Skip to comments.Citizen MD [American Medical Association op-ed against Intelligent Design]
Posted on 12/03/2005 6:18:54 AM PST by Right Wing Professor
click here to read article
PatrickHenry has contributed far more resources to these threads than I have seen from you or most other posters, including myself.
I am glad you acknowlege that.
And I rather doubt the authorities will, either, if it continues.
If you insist such an exchange did not take place, I'll provide links to the direct posts so that everyone can understand.
Funny thing is, PH hasn't posted here since last night. Why the *Oh so the great PH chimes in."? It's not like he was even posting anything then (post 250) *at* anybody either. These creationists really fear the Grand Master. :)
And, it just so happens that the government (regrettably) has a near monopoly on education, and that ID supporters are attempting to use the government and schools to promote their theory (instead of establishing their theory through scientific channels). The analogy holds.
Why aren't there dozens or hundreds of peer-reviewed articles in major journals that propound what ID predicts and what its mechanism is? Don't give me the old canard about scientists "keeping it out"... a physics luminary like Einstein worked very hard to disprove and discredit quantum mechanics, but the scientific community was persuaded by the arguments and usefulness of QM. Where are the arguments for ID? What is its fundamental usefulness as a theory?
There are no arguments for ID, no explanations for its mechanics, no usefulness as a theory, because it isn't science. Please tell me exactly what ID predicts will occur in the future, what mechanism it operates by, and how that enhances our knowledge of the way the universe works...
No wonder American children don't do well with science, even leaving religion out of it, if science teachers can't find away to show the students something of the history, applications, and moral influences in a positive manner, then America will continue to fall behind in its edge in science.
Most humans don't compartmentalize...what they learn in English may help them in math and vice versa. An understanding of history and philosophy may help a student with his geometry(when I understood what Pythagoras was trying to do with mathematics, ie. get closer to the gods, I began to understand the reasoning behind mathematican and geometric PROOFS).
Science has a bigger problem in this country, then some proposal to allow a little creationism into biology class...the entire issue regarding its teaching across all the realms of science(chemistry,physics, ect) needs to be re-examined.
Most of it of course, especially in public schools, has to do with NEA inteference with attempts to upgrade the quality and education of new teachers. I think you have more to fear from leftist politics and unions stifling the education of students then you would from a school board here or there allowing a little religious discussion into a biology class. It seems that the politics of sexual identity gets more funding in the public schools then a lot of science classes.
I think some of you science teachers and workers in the field need to step back and take an overall look at the public school systems and see just who the real enemies of science education are. What the religious folk may be proposing pales in destructiveness to what the liberal progressives and their PC, EMOTION AND GUILT LADEN proposals are doing to our schools.
Just who are the real enemies of science anyway? Step back from compartmentalized views of science and take a very good look.
Ahhh he just likes to see a good dust up...and yes I do acknowledge his contributions!
If it's my post you're talking about, be sure to quote it all.
I'm sure your "authorities" would be very upset at the idea of coopting democrats. :-)
This is a conservative website, not a RINO cheerleading club.
I was just saying Hello to Patrick...meant no insult at all!
Patrick should know by now I'm no enemy of real science, my interests are more philosophical and political anyway. I ask questions. I play the Devil's advocate and I want to see that those scientists advocating a more materialistic view of life be forthcoming about their own biases and how that view impacts their work when they criticise those who have more of a theistic view of life which may or may not color their scientific work.
I'm all in favor of an understanding of history and philosphy. That's why I support what used to be correctly called a liberal education.
Thus science majors took history, govermnent, economics, philosophy, music appreciation, Engish literature, foreign language etc classes along with non science majors.
Unfortunately, non science majors did not take science classes in the same way, it was one or two classes like "biology for non science majors."
Resulting in well rounded scientists and one sided everyone else, a trend which I understand is continuing.
No way am I going to dilute the science classes. If I had my druthers I'd increase the science requirements for everyone else instead.
Why should it when the fruits of science can be so easily turned against men?
WMDs and toxic environments are every bit as much a "legacy" of science as is modern medicine.
And if anyone complains that these powers are in the control of amoral practitioners, or that the general populace deserves a seat at the table, then they are knuckledragging luddites.
They need to be put in their place!
The child was dead. It was an attempt to save her life. She lasted twenty days. Christian Barnard's first heart transplant lasted......18 days.
dead = "dead"
Oh I wasn't calling for dilution....a DNA double helix doesn't change despite the politics of the land. Just asking that you take a good look at what is really damaging the quality of science teaching in America...and it isn't religious folks.
By the way, another thing to keep in mind is that there is a certain Islamic sect that would kill both you and me if they could get their hands on us. I don't think you have that to fear from the Kansas school board.
Guess who the Kansas School Board called as a witness.
Yes, I have something to fear from the Kansas school board.
And don't forget, according to the Kansas school board science no longer looks for natural or even primarily natural causes.
The child was alive and could quite possibly have lived longer using a chimp rather than a baboon heart.
You seem to have an odd definition of dead, even in quotes.
I don't think the Kansas school board is going to shoot you nor most Christians for that matter. The Kansas School board called a lot of witnesses, evolutionary biologists too, unfortunately they never bothered to show up to defend their point of view.
You made the point that there are Islamic groups who would be happy to kill me.
I pointed out that the Kansas school board called Mustafa Aykol as a witness and you seem to have jumped to their defense.
So, I will ask you if you know who he is?
Wrong. As with any group that refuses to play by the rules -- in this case that your views must first succeed, on merit, as science before they deserve a place in science curricula -- and instead pursues affirmative action, bar lowering, or other special dispensation; "diplomacy" and other forms of appeasement will only encourage them to pursue such illegitimate avenues more vigorously.
Surely you would agree with this principle if the focus were on appeals for affirmative inclusion of environmentalism (as opposed to scientific ecology), of identity group icons in history, or any of the numerous curricular emendations constantly sought, and too often obtained, by the political left.
The only appropriate and effective response to this is absolute, unapologetic and unbending INSISTENCE and high and hard-nosed academic standards; restricting curricula to covering material with objective academic merit.
When creationism, or ID, or any non- or extra- evolutionary view has earned such merit, I have no objection to teaching it, which in such case will happen as a matter of course anyway. In the meantime I'm not "shifting" one single, solitary inch.