|
Post by raybar on Aug 8, 2013 9:56:55 GMT -5
Here is a scathing review of Stephen Meyer's recent book, "Darwin's Doubt." The review is by Donald Prothero, a paleontologist with professional training in revelent fields. Mr. Meyer is a creationist who holds a PhD in the History of Science, which does not imply any such expertise. www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/13-08-07/If the review is anywhere near accurate - and the other negative reviews on Amazon are all in agreement - then this book would be a shining example of the dispicable and dishonest way creationists try to spread their views. The review is long, but worth reading if you are interested in the subject.
|
|
|
Post by russell on Aug 8, 2013 18:28:45 GMT -5
I read the review when it came out. Interesting. For us Aussie’s the whole creationist idea is humorous. There are some few here but very few so we watch from a distance what these nut cases are trying to do to your school system. The worst we have to deal with are catholic et al politicians and their ideas are slowly getting swamped by more reasonable, humanistic, ideas.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 8, 2013 21:06:52 GMT -5
Fundamentalist creationists are not allowed (see U.S. Legal quotations below) to have their school districts teach Intelligent Design/Creationism because that is a religious belief and is against separation of church and state. They are, however, getting critical analysis of evolutionary theory into school districts in some U.S. states. And that's one large purpose for such books as "Darwin's Doubt".
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Aug 8, 2013 23:06:18 GMT -5
They are, however, getting critical analysis of evolutionary theory into school districts in some U.S. states. And that's one large purpose for such books as "Darwin's Doubt". Yes, I am aware of some of this. "Freedom of inquiry" is a term I've seen. But it's just another attempt to get non-science into the science classroom. Critical analysis of evolution (or anything else) is fine. I'm all in favor of it --- by qualified experts. But I am virtually certain that high school students lack the expertise to do critical analysis anything. And I seriously doubt that most high school biology teachers are qualified to perform a critical analysis of so large and complex a subject as evolution.
|
|
|
Post by russell on Aug 9, 2013 0:20:09 GMT -5
I understand that religion is not allowed in science class rooms in the US so creation science is out. Isn’t that where the impetus for irreducible complexity came from? The idea being to spin very selective information into a formulation that appears on the surface to be scientifically sound. I know the courts had a few words to say about that approach and it too was struck down as not science but I’m sure they’ll keep trying. The “teach the controversy” idea is another approach they have tried to slip their religion into science class rooms. The trouble I see with this approach is that there is no controversy to teach but the idea of being far to both sides resonates with people as fair and reasonable on the surface. If you survey those who are actually trained to understand the science you’ll find well under one precent disagree with evolutionary theory. Such a small figure does not make a controversy in my opinion so the idea they wish to teach does not actually exist for those who understand the science at least.
The idea that high school students are incapable of critically analysing any controversy that they can present is in fact the whole point I’d guess. Baffle them with simplistic sounding ideas and cherry picked quotes and a slick talker could convince many of them that there really is a reason to doubt the science. Forget that the vast majority of those qualified to actually judge the science don’t see any reason to doubt it. If they can get ignorant young minds to judge biased presentations on their own they can talk many into buying their religious biases and that’s what it’s all about isn’t it.
|
|
|
Post by raybar on Aug 9, 2013 9:09:28 GMT -5
"Irreducible complexity" first showed up in Micheal Behe's book "Darwin's Black Box" which has been "torn to shreds" by every reviewer who knew what he was talking about, and also debunked in court during Kitzmiller v Dover.
They keep trying, but since they have no actual theory beyond "god did it" they can't come up with anything that stands up to examination.
|
|
|
Post by faskew on Aug 9, 2013 14:10:32 GMT -5
In Texas, the governor and most of the legislature are fundamentalist evangelicals who are also rabid creationists. They try to sneak creationism into the schools every chance they get. Maybe someday it will be better, but not in the next couple of years. 8-<
|
|