Scientific Illiteracy and the Partisan Takeover of Biology

National Center for Science Education ^ | 18 April 2006 | Staff

[Mamzelle]

re: why not try and scare the fundies away from science revisionism? Otherwise, the dems will win!)))

Uh, huh...? I'm sure you just tremble at the thought of dems winning...trembling with joy.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Placemarker, shmacemarker--Gee, picker, this week I learned two new songs and have almost mastered a new chord while you've been stuck on the same old note."

1) You recognized yourself as the paranoid creo.

2) You've been playing the same note on every crevo thread you've been on.

[Right Wing Professor]

Incidentally, we're getting pretty close to the point where we can declare Einstein's "theory" a "law" don't you think?

Only if we don't know what theories and laws are. Hint: a law is not what a theory becomes when it grows up.

[js1138]

Both theories are attempts to explain evolution by "alternate routes" and deal with the inability of the fossil record to back up what Darwin had originally proposed.

Your characterization of the fossil record is simply dishonest. Obviously not every creature that ever lived is present as a fossil. Fossilization is a rare event. What is true, however, is that creationists have consistently predicted that there are *no* transitional fossils, when in fact there are many thousands.

It boils down to this: one hypothesis predicts no transitional fossils and has no basis for predicting them. Evolution predicts transitional fossils, predicts their characteristics, and predicts the strata in which they are likely to be found. Even a single find falsifies the expectations of creationism.

[Mamzelle]

Your posting "reply" number what to my post. I take that as a sneaky way to reply when you want to pretend you're not replying. As I have never been one of those namby-pambies who run to the mod saying "I must not be spoken to" , you can talk to my i-face.

[LibertarianSchmoe]

I'm sure you just tremble at the thought of dems winning...

I'm sure you're sure of a lot of things for which you have no logical or evidential basis.

Big surprise that you're a CRIDer... < /s>

[colorado tanker]

Agreed. The only answer is school choice. If we had that, the public schools would either stop teaching junk science, fuzzy math and politics for geography or go out of business.

[Right Wing Professor]

I recommend consigning her to your ignore file. She has nothing to offer; her entire schtick is to accuse scientists of being closet liberals.

[js1138]

Incidentally, we're getting pretty close to the point where we can declare Einstein's "theory" a "law" don't you think?

No, I don't. But you have conceded the principle that a theory can supersede a law in science. Laws are generally formulas used by engineers. Theories are explanatory.

[LibertarianSchmoe]

Hint: a law is not what a theory becomes when it grows up

You may also want to inform them that a theory is not brought home by the stork.

[Dimensio]

So students leave their civil rights, democracy, and national sovereignty at the door when they enter the school building

No. However, high school science courses are for teaching of established science. At that level, students do not have the knowledged or expertise to fully evaluate all new scientific concepts. Introducing "Intelligent Design" into a biology course as though it has achieved a standing in science on par with evolution is fundamentally dishonest.

[Mamzelle]

And I'm not surprised that you haven't been here very long. I used to think of myself as a libertarian, lo these many years. But 'tarians have this "loser" gene--they like losing. They almost threw Florida to Gore in 2000, and they'll do their best to lose with principle any chance they get.

They also get the icky-willies when they have to share a table with a Baptist, and want badly for the GOP to cut religious conservatives loose so that they can bring about a principled DNC majority that they can complain about...while slurping lattes with their liberal soulmates.

I think the religious conservatives are far more valuable than chickenliver 'tarians--they mobilize, they vote, they donate. All 'tarians do is whine.

[RadioAstronomer]

Certainly there is. It is called a "scientific law

Not true. "Laws" can be wrong and still be a "law". For example "the law of gravity". However, the theory called "general relativity" has superseded it.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Your posting "reply" number what to my post. I take that as a sneaky way to reply when you want to pretend you're not replying."

Of course I was replying to you. Can't you stop the paranoid delusions for just one second?

"As I have never been one of those namby-pambies who run to the mod saying "I must not be spoken to" , you can talk to my i-face."

But then I wouldn't have received this lovely reply from you. :)

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"I recommend consigning her to your ignore file. She has nothing to offer; her entire schtick is to accuse scientists of being closet liberals."

And don't mention astronauts. For God's sake, don't do it!

[Mamzelle]

Why don't you ask your friends about Santorum? Let them make it official.

[RadioAstronomer]

Einstein's "theory" a "law" don't you think?

Theories do not become laws.

[donh]

Newton's laws haven't been replaced by Einstein's Theory of Relativity - they are subsets of the same that hold true for a given reference frame.

This statement reeks. Newton's and Einstein's universes imply two radically different, generally contradictory "reference frames". We hang onto Newton's laws because they are computationally cheap approximations that will serve in most low-cost earthbound circumstances, not because they constitute a proper subset of Einstein's laws.

[RadioAstronomer]

And don't mention astronauts. For God's sake, don't do it!

ROFL!

[Mamzelle]

You could mention Santorum. You have before, after all.