61
   

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Mar, 2009 12:19 pm
@wandeljw,
Well--I used that as a striking expression because my going all around the houses with nudge-nudgies and wink-winkies seems to go right over your foolish heads or in one side and out the other.

The postulates of relativity, quantum mechanics and thermodynamics, and all such like concepts in mathematics, nobody can deny. (Except Spengler maybe or Wittgenstein). The postulates of morality codes, which evolution theory liquidates, no good man will deny. Those are ideas, not that we must believe in, but that we ought tobelieve in.

The first three relate to inanimate things. Evolution relates to life and behaviour.

The obvious fact that your poseur physician is not aware of Coleridge's important distinction, which I posted a few days ago, is a sure-fire guarantee
that he will know nothing significant about the concepts he is waving in your awestruck faces. He even talks like a simpleton. And what's worse assumes his readers are. He wouldn't be my physician.

Which do your prefer wande? Surveillance by an unseen but all-seeing God to prevent bad behaviour or security cameras everywhere, every citizen an informant and a property lock-down?

You can bet your bottom dollar which of those two choices is favoured by media and the legal profession and they are expert sophists to weave your brains into the shape they want. And media can lure all sorts of life forms out of the woodwork which will parrot the easy familiarities which suit its purpose such as those the physician offered. Sometimes for fees.

Another matter which relativity or quantum mechanics or thermodynamics has nothing to say about is financial chicanery. Also manners and etiquette.

Mr Madoff would be taking the plaudits of the crowd in ancient Rome for putting on such splendid games.

"Grubby sex" was merely a metaphor for our basic instincts which evolution rewards.



0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Mar, 2009 12:34 pm
T.H. Huxley, aka Darwin's Bulldog, wrote-

Quote:
If some great power would agree to make me always think what is true and do what is right, on condition of becoming some sort of clock and wound up every morning before I got out of bed, I should close instantly with the offer.


There's a price for being rendered "good" the scientific way.

I'll translate Set's last post for young readers here.

Quote:
This debate is way over my head but I get a kick out of shouting inanities from the sidelines and especially when they help me reinforce my aversion to booze which has led me into being punished so often and to take a nostalgic trip down memory lane.


0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Mar, 2009 09:17 am
Anyone here know about the health of Queen Victoria? Rumor is, she's dead.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Mar, 2009 09:36 am
FLORIDA UPDATE
Quote:
Celebrating science would be a good start
(Mark Hohmeister, Associate Editor, Tallahassee Democrat, March 14, 2009)

I'll give them credit, the creationists are persistent.

Oh, I'm sorry, I guess they aren't creationists anymore. I meant to say proponents of a critical analysis of the scientific theory of evolution.

Call them what you will, 200 years after the birth of Charles Darwin and 150 years after the publication of his "On the Origin of Species," they're still trying to use tax dollars to teach a Bible-based science that was left in the dust, well, at least 150 years ago.

This year's effort comes courtesy of state Sen. Stephen R. Wise, R-Jacksonville, who is sponsoring SB 2396, which on Tuesday was referred to the committees on Education Pre-K-12 (on which Wise sits) and Education Pre-K-12 Appropriations (of which Wise is the chair).

This bill would amend Florida Statute 1003.42, which prescribes courses of study in public schools, by adding: "A thorough presentation and critical analysis of the scientific theory of evolution."

We've been through this. Oh Lord, we've been through this.

In 2008, the House and Senate thankfully failed to agree on a bill that was to protect teachers who sought to teach the "full range" of scientific theory, though no actual persecuted teacher could be found.

In 2007, the state Board of Education listened to a parade of creationists at public forums but in the end had the guts to include evolution in the Sunshine State Standards.

Before that … oh, must we really review everything since the Scopes trial?

The creationists have evolved. The insistence that the world is 6,000 years old has been pushed to the fringe, and "creationism" and "intelligent design" have been zapped by the courts. So now the attack is simply to try to discredit any evolutionary theory.

Do you have the desire or courage to learn more about evolutionary theory (and maybe even what the word "theory" means)? Well, you're in luck next week.

Tuesday is Day 1 of the two-week "Origins '09: A Tribute to Discovery in the Year of Science 2009," and the series of lectures, films and more will start with Peter Harrison, a professor of science and religion at Oxford, speaking on "The Origins of the Conflict Between Science and Religion."

It's at my church, First Presbyterian, and if holding that one in a house of worship isn't enough irony for you, be sure to catch Harvard's E.O. Wilson, speaking March 23 on "Darwin's Four Great Books: The Origins of a Revolution." Wilson has won the Pulitzer Prize twice. He also has argued that religion is a product of evolution. His talk is at Bethel AME Church.

What we need are rational discussions of how science impacts our beliefs and moral systems.

What we don't need is legislators trying to drag any controversy that suits them into the classroom.

Florida Statute 1003.42, minus Sen. Wise's little amendment, is an amazing document. It mandates the teaching of the Constitution, the Holocaust, respect for the flag, the contributions of blacks, Hispanics and women to American culture, agriculture, conservation, the "sacrifices that veterans have made in serving our country and protecting democratic values worldwide" and even "kindness to animals."

Nowhere in there are the words "critical analysis." Yet.

Imagine if the standards were amended to require a "critical analysis" of every topic.

Should we invite a Holocaust denier to speak in every classroom? Perhaps students should be made to watch videos by those who think our priceless young men and women often die in vain while supposedly "protecting democratic values worldwide." Maybe Michael Vick could drop by to offer an opposing view on "kindness to animals." (I remember some horrid kids from my childhood who also could help with that one.)

There is a place for those views, for all views. It's over the neighbor's picket fence, in the home, maybe in the church. But not in the classroom.

Joseph Travis, dean of FSU's College of Arts and Science and an evolutionary biologist, said it perfectly this week when, addressing politics and science, he said: "We can disagree on policy … but let's not pretend the facts aren't what they are."

If you care to teach kids to burn the flag or want lay the veneer of whatever gods you worship over solid scientific accomplishments, that's your privilege.

But don't saddle the rest of us with it.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Mar, 2009 09:54 am
"He also has argued that religion is a product of evolution."

Wilson and many others of us are free to believe the quoted statement, but of course, it is a thought not pursued by evolution scientists.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Mar, 2009 10:11 am
@wandeljw,
TBO.com - Tampa Bay Online

Teachers Praise Florida's New Science Standards

By RONNIE BLAIR | The Tampa Tribune

Published: March 3, 2009


TAMPA - It was just a few minutes into the honors chemistry class at Wharton High School when teacher Wes Newton sent his students scurrying to the back of the classroom to begin their experiments.

Carmen Austin, head of Wharton's science department, said this perhaps is where analytical science teachers reveal the more daring side of their personalities.

They entrust teenagers with expensive lab equipment.

Sure, students might break things. Teachers know, though, that the best way to learn science is to put on some safety goggles and perform.

That is becoming truer than ever in Florida schools, where new science standards approved a year ago by the state Board of Education promote a hands-on approach that appears to be winning nods of approval from many teachers.

"The standards do allow a lot more freedom in the classroom," said Larry Plank, science supervisor for high schools in the Hillsborough County School District.

It may be just in time as the critical-thinking skills so essential in science could be key to helping the United States compete in the global economy.

Political leaders are taking notice, too. Gov. Charlie Crist declared this the year of science in Florida. President Barack Obama pledged in his inauguration speech to "restore science to its rightful place."

Florida students have a ways to go, though, in demonstrating their scientific acumen, based on past results of the science portion of the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test.

FCAT science scores lag behind scores for math. In elementary and middle schools the science scores also are much lower than reading. The science exam is given to students in grades five, eight and 11 and less than half the students are proficient in the subject.

In 2008, just 43 percent of Florida fifth-graders scored at the level the state considers proficient. For eighth-graders, it was 40 percent and for 11th-graders it was 38 percent.

This year's exam will be administered this month.

Educators say there could be several reasons why FCAT science scores still need a lot of work.

For one thing, the science exam hasn't been around as long as the reading and math exams, which began in 1998. Science was added in 2003.

That means students and teachers have had more time to learn how best to prepare for those other exams. Science scores are better than in 2003, but "students continue to struggle with developing a deeper understanding of scientific concepts," according to an analysis the state released last year.

Another possible factor is that high school students must pass FCAT reading and math to earn a diploma. That's not true for science.

"It's hard for kids to take it seriously when it's not a graduation requirement," said Laura Hill, who supervises the science curriculum for the Pasco County School District.

Plank points with some pride to the fact Hillsborough's 11th-grade students do much better on FCAT than many of their counterparts around the state, with 43 percent at the proficient level.

Still, the district looks for ways to improve. Plank said Hillsborough created a science coach position this year at one high school, Middleton High, and is promoting the hands-on approach at all the schools.

"What I tell teachers is, if we spend enough time increasing students' knowledge in science, that will be reflected in the test scores," Plank said.

Prior to upgrading the curriculum standards, the state recognized it had a number of problems on the science-education front. A few of the indicators included:

Florida had received poor ratings from nationally recognized science standards experts, such as the Thomas B. Fordham Institute.

Student performance was low on state, national and international assessments.

Graduating seniors were demonstrating a lack of preparation for postsecondary education and the workforce.

Nationally, the United States had fallen behind in the production of scientists and engineers.

Building Future Scientists

A statewide committee that included some Tampa Bay area teachers worked on the standards and several public hearings were held around the state.

Much of the public comment at that time became bogged down in a debate about evolution, but the standards covered much more ground than just whether schools would teach Darwin's theory. (They do.)

Depending on the grade level, the standards cover a host of material, such as the practice of science; the properties of matter; forms of energy; the role of theories, laws, hypotheses and models; and the characteristics of scientific knowledge.

Now, as schools put the new standards into action, educators hope the renewed focus on science will launch more students into careers in biology, chemistry, engineering and other science fields.

Even for students who choose a different career path, the problem-solving skills they pick up in science classes will prepare them to compete in what has become a global economy, Austin said.

"We need to have critical thinking going on," she said.

Blake Nold, 17, a Wharton High junior, is getting plenty of opportunities to hone his critical-thinking skills. He is taking honors chemistry and Advanced Placement biology.

"You just like to challenge yourself," he said.

Nold is unsure what direction his life might take, but science opens up definite career opportunities, he said.

To him, there's an added bonus.

"It's just a fun subject," Nold said.

Austin said teachers at Wharton High aren't finding the shift to the new standards that daunting.

"It hasn't been, 'Oh, gosh, we have something from out in left field we have to teach,' " she said.

High schools in Hillsborough County already had a lab component for science classes, along with a curriculum guide to keep teachers and students throughout the district on a similar schedule, Austin said.

All this extra emphasis on science comes at a time when school districts across the state face millions of dollars in revenue shortfalls and are trying to cut all but the most essential services.

Science supervisors, though, said they have avoided cuts that could have proved detrimental to the classroom.

Schools still get the money they need for classroom supplies, such as chemicals or frogs for dissection. That's a good thing. Those frogs can cost $3 to $4 a piece, Plank said.

Renewed Emphasis

Kathy Steiner, director of curriculum and instructional services in Pasco County, said schools find that parents appreciate the focus on science. More schools are holding science nights where parents and children visit the campuses after hours for star parties or other events.

"We're getting more parents interested and involved in science," Steiner said.

One school determined to put a renewed emphasis on the subject is Quail Hollow Elementary in Wesley Chapel.

Principal Michelle Berger said the school recognized a couple of years ago that FCAT science results were a problem and vowed to do better.

Last year, Quail Hollow's science scores took a significant jump, but more than half the students remained below the proficient level.

"So while we made a great leap, we were still not where we needed to be," Berger said.

Teachers decided to transform the school's Fun Fridays into Science Fridays, with every classroom from kindergarten to fifth grade conducting experiments on Friday afternoons. The school also started a science club that meets after school on Wednesday.

Fifth-grade teacher Lisa Decker, the science club sponsor and the school's go-to person on all things scientific, winces at the suggestion that Science Fridays and the club exist primarily to improve FCAT scores.

"The test is there," Decker said, "but in the big picture I want them to go to middle school and be successful."

Decker also hopes to cultivate a few future scientists, such as 10-year-old Victoria Cannon, who wants to become a marine biologist.

"I like to swim and I like learning about animals, and I think it would be a good job for me," Victoria said, "because it's both."
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Mar, 2009 12:44 pm
@Lightwizard,
The giggling started on "scurrying" and mounted apace.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 06:45 am
IOWA UPDATE
Quote:
Iowa Gives The Thumbs Down to the Discovery Institute
(By Hector Avalos, Panda's Thumb, March 13, 2009)

Count this as another loss for the Discovery Institute in Iowa"right behind its failed efforts to portray intelligent design as legitimate research in Iowa universities. The “Evolution Academic Freedom Act,” based on the model language promoted by the Discovery Institute, never even made it out of the relevant subcommittee in the Iowa legislature. March 13 was the deadline for any further action.

The bill was introduced by Rod Roberts, a Republican legislator, in early February. By mid-February, the faculty at Iowa institutions of higher learning launched a petition that eventually gathered some 240 signatories from about 20 colleges, universities, and research institutions in Iowa.

Glenn Branch of the National Center for Science Education told the Chronicle of Higher Education (February 25, 2009) “that the new Iowa statement is apparently the first organized response to such a bill by college faculty members throughout a state.”

Although the bill was given little chance of passing from the start, the petition helped to inform legislators and the public of the depth of resistance to such a bill within the academic and scientific community. Iowa faculty wanted to nip this bill in the bud before we had another Louisiana on our hands.

After the faculty petition was published, Casey Luskin, a lawyer working for the Discovery Institute, was sent scrambling for airtime on Iowa radio in order to help salvage the bill. But Luskin’s arguments on Iowa’s airwaves did not convince anyone that counted and Luskin’s performance only exposed the truth that this bill was mostly the product of the DI and its Iowa sympathizers.

The fact that the bill was meant to protect Intelligent Design was clearly evident to those who have followed the ID controversy. First, much of its language was cut-and-pasted from the model bill from the Discovery Institute. Compare the DI version here with the Iowa bill here.

Second, Rod Roberts said he was motivated by the Guillermo Gonzalez case at Iowa State University, which he regarded as infringing on Gonzalez’s academic freedom because of his advocacy of Intelligent Design.

The bill would have allowed the “full range of scientific views” concerning evolution in science classrooms. What Roberts did not divulge is that the DI regards Intelligent Design as a scientific viewpoint, and so it now could be included in the full range of scientific viewpoints, especially when discussing supposed alternatives to evolution.

Although the bill stated that it was not intended to promote religion, the bill did not divulge that the Discovery Institute does not see Intelligent Design as “religion.”

The fact that the proposed bill is working with different definitions of “scientific” and “religion” is the tricky part of the bill. Most laypersons or legislators not familiar with the intelligent design controversy may assume that the bill was using definitions common within the scientific community.

One only finds the truth by asking the bill’s sponsors whether they specifically regard Intelligent Design as a scientific theory or as religion.

This is precisely the type of question that Luskin refused to answer directly when he debated the bill with me on the Jan Mickelson show (WHO Radio 1040 AM) in Des Moines on Wednesday, March 4, 2009. The debate is available as a podcast here.

The lessons for those fighting these bills in other states are these:

-Large collective faculty petitions can help to bring attention to the depth of rejection of intelligent Design within the local scientific community.

-Yes, there can be the danger that a bill may receive more attention from such petitions, but, without them, the only voices heard by legislators may be those who support these bills.

-Yes, there may be backlash from university administrators who fear that legislators may retaliate. But we also find new legislators and administrators who support faculty efforts.

-Ask supporters of such bills directly whether they define Intelligent Design as “science” or as “religion.” Often they get away with such bills because they rely on the readers not knowing the definitions of these terms.

-Ask legislators if they would be willing to insert a statement that clarifies that “Intelligent Design shall not be regarded as a scientific viewpoint for the purpose of this bill.” If they resist, then you have more evidence of the true intent of the bills.

Overall, the Discovery Institute keeps losing in Iowa because it continues to underestimate the vigilance and willingness of Iowa faculty to fight these bills.

On the other hand, we cannot not become complacent despite the DI’s repeated losses in Iowa. The DI is always trying to find new ways and new uninformed legislators who will do their bidding.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 07:25 am
@wandeljw,
This could be a point in time where the "Republican WAr on SCience" begins to wane . This was almost a perfunctory response to a stupid religious bill. Shows that people may be tiring of all this DI crap.


One could hope so.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 09:43 am
@farmerman,
After Dover and a conservative Republican judge seeing through their sham, they'll keep testing the waters to see if there is anything they can get away with. It's the sales presentation -- their rap is like a used car salesman who kicks the tires and they all go flat, then has a pump handy to fill them with more hot air and hope for a dumb politician to buy it.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 10:12 am
@Lightwizard,
Unfortunately, there are plenty of them out there, and some will buy into this nonsense.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 10:36 am
@cicerone imposter,
Obviously, some of them may be sold a used car (ID is the used car of creationism), with four flat tires and no engine (oh, you want an engine -- that's extra) and then try to drive it up the hill marked "SCIENCE" to find it can't get even a few inches up the hill.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 02:44 pm
All these little utopias. How cute.

Everytime a utopia has been depicted it has always been small in size, isolated and internally coherent. Its coherence being limited by the complexity involved if it was large, pluralistic and had to deal with neighbours. As such that literature is popular with limited minds.

And nothing can be smaller or more isolated than a limited mind sat at a computer. The utopia, from Plato through Huxley to Star Trek is nothing if not simple.

However, in this debate, the remoter consequences are presumably of some importance. These it is un-necessary for the computer poster to consider. And he doesn't.

It would require too much effort for a start. And it would soon shred the little utopia spinning around in his head and from which he derives so much pleasureable self-validation.

In actual fact without religion you'll be left with operant conditioning as the only means of control. Control does not arise spontaneously. And as it is obvious from the standard of the posts of anti-IDers on here that the rest of us are judged inferior human beings, which is to be expected of the utopian mindset, what sort of operant conditioning is fairly easy to predict.

"The Puritans have cut down the maypoles and the hobbyhorse is forgot."

Avoid pubs boys. Utopias are a joke in pubs.

I wouldn't mind betting that you all think artificial intelligence is a possibility.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 02:57 pm
@spendius,
spendi, Think of your local pub as your utopia.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 03:53 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You don't understand the word. A utopia is a socially engineered thing.

Pubs evolved but where secularism is rife now engineering is coming into its own. The inevitabilities of socialism are inescapable.

We are all going to be clockwork oranges. (Not the movie version- the book version--the movie was a travesty.)

The irony is that when you lot have helped to bring it about you think you will be in the elite. You'll be on parade at dawn with the rest of us and all spruced up. Fancy thinking you are on the side of freedom.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 03:57 pm
@cicerone imposter,
That's a Pubtopia.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 03:58 pm
@spendius,
Yeh, but pubs still have jukeboxes that play old ABBA songs
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 05:13 pm
@farmerman,
One of the two ladies in ABBA is the product of Hitler's eugenics experiments. The tall, dark and handsome one.

A bit sacharrine I always felt but okay for jollying along the Godforsaken lonely anomics and getting them to tweet along.

At least my pub juke box has Subterraneean Homesick Blues and Dancing in the Dark on it.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 06:13 pm
@spendius,
I have always thought that A2K meets are not useful because they prevent proper debate with those met afterwards. There is going to be a "niceness" factor.

However, georgebob 1 has been so provoked as to overcome such things in respect of a prominent anti-IDer. He wrote-

Quote:
I have expressed some concern and disapproval of your too often intemperate and insulting remarks. They do a much better job of making you look foolish than anyone else. I know you to be a nice guy, well informed and pleasant - what you have shown here isn't the guy I have met. Why don't you knock it off?


The meet must have been a very superficial affair.
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2009 08:44 am
http://image.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/a25981b0c8a00f4570189110_L.jpg

New book warning parents about the dangers of learning evolution in school.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 07/04/2025 at 07:30:45