science education

In “The Middle East is ripe for a scientific revolution”, (New Scientist 27 April 2011) Ahmed Zewail offers, I see three essential ingredients for progress. First is the building of human resources by promoting literacy, ensuring participation of women in society and improving education. Second, there is a need to reform national constitutions to allow freedom of thought, minimise bureaucracy, reward merit, and create credible- and enforceable- legal codes. Few would argue with that; it’s an essential foundation for intellectual civilization. But many sources question whether the actual state of science in the Western world today, especially in sensitive areas like evolution, provides grounds for hope that intervention will help. Trying to “Islamize” Darwin would hardly produce a happier Middle Read More ›

Overhearing the squabble noted by Steno between “gnu atheists” Jerry Coyne and P.Z. Myers on the one hand and National Center for Science Education and its British counterpart, BCSE (Darwin schools lobbies) on the other, my first thought was of a proverb I learned as a child: “When thieves fall out, honest men come by their own.”

The point isn’t, of course, that any of these people are thieves; the proverb expresses a general truth: There are fights people can’t afford to be in, but they are in them anyway and others will benefit from the fallout.

Essentially, Coyne and other “gnu”* atheists are attacking the Darwin-in-the-schools lobbies for pretending that Darwinism is compatible with traditional Judaism, Christianity, or Islam. He’s right, and Darwin thought much the same thing, as we know from his private notebooks, released some years back. We’ve been saying hose things ourselves for years here about Evolution Sunday, Michael Dowd’s thirty-three ring circus of “evolutionary Christians,” and other “dhimmis for Darwin” enterprises. But what is the consequence of the “gnu atheists’ squabbling publicly with the dhimmis for Darwin and making sure the world knows about it?

One thought: Next time you are pestered by the “Jesus loves Darwin and you should too!” crowd, I suggest sending them the link to Jerry Coyne’s open letter and suggest they discuss it with him, not you. When Darwinists disagree, who can decide?

And if local school boards are smarming us that Darwinism is without religious significance, point out that among Darwinists themselves, that view is highly contested, never mind what the ID community thinks.

*Jerry Coyne’s perspective on the squabble is interesting because he may have invented the term “gnu atheist”, Read More ›

The way Darwin lobbyists don’t.

California-based Caroline Crocker, Expelled and now the director of an integrity in science institute and author of Free to Think, offers some reflections on how to teach science as if it wasn’t a cult:

…biological systems are a complex mixture of chemical and electrical reactions controlled by application of many levels of information, not to mention the environment, so that predicting the outcome of changing one parameter can be almost impossible. The complexity, and thus the impossibility of drawing absolutely accurate conclusions and predicting the effect of a change in one parameter, further increases as one progresses into psychology, sociology, ecology and the like.To illustrate this principle, we can consider the work of Dr. Carolyn Nersesian of the University of Sydney. This ecologist used a technique from chemistry (titration) to understand the feeding behavior of eight brushtail possums. Basically, she slowly increased the concentration of a poison in the food in a sheltered area (tree) while offering the animals untainted food in a less sheltered area that had been pre-treated with fox urine and feces The goal was to see what concentration of poison would cause the animals to risk exposure to predators by moving from the sheltered to the unsheltered area. Read More ›

Some of the biggest names in textbooks. For example, the standards passed two years ago that permit keeping one’s brain in gear while listening to tales of evolution garnered: Biology Pre-Adoption Samples Chemistry Pre-Adoption Samples IPC Pre-Adoption Samples Physics-Pre-Adoption Samples Look ma!: No broomstick.

From Britain’s Truth in Science, reviews of how evolution is taught in textbooks from such sources as Oxford and Cambridge. For example, about “Biological Science 1 & 2 – Cambridge University Press”, we learn, This textbook has frequent caveats and disclaimers when explaining evolution, but also has dogmatic assertions, which sometimes makes the text highly confusing.  Not everyone sympathetic to design will agree with all of their criteria, but it is a great resource for what to expect.

In Free to Think: Why Scientific Integrity Matters (2010), Expelled’s Caroline Crocker recalls a conversation with a tutoring student’s mother, after a session teaching the textbook Darwin sludge:

“I want her to learn the truth!” Felicita exclaimed …Here I hesitated, “Listen, being vocal about this issue probably lost me three jobs and resulted in my being blacklisted from getting many others. Students are also being intimidated into following the party line. If I teach Maria both sides of the issue, I strongly advise that you instruct her not to Read More ›

At Religion Dispatches, Laurie “Devil in Dover” Lebo reports, “Anti-Science Bill Passes Tennessee House”: The bill, which has yet to pass the Senate, would require teachers to be helped “to find effective ways to present the science curriculum as it addresses scientific controversies.” It also says that teachers may not be prohibited from “helping students understand, analyze, critique and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught.”Those “controversial” theories would include, “Biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.” Sources say that many educrats prefer that none of these topics, nor any others that they may from time to time propose, be treated Read More ›

In the land that gave us Shakespeare and Isaac Newton, all is well in the schools.

Encouraging signs are stuff like: A girl is suspended for wearing a crucifix but Sikh religious gear is permitted; national public observances are ignored to avoid conflict with the timetable routine; vile anti-Hindu propaganda and unprovoked beatings at some schools. Parents, of course, respond to all this by such moves as expressing outrage over a school ban on tight pants.

Of course, spectacular academic results have accompanied these developments: Scores lower than Estonia (Sorry, Estonia, Tere tulemast! You in fact do much more with much less.)

But into this atmosphere of calm and orderly application to the great disciplines of learning, followed by the thrill of achievement, suddenly, shudder!! [cue frite muzak “Insidious creationism”] enters the … creationist!: Read More ›

From AAAS’s ScienceInsider we learn: “Bill Allowing Teachers to Challenge Evolution Passes Tennessee House” (Sara Reardon, 7 April 2011): If the bill passes, Tennessee would join Louisiana as the second state to have specific “protection” for the teaching of evolution in the classroom. The effects of the Louisiana law, which passed in 2008, are still unclear. The bill allows teachers to “help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught,” namely, “biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.” Mediocrats are appalled: “Asserting that there are significant scientific controversies about the overall nature of these concepts when there Read More ›

Courtesy Britain’s Royal Society. A friend notes that three Nobel Prize winners were among the speakers: Read More ›

And tells us a bit Explaining the history and diversity of life is simply not an issue of great concern to most people except as a marker of belief system. On that score, many “evolution believers” have knowledge that is just as shallow as creationists. They simply nod and smile in response to different cues. Professing a belief in evolution or creation is a not-so-secret handshake that signals membership in a loose clan. That’s why the press is so insistent that presidential candidates take some position on the issue; it marks them like a scarlet letter. before freaking out: But many [creationists] are well practiced in the art of debate and will not easily play into your hands. They will Read More ›

The Internet Radio homeschooling show, “Leigh at Lunch “talks to Jonathan Bartlett, of the Blythe Institute which works on teaching new paradigms in biology. Interesting discussion of the most common attitudes to faith and science.  

Here.

Week July 18th to 22nd inclusive.

Presenters will include:

Prof Steve Fuller, Warwick University
Prof Guillermo Gonzales, Grove City College, Pennsylvania, USA
Dr David Galloway, Vice President Royal College of Surgeons, Glasgow
John Langlois, Barrister
Dr Alastair Noble, Director, Centre for Intelligent Design, Glasgow.
Prof Chris Shaw, Queens University, Belfast.
Dr Jonathan Wells, Discovery Institute, Seattle, USA
David Williams, Lawyer

Other Tutors to be advised.

Bursaries / Scholarships are available as appropriate.

In the first instance visit our web site for more details:-

http://www.c4id.org.uk/

Some thoughts:

Read More ›

In the Florida Times-Union, Abel Harding tells us, “Florida Legislature poised to battle over teaching evolution in schools”: Critics say that Wise’s legislation could open the door for teachers and students to challenge evolution, which they say is settled science.”You can have critical analysis of everything, but the idea that you should single out evolution for critical analysis is problematic,” said Joshua Rosenau, programs and policy director at California-based National Center for Science Education [the Darwin lobby]. “It’s recognized by the scientific community as the foundation of modern biology.” Hold it right there, Rosenau. Which parts, exactly, are settled science? Junk DNA? And does anyone really believe that Rosenau would be satisfied if critical thinking was also permitted on other Read More ›

A friend shares with me a courteous letter to the editor (“Atheists deny intelligent design of our universe”, March 17, 2011), It is the responsibility of parents to not only monitor what is taught in schools, but to provide information that is purposely excluded. It is painful to witness the lengths to which many atheists go in their attempts to deny intelligent design in both creation and perpetuation. Every time Hawking’s or others add a new layer of speculation concerning the origin of the universe, their information leaves another void that only God can fill.  I think the author, Michael Wolfe, is right. No responsible parent should take for granted what goes on in the classroom today. The days are Read More ›