascist there has ever been, and the worst racist history has ever witnessed," writes Harun Yahya, the most assertive and best-known critic of evolution in Turkey, and long a favorite of more conservative American creationists.

The evolution-creationism battle is playing out against a backdrop of a much larger conflict between the forces of secularism -- as represented by the Turkish military and many of the country's more educated citizens -- and forces, including the popular ruling party, that want to make religion more important in national affairs. The Islamic anti-evolution campaign is taking place in Turkey, and not Egypt or Saudi Arabia, because it is the Muslim nation where evolution has been taken most seriously. Like the Bible, the Koran says that God created the Earth and everything on it, and in many Muslim nations that ends the discussion.

But Turkey, which is officially secular, appears to be joining its Muslim neighbors on evolution. A recent survey, quoted in a 2008 article in the American journal Science, found that fewer than 25 percent of Turks accepted evolution as an explanation of how modern life came to be -- by far the lowest percentage of any developed nation. In a year in which conferences worldwide are celebrating the 200th anniversary of Darwin's birth and his contribution to science, the battle against Darwinian thinking in Turkey has become something of a rout, even among aspiring science teachers.

To many Turkish scientists and educators, this is a worrisome development. The founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, was an advocate of science, education and, some say, even evolution. Turkish science has been especially strong in the Muslim world. If Turks close their minds to evolutionary thinking, advocates say, it won't be long before religion and politics shut off other scientific pursuits.

To John Morris, president of the Institute for Creation Research in Dallas, however, the news could hardly be more encouraging.

"Why I'm so interested in seeing creationism succeed in Turkey is that evolution is an evil concept that has done such damage to society," said Morris, a Christian who has led several searches for Noah's Ark in eastern Turkey. Members of his group have addressed Turkish conferences numerous times.

The Discovery Institute of Seattle, which researches and promotes intelligent design as an alternative to creationism and evolution, also sent speakers to Turkey after being invited by the Istanbul municipal government in 2007. President Bruce Chapman said the institute helped bring Turkish evolution critic Mustafa Akyol to a 2005 Kansas school board hearing on teaching critiques of evolution.

The most visible Turkish proponent of creationism is a former journalist named Adnan Oktar, who writes and appears daily on his own two-hour television show under the alias Harun Yahya. He and a revolving group of about 30 writers and young scientists have produced more than 200 widely distributed books and videos attacking evolution as equivalent to atheism, communism and worse.

In 2006, Oktar created an international stir when he sent a book of high-quality fossil images to biology teachers worldwide. Published on almost 800 pages of glossy stock, the "Atlas of Creation" sets out to show that creatures today are essentially the same as those that lived, and became fossilized, eons ago -- an argument also found in American creationism. The source of funding for the book, which emphasizes North American fossil finds, remains murky.

Speaking in his home and television studio overlooking the Bosporus, Oktar asserted responsibility for "defeating" Darwinism in Turkey and said that Americans had helped him do it. But as he sees it, the student has become the teacher. He has created a far-reaching anti-evolution empire, he said, while American creationists and advocates of intelligent design still struggle to be heard.

The 53-year-old Oktar, dressed entirely in white, said he is not a scientist but an author "following the path of Allah." He said that by aggressively attacking evolution, he has drawn persecution in the form of lawsuits, legal cases and police torture. He is awaiting a ruling on an appeal of his conviction last year on charges that his group -- which some in Turkey liken to a cult -- had become a criminal, moneymaking enterprise.

Being an advocate for evolution in Turkey has its costs, too. Aykut Kence, who earned his doctorate in evolutionary biology in the United States and now teaches at an Ankara university, has fought back-and-forth lawsuits with Oktar for years. He began to take the creationists seriously when they circulated leaflets with pictures of him and Mao Zedong, publicly equating Kence's teaching of evolution to communism. His defense of evolution, he said, has cost him government funding.

After a decade in the trenches, Kence said he believes aggressive creationism "is part of a larger plan to convert people to a more conservative Islam."

The Islamic-oriented government, elected in 2002 and reelected in 2007, has telegraphed its views on evolution by adding doses of creationism to a required public school course on "Religion and Morals," proponents of evolution say. This year, the editor of one of the nation's prominent science journals, Science and Technology, was fired by government officials over her magazine's plans to put Darwin on its cover.

Some argue, however, that it is too early to write off Turkish science as being under the thumb of religion. Salman Hameed, a professor of science and humanities at Hampshire College in Massachusetts and author of the 2008 Science article titled "Bracing for Islamic Creationism," said secular forces remain strong in Turkey, which is seeking membership in the European Union.

"I think it will be five to 10 years before Turks as a whole make up their mind," he said. "The situation is quite worrisome, and that's why I wrote the article. But I believe the issue is not settled at this point."
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 07:38 am
@wandeljw,
When religion intervenes into scientific research in the guise of maintaining purity , its really sad to have students go through the rot of learning their anatomy and physiology and not be allowed to speculate as to where all the function derived from.
The Yahyah book, very slick and loaded with fossils , is also loaded with easily refuted lies and dumb observations.

I treasure my copy as much as my classic copies of NAtional Lampoon.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 08:01 am
@farmerman,
Yes, The At Last the Creationuts Have Gone Off the Deep End, a Really Stupid Book of Fossils by the old fossil himself belongs in a Barnes and Noble store alongside Dave Barry Slept Here: A Sort of History of the United States, Of Pandas and People, Dianetics and Scientology, and National Lampoon's "Pimp It Yourself" (all hysterically funny comedy).
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 08:21 am
@farmerman,
But, effemm, the anatomy and physiology of people is connected to their mental states as I keep trying to tell you. Treating humans as machines, which is what you are doing, is attractive because of its simplicity and its avoidance of difficult terrain in the psychosomatic world. You are always right in that mechanical world. It is difficult to see how you could be wrong. And I think that the fear of being wrong is what drives you to choose your methods.

All you will do with that approach is alienate people from science and thus defeat the very object you claim to support.

Hardly anybody is really interested in where their anatomy and physiology derived from. Where their mental states derive from is of far more interest and that is a matter of extreme complexity and shunned for that very reason. You fear it and prefer to remain in the simple world of mechanical causality and want to get us all down in the same hole then you can be king.

In such a world we would, of course, all be impotent by 25 except maybe for those who live in a pure vegetative state. Which is why you shunned explanations of an in-your-face phenomenum like lingerie shops. What is the anatomical and physiological explanation of those.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 08:33 am
@spendius,
ok, I got you .NOW do you have anything new to add?

You sound like an auto mechanic whose trying to replace a waterpump by wondering why there is rain. AM I CLOSE?
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 09:30 am
@farmerman,
You're spot on. It's addle-headed nonsense -- the strawman argument poised over and over again like Chinese water torture proving, once again, that torture doesn't work and neither does the salesperson flaunting the law of attrition. Let the snake oil salesman slither back to the pub and after scaring the bejesus out of the patrons, he'll offer his truth from the tree of knowledge, except it's a tree that bears no fruit.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 11:13 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
You sound like an auto mechanic whose trying to replace a waterpump by wondering why there is rain. AM I CLOSE?


For sure if an auto mechanic who is trying to replace a waterpump by wondering why there is rain can ask the question about lingerie shops and laugh out loud at being answered like that.

It's circular like the aura of pious beatitude around your head.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Nov, 2009 01:00 pm
@Lightwizard,
Quote:
It's addle-headed nonsense


What is? That lingerie sales are big business in order that certain culturally derived esoteric tastes can be continually spiced up.

The rest of your post is posited on that ridiculous assertion.

Can't you try a little harder Wiz.

I don't mind exercises of wit but when they become repetitive they become tiresome and proof you have nothing to offer.

Anyway--I'm watching the Colts running over the Texans.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Nov, 2009 10:09 am
UK UPDATE
Quote:
Scientists win place for evolution in primary schools
(Polly Curtis, The Guardian, 9 November 2009)

The government is ready to put evolution on the primary curriculum for the first time after years of lobbying by senior scientists.

The schools minister, Diana Johnson, has confirmed the plans will be included in a blueprint for a new curriculum to be published in the next few weeks.

It follows a letter signed by scientists and science educators calling on the government to make the change after draft versions of the new curriculum failed to mention evolution explicitly.

The open letter sent in July to Ed Balls, the children's secretary, was signed by 25 leading figures from science and education, who urged the government to rewrite the curriculum before it was finalised.

Among the signatories were the Oxford University evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, three Nobel laureates and Reverend Professor Michael Reiss, the professor of science education at the Institute of Education in London.

The letter expressed alarm that the theory of evolution through natural selection, which it describes as "one of the most important ideas underlying biological science", was ignored in the revamped curriculum.

"We consider its inclusion vital," the letter said.

In a letter to the British Humanist Association (BHA), which has co-ordinated the campaign for evolution on the curriculum, Johnson confirmed it would be in the final draft. Pupils will start with simple concepts of change, adaptation and natural selection illustrated by the evolution of fish to amphibians to mammals, for example.

Andrew Copson, director of education at the BHA, said: "Evolution is arguably the most important concept underlying the life sciences. Providing children with an understanding of it an early age will help lay the foundations for a surer scientific understanding later on. I congratulate the government for taking on board the contributions from so many supporters of science education."

The government asked its primary school adviser, Sir Jim Rose, to overhaul the curriculum for four- to 11-year-olds last year. His report in the spring set out widespread reforms to the curriculum.

It recommended stripping away the 11 subjects primaries must cover by law, and replacing them with six "areas of learning", including history, science and geography. In the next few weeks, the results of the consultation on Rose's plans will be published along with the government's response.

Copson said the teaching of evolution was particularly important in the wake of a recent survey commissioned by the British Council, which found that 54% of Britons agreed with the view that "evolutionary theories should be taught in science lessons in schools together with other possible perspectives, such as intelligent design and creationism".

Johnson said: "Learning about evolution is an important part of science education, and pupils already learn about it at secondary school.

"The draft primary curriculum was designed to cover evolution as an implicit part of the new programme of learning for science and technology. After a public consultation on the plans " which took in the views of parents, teachers, the public, subject experts and other interested parties " it is expected that evolution will be covered explicitly in the new primary curriculum. The responses from the consultation will be published shortly."
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Nov, 2009 10:37 am
@wandeljw,
Quote:
The letter expressed alarm that the theory of evolution through natural selection, which it describes as "one of the most important ideas underlying biological science", was ignored in the revamped curriculum.

"We consider its inclusion vital," the letter said.


Look wande, my little love, it is precisely because the theory of evolution by natural selection is "one of the most important ideas underlying biological science" that some consider its exclusion vital. Are you quoting people who are so arrogant that they think we don't know what a ******* non sequitur is.

If the theory was unimportant nobody would give a shite about it.

The only biological theory I know of which is more important than the theory of evolution by natural selection is the one about discombobulated cellular functioning being related to neurotic mental states.

I don't suppose for one moment that these experts who you have seen fit to quote in support of your position will have any interest in that.

wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Nov, 2009 10:46 am
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
The only biological theory I know of which is more important than the theory of evolution by natural selection is the one about discombobulated cellular functioning being related to neurotic mental states.

I don't suppose for one moment that these experts who you have seen fit to quote in support of your position will have any interest in that.


I agree, spendius. The experts I quote appear unconcerned about cellular functioning and neurotic mental states. Let me say, however, I fully sympathize how this issue impacts you personally.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Nov, 2009 10:49 am
@wandeljw,
Quote:
In a letter to the British Humanist Association (BHA), which has co-ordinated the campaign for evolution on the curriculum, Johnson confirmed it would be in the final draft. Pupils will start with simple concepts of change, adaptation and natural selection illustrated by the evolution of fish to amphibians to mammals, for example.


As if just saying the evolution of fish to amphibians to mammals provides the slightest realistic description of what actually happened in the process assuming it took place.

Even when accompanied by pretty coloured pictures showing fish, nearly fish, fish/ amphibians, or if you're a stickler for alphabetical order, amphibians/fish, amphibians, nearly amphibians, amphibians/amphibians/mammals and, at the bottom of the chart, mammals, not including cheescake off the top shelf.

The kids won't be able to imagine what Darwin called unimaginable periods of time for obvious reasons.




0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Nov, 2009 10:56 am
@wandeljw,
Quote:
Let me say, however, I fully sympathize how this issue impacts you personally.


Considering my age and what I have had put in my way over the years I think congratulations would be more helpful to you than sympathy. Neither are any use to me.

The issue impacts us all. You should read the science on it. It's a survival course and it works.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Nov, 2009 11:00 am
Dangit, I posted this in the wrong thread, so will post here as well...

Quote:
By posting this, I am not endorsing or standing behind the article. It is merely something to discuss.

10 Ways Darwin Got It Wrong
1. The "warm little pond" theory
2. The supposed simplicity of the cell
3. His ideas about the information inside the cell
4. His expectation of intermediate fossils
5. His failure to see the limits of variation of species
6. His discounting of the Cambrian explosion
7. His theory of homology
8. His theory of human beings evolving from apes
9. His theory of the tree of life
10. His rejection of biblical creation by God
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 2.33 seconds on 06/17/2025 at 03:45:02