Darwin foes link Global Warming to Evolution. WTF?

[Hacp]

In Kentucky, a bill recently introduced in the Legislature would encourage teachers to discuss “the advantages and disadvantages of scientific theories,” including “evolution, the origins of life, global warming and human cloning.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/04/science/earth/04climate.html?hp

WTF? One has millions of years of fossil and genetic records to back it up while the other has a bit more than a hundred years of data, less if you subtract the grafted data. They can't be serious?

Also, human cloning isn't a theory.

 

[Throckmorton]

Birds of a feather

 

[DanDaManJC]

you gotta remember.. there's no real scientific method, it's a conspiracy between al gore and atheist anti-christians to remove god from our world and take away all personal liberty.

 

[ericlp]

Haha sounds about right. Bush the born again didnt believe in it as well.

Oh well...

 

[Amused]

Birds of a feather

A swing and a miss.

I am about as socially liberal as they come. Agnostic too. I can see the clear evidence for evolution. Yet I do not believe there is valid evidence for the MMGW claims.

Try again.

 

[Moonbeam]

A swing and a miss.

I am about as socially liberal as they come. Agnostic too. I can see the clear evidence for evolution. Yet I do not believe there is valid evidence for the MMGW claims.

Try again.

That's how the mind works. Christians can't see evolution because, unlike you, they have a religious bias. But you are both blind to MMGW because you are both biased about pocket book issues. Blindness is always selective depending on unconscious motivations.

Evolution is no skin off your nose.

 

[sapiens74]

That's how the mind works. Christians can't see evolution because, unlike you, they have a religious bias. But you are both blind to MMGW because you are both biased about pocket book issues. Blindness is always selective depending on unconscious motivations.

Evolution is no skin off your nose.

No skin off my monkey nose

 

[StageLeft]

In the quote in OP post I see no link, simply mentioning it in the same sentence; not even so much as an insinuation that the four things there are on the same scientific footing.

 

[Noobtastic]

global warming is a political movement masquerading as science, whereas evolution is a scientific fact.

 

[Tristicus]

global warming is a political movement masquerading as science, whereas evolution is a scientific fact.

Things evolve, yes, but evolution is not a fact.

 

[ayabe]

Advantages and disadvantages of evolution, that is something I would love to watch.

To me it's just an attempt to slide this in and use it as a platform to rail against abortion. Some people feel evolution cheapens human life. Whether or not you believe that humans are just another animal you have to realize that we still use our animal instincts on a daily basis, every single one of us.

Ironically, the inability to control these legacy instincts is often what most holds us back from achieving greatness as a species.

 

[Modelworks]

WTF? One has millions of years of fossil and genetic records to back it up while the other has a bit more than a hundred years of data, less if you subtract the grafted data. They can't be serious?

Also, human cloning isn't a theory.

The bill isn't doesn't say anything about trying to disprove evolution or any other science. It is about having students think for themselves and remaining objective about science. Scientist at the time of Galileo thought that everything revolved around the earth and anyone not sharing that view was ridiculed. Science would never advance if people just went with whatever idea was popular among scientist. Skepticism is needed in science or it will die. People need to ask why a scientist is saying something as well as discuss the impact the theories have on society.

There is an excellent movie on Darwin that was just released that has several segments in it where Darwin discusses the advantages and disadvantages of his theory and what impact it would have and the turmoil it caused him.

(2) After a teacher has taught the content related to scientific theories contained in textbooks and instructional materials included on the approved lists required under KRS 156.433 and 156.435, a teacher may use, as permitted by the local school board, other instructional materials to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an objective manner, including but not limited to the study of evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.
(3) This section shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.

 

[DukeN]

you gotta remember.. there's no real scientific method, it's a conspiracy between al gore and atheist anti-christians to remove god from our world and take away all personal liberty.

Don't forget about them scientists - all of whom change data to suit their needs so they can pay for their Prius with grants that should goto gun research.

 

[drebo]

I don't see a problem with this bill. Allowing students to question their own beliefs as well as the beliefs put forth to them in the classroom is a good thing, regardless of the subject matter.

I, for one, don't like the idea of children being raised only learning one side of the coin. If all their learning comes from the biased party-line sycophants of either side, that's not a good thing. Discuss both sides and let the students choose for themselves.

As stated before, things do evolve...no one questions that. That man ultimately sprang forth from some protoplasmic goo is the real dispute, and not one that has been sufficiently illustrated. Faith and morals put forth by religion are not inherently bad things.

Aside from that, people should be free to think whatever they want. It's not up to you or me or anyone else to decide what people should think.

 

[Hacp]

The bill isn't doesn't say anything about trying to disprove evolution or any other science. It is about having students think for themselves and remaining objective about science. Scientist at the time of Galileo thought that everything revolved around the earth and anyone not sharing that view was ridiculed. Science would never advance if people just went with whatever idea was popular among scientist. Skepticism is needed in science or it will die. People need to ask why a scientist is saying something as well as discuss the impact the theories have on society.

There is an excellent movie on Darwin that was just released that has several segments in it where Darwin discusses the advantages and disadvantages of his theory and what impact it would have and the turmoil it caused him.

You can tell its strange. Human cloning is not a theory. There is clearly an agenda. Why mention human cloning at all?

 

[Elfear]

I don't see a problem with this bill. Allowing students to question their own beliefs as well as the beliefs put forth to them in the classroom is a good thing, regardless of the subject matter.

I, for one, don't like the idea of children being raised only learning one side of the coin. If all their learning comes from the biased party-line sycophants of either side, that's not a good thing. Discuss both sides and let the students choose for themselves.

As stated before, things do evolve...no one questions that. That man ultimately sprang forth from some protoplasmic goo is the real dispute, and not one that has been sufficiently illustrated. Faith and morals put forth by religion are not inherently bad things.

Aside from that, people should be free to think whatever they want. It's not up to you or me or anyone else to decide what people should think.

Agree wholeheartedly.

 

[Genx87]

In Kentucky, a bill recently introduced in the Legislature would encourage teachers to discuss “the advantages and disadvantages of scientific theories,” including “evolution, the origins of life, global warming and human cloning.”

The bill, which has yet to be voted on, is patterned on even more aggressive efforts in other states to fuse such issues. In Louisiana, a law passed in 2008 says the state board of education may assist teachers in promoting “critical thinking” on all of those subjects.

We dont want that happening in our public school system!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

As stated before, things do evolve...no one questions that. That man ultimately sprang forth from some protoplasmic goo is the real dispute, and not one that has been sufficiently illustrated.

The beginning of biological life is still an unanswered question, but that biological life is related by common ancestry is not.

 

[Brainonska511]

We dont want that happening in our public school system!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The level that evolutionary theory is taught in schools is not what might be under debate within the scientific community.

Trying to create equal time where the two ideas are unequal is not quality education. We don't give equal time to holocaust deniers, we don't give equal time to the "evidence" we didn't really land on the moon, etc....

 

[woolfe9999]

I don't see a problem with this bill. Allowing students to question their own beliefs as well as the beliefs put forth to them in the classroom is a good thing, regardless of the subject matter.

I, for one, don't like the idea of children being raised only learning one side of the coin. If all their learning comes from the biased party-line sycophants of either side, that's not a good thing. Discuss both sides and let the students choose for themselves.

As stated before, things do evolve...no one questions that. That man ultimately sprang forth from some protoplasmic goo is the real dispute, and not one that has been sufficiently illustrated. Faith and morals put forth by religion are not inherently bad things.

Aside from that, people should be free to think whatever they want. It's not up to you or me or anyone else to decide what people should think.

All sounds perfectly reasonable to me, on the surface of it. We should teach our kids to question evolution, right? Wait a second. Shouldn't we teach them to question every single thing they are taught in school then? Literally everything? Should schools teach flat earth theory while they are also teaching mainstream geography?

The problem here is the "two sides of the coin" argument presupposes that there are two sides of equal merit. The truth about evolution is that the theory is non-controversial in the scientific community. There is a body of science that is entirely supportive of it, and there is an "opposing" body of religiously motivated pseudoscience which isn't. Since the "science" in "scientific creationisn" *isn't*, it comes down to religious objections to evolution cloaked as science. This is a deceptive way of introducing a religious agenda into public schooling.

- wolf

 

[theeedude]

I would be pissed off if it was in my state and I had kids in school, but let's face it, it's Kentucky, we don't really need them to supply the country with aspiring scientists and engineers. We have China and India for that If they want to raise their kids to be dumbfvck teabaggers, they should be allowed to do that, someone has to do the menial labor.

 

[werepossum]

The bill isn't doesn't say anything about trying to disprove evolution or any other science. It is about having students think for themselves and remaining objective about science. Scientist at the time of Galileo thought that everything revolved around the earth and anyone not sharing that view was ridiculed. Science would never advance if people just went with whatever idea was popular among scientist. Skepticism is needed in science or it will die. People need to ask why a scientist is saying something as well as discuss the impact the theories have on society.

There is an excellent movie on Darwin that was just released that has several segments in it where Darwin discusses the advantages and disadvantages of his theory and what impact it would have and the turmoil it caused him.

Thinking for yourself is so twentieth century. The new approved methodology is that the elite know best, so check your mind and free will at the door and do as you are told. Put your wallet on the pile and ignore the man behind the curtain, for disharmony will be punished.

 

[Munky]

Great, now we can bring back what's been sorely missing in our educational system - critical thinking, questioning what others tell you, debating theories and practices from multiple points of view - everything that the schools should have been teaching all this time, instead of creating hordes of mindless zombies following the mass media and popular belief.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I don't really see the place for discussing "advantages and disadvantages" of scientific theories in science class. It could be said that gravity is disadvantageous because it causes unfortunate people to fall from high distances and injure or kill themselves. That isn't a reason to doubt or revise a theory of gravity, however.

The truth of scientific theories does not depend on their advantages or disadvantages, and to me it is illustrative of some woefully malformed thought-processes in the minds of legislators that they could believe that such discussions have any scientific meaning.

We shouldn't be teaching our kids to believe only the things that are advantageous if they are true, and to disbelieve facts they believe to be disadvantageous. That isn't real education. A real science education would teach kids to believe things that they can observe and test against reality, despite the potentially dis/advantageous ramifications of the hypotheses they're testing.

 

[ichy]

Treating crackpot pseuo-science as a legitimate theory is not teaching critical thinking. Do we teach holocaust denial or 9/11 conspiracy theories in history class? How about cold fusion or perpetual motion machines in science? Should students in math be told to consider that 1 + 1 might equal 3?