babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » humanities & science   » Pseudoscience would waste teaching time

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Pseudoscience would waste teaching time
Snuckles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2764

posted 24 April 2005 11:37 PM      Profile for Snuckles   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Paul Z. Myers
April 24, 2005

Intelligent design (ID) has failed to meet even the minimal standards of evidence and scholarship we should expect of the science we teach our children. Teaching it steals time from more vital subjects in which our kids should be grounded.

Science is a conservative process. Most college-level introductory textbooks contain only material that has stood the test of time and has been confirmed independently.

ID proponents have not only failed to provide any evidence for their thesis, they aren't even trying. There are no labs doing research on this subject; all the papers the Discovery Institute has tried to publish are exercises in spin, in which they try to distort biology researchers' work to fit their preconceptions.

With no established body of results, no current work and no promising prospects for future research, why should ID be supported? It's a dead end. It is absurd to propose that our kids learn about a subject that no legitimate scientists are pursuing and that has no utility.


Read it here., or at PZ Myers' blog.

[ 24 April 2005: Message edited by: Snuckles ]


From: Hell | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Surferosad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4791

posted 25 April 2005 11:59 AM      Profile for Surferosad   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Damn right!
From: Montreal | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 25 April 2005 12:32 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hehe. It almost sounds as though this blogger thinks that Intelligent Design is going to be evaluated on its merits!

Blogger Dude: ID is just "Jesus in the Classroom". It's not going to go away when you prove it's a crock, anymore than Jesus is going to go away.

Kick Jesus out of the White House and you'll kick him out of everywhere else at the same time.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Erstwhile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4845

posted 25 April 2005 02:46 PM      Profile for Erstwhile     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:

Kick Jesus out of the White House and you'll kick him out of everywhere else at the same time.

Magoo! No!

quote:
"Christ For President"

Let's have Christ our President
Let us have him for our king
Cast your vote for the Carpenter
That they call the Nazarene

The only way
We could ever beat
These crooked politician men

Is to cast the moneychangers
Out of the temple
Put the Carpenter in

Oh it's Jesus Christ our President
God above our king
With a job and pension for young and old
We will make hallelujah ring

Every year we waste enough
To feed the ones who starve
We build our civilization up
And we shoot it down with wars

But with the Carpenter
On the seat
Way up in the capitol town

The USA
Be on the way
Prosperity bound

Lyrics: Woody Guthrie
Music: Wilco



From: Deepest Darkest Saskabush | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 25 April 2005 02:57 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I kept looking (and eventually hoping) for the tongue-in-cheek part, or the criticism of religion part, but no.

Was Woody a churchgoer?


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 25 April 2005 03:14 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
You have to remember Woody wrote that song before Jesus became a republican and discovered the whole love thy neigbour and turn the other cheek schtick didn't play as well on main street as eye poking and smiting.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 25 April 2005 03:25 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
True. I forgot that he used to be a non-judgemental hippie who had long hair. Long hair!

The grooooovy Jesus.

Hey, ever hear of Christ the Pantocriter? Apparently it's a Russian Orthodox thing. Unlike our Christian Jesus, who likes to hang out in pastoral settings surrounded by children and young sheep, Christ the Pantocriter is the angry Christ who doesn't suffer fools gladly. I saw a painting of this Christ once on the dome of a church, and it was rather frightening. Less "love thy neighbour" and more "who wants a piece of this?"


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Papal Bull
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7050

posted 25 April 2005 04:46 PM      Profile for Papal Bull   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I've heard of that Magoo. I've also heard of the American Warrior Christ (that's gaining popularity among Canadian youth...eeeek!) and then there is the sexually charged Jesus of Siberian Skoptsky folk. Then there is...Well, there are lots of version of the Christ.

Pick and choose literalists.


From: Vatican's best darned ranch | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Gir Draxon
leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie
Babbler # 3804

posted 25 April 2005 06:17 PM      Profile for Gir Draxon     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And the Soviets thought that teaching Darwin instead of Lamarck was a waste of time
From: Arkham Asylum | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 25 April 2005 07:31 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I have no idea what the hell you are on about, Gir.

If you're trying to make the point that Trofim Lysenko screwed up a generation's worth of Soviet genetics experience, sure.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gir Draxon
leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie
Babbler # 3804

posted 25 April 2005 07:57 PM      Profile for Gir Draxon     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by DrConway:

If you're trying to make the point that Trofim Lysenko screwed up a generation's worth of Soviet genetics experience, sure.

Exactly. He was so sure that his Lamarckian beleifs were right and True Science (TM) that he didn't pay attention to pseudo-science. He was wrong.

Don't get me wrong, the ID guys should be doing more to make their case, but I think they should be given the opportunity to do so. If they can produce good evidence, then we should accept it. If they can't, then it still has a place in the classroom, just like when I learned about acquired trait inheritance in high school as an idea that is reasonable, but contradictory to modern empirical evidence.


From: Arkham Asylum | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 25 April 2005 08:01 PM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
True. I forgot that he used to be a non-judgemental hippie who had long hair. Long hair!

The grooooovy Jesus.


You are confusing him with his son Arlo. Woody Guthrie was significantly more complex than 'long hair!'.


"By the time he arrived in California, in 1937, Woody had experienced the intense scorn, hatred, and antagonism of resident Californians who were opposed to the influx of outsiders. Woody's identification with outsider status would become part and parcel of his political and social positioning, one which gradually worked its way into his songwriting, as evident in his Dust Bowl Ballads such as I Ain't Got No Home, Goin' Down the Road Feelin' Bad, Talking Dust Bowl Blues, Tom Joad and Hard Travelin'. His 1937 radio broadcasts on KFVD, Los Angeles, and XELO (just over the border in Mexico) brought Woody and his new singing partner, Maxine Crissman or Lefty Lou, wide public attention, while providing him with a forum from which he could develop his talent for controversial social commentary and criticism on topics ranging from corrupt politicians, lawyers, and businessmen to praising the humanist principles of Jesus Christ, Pretty Boy Floyd, and Union organizers."

ALso denounced as a Communist by the HUAC.

It is so much better to have a clue what you are talking about, as you usually are aware Magoo.

Woody Biography

[ 25 April 2005: Message edited by: arborman ]


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 25 April 2005 08:08 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Papal Bull:
I've heard of that Magoo. I've also heard of the American Warrior Christ (that's gaining popularity among Canadian youth...eeeek!) and then there is the sexually charged Jesus of Siberian Skoptsky folk. Then there is...Well, there are lots of version of the Christ...

What was that vulgar version George Carlin's bishop came up with in the movie 'Dogma', the Buddy Christ?

From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
NDP Newbie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5089

posted 26 April 2005 12:04 AM      Profile for NDP Newbie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Papal Bull:
I've heard of that Magoo. I've also heard of the American Warrior Christ (that's gaining popularity among Canadian youth...eeeek!) and then there is the sexually charged Jesus of Siberian Skoptsky folk. Then there is...Well, there are lots of version of the Christ.

Pick and choose literalists.


You mean Americhri$t is gaining support among our most pro-NDP demographic? That's weird...


From: Cornwall, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Melsky
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4748

posted 26 April 2005 12:25 AM      Profile for Melsky   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I thought Magoo was calling Jesus a longhair and hippie, not either of the Guthries.
quote:
Originally posted by arborman:

You are confusing him with his son Arlo. Woody Guthrie was significantly more complex than 'long hair!'.

[ 25 April 2005: Message edited by: arborman ]



From: Toronto | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 26 April 2005 12:46 AM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Correct. I seem to recall that for a time at the end of the 60's and start of the 70's that Jesus was considered a bit of a counterculture hero by many.

Long hair, sandals, defying the rules, peace and love... all that was missing was any mention of him getting high (though He'd be awesome to have around if you got the munchies).


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Surferosad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4791

posted 26 April 2005 01:32 AM      Profile for Surferosad   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gir Draxon:

Exactly. He was so sure that his Lamarckian beleifs were right and True Science (TM) that he didn't pay attention to pseudo-science. He was wrong.

Don't get me wrong, the ID guys should be doing more to make their case, but I think they should be given the opportunity to do so. If they can produce good evidence, then we should accept it. If they can't, then it still has a place in the classroom, just like when I learned about acquired trait inheritance in high school as an idea that is reasonable, but contradictory to modern empirical evidence.


But they were given the opportunity! In fact, the point of view now defended by ID people was the standard belief amongst many scientists before Darwin! ID is an old theory that has been superseded by a new one. ID doesn't explain anything and is completely unnecessary and unsupported by evidence. Adopting ID now would be the equivalent of going back to the geocentric model of the solar system!

ID believers have as much credibility as astrologers and UFO enthusiasts amongst serious scientists. And there's no point in arguing with a sincere believer in astrology (or a sincere believer in ID): it is obvious that what he believes in is bunkum. Arguing with a supporter of obvious bunkum is giving him a legitimacy that he doesn't deserve. It is also usually pointless, because believers in obvious bunkum are usually impermeable to rational arguments. If they could understand reason, they wouldn't believe in obvious bunkum.

Problem is, these people won't shut the fuck up! They're still at it, even though they've been proven wrong and none of their theories are necessary to explain anything. See, ID isn't about science, ID is thinly disguised religious belief trying to pass as science!

At least the Lysenko bullshit went away as soon as Staline croaked!

[ 26 April 2005: Message edited by: Surferosad ]


From: Montreal | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 26 April 2005 03:21 AM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gir Draxon:

Don't get me wrong, the ID guys should be doing more to make their case, but I think they should be given the opportunity to do so. If they can produce good evidence, then we should accept it. If they can't, then it still has a place in the classroom, just like when I learned about acquired trait inheritance in high school as an idea that is reasonable, but contradictory to modern empirical evidence.

That's all fine, but that ain't what they want. Nobody's stopping ID people from making their case or presenting evidence. Apparently, they prefer to lobby to get their ideology taught in high-school classrooms without the need for case or evidence. And while ID isn't taught about a great deal in high school, any course that goes into the history of biology is going to mention it. Nobody's keeping it a secret.


From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca