Skip to main content

View Diary: The Science President ... ? (239 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Ok (3.00)
    but that doesn't answere my question.  What's wrong with teaching both methods and giving kids a choice in what they want to believe in?

    Hillary will be pres in 08 and there is nothing you can do about it!

    by Democratsin08 on Sat Feb 04, 2006 at 08:59:30 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  ID is not science (4.00)
      you don't "choose" what to believe in science..you follow the facts
    •  Is it any wonder (4.00)
      the rest of the world is in the process of kicking our asses at turning out scientists, engineers, and the like?  Sure, teach a whole bunch of crap, and let kids decide what to believe.  But let me ask you this: who wants to drive across a bridge that was designed on the principles of faith-based physics?

      "Don't blame me, I voted for the smart guy."

      by frsbdg on Sat Feb 04, 2006 at 09:05:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Er... (4.00)
      Because they're asking that something based totally on faith which people try to prove by LACK of evidence (Intelligent Design) in a class of science, a field which is utterly based on deriving facts, gathering evidence, and discovering facts.

      ID leaves absolutely no room for the scientific method, thus has no place in science classes.

      God help me find some sanity, because I don't know whether I've gone insane or America has.

      by Kryptik on Sat Feb 04, 2006 at 09:05:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  What (4.00)
      are both methods? You mean the Big Bang Vs Young Earth Creationism or Old Earth Creationism or what exactly? Some Old and Young EC's accept the Big Bang. The Big Bang Vs the Steady State theory or what? Obviously we don't teach kids that either the South or the North won the Civil War, depending on which you want to believe. But this isn't about teaching at all, it's about a document being written by scientists that someone came along and pestered them over and it's one very minor example of many. This one didn't hurt anyone, there are some issues that might.

      Read UTI, your free thought forum

      by DarkSyde on Sat Feb 04, 2006 at 09:07:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Civil war? (none)
        "The civil war was first decided in the North's favor before it was decided in the South's favor 150 years later."

        -7.38, -5.90 | "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism." - Carl Sagan

        by Subterranean on Sat Feb 04, 2006 at 09:44:19 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Kids are stupid (4.00)
      Kids are stupid.  You can't teach them a bunch of competing "theories" and expect them to somehow sort out the wheat from the chaff.  Especially if you present them as equals, which in the real world, they clearly are not.  Evolution is a valid scientific theory that is backed up by millions of evidences and used in laboratories across the world on a daily basis.  Intelligent Design Creationism solves nothing and exists solely as a way to push religion into public schools.  You would really waste time on "teaching" kids IDC when you could be spending their time on real science, like evolution?

      P.S., this is why the rest of the world laughs at our science education.

      •  Kids are not stupid (none)
        They simply haven't learned certain things yet.

        Just like scientists.  The IDers like to discredit the theory of evolution by pointing out 'irreducible complexity' or the lack of transitional forms of certain bone structure in fossils.  Then when a new mechanism or a new fossil record is found that fills in the gap, they then say, what about this gap?  

        No matter how much science continues to grow, these people are never going to be satisfied.

        Children aren't stupid.  They continue to learn.  The IDers refuse to learn.

    •  That it's practically impossible to do so fairly. (4.00)
      Theoretically, it's possible to mention intelligent design in classrooms (throw obligatory bone to deism here); however, the people who are adamant about ID are heavy in religious politic. It'll be taught with a "nudge nudge, wink wink" way of skirting state/religion boundaries. Note, for example, that the ID texts slated for classrooms were first drafted as relgious texts [e.g. "Of Pandas and People" was originally "Creation Biology"].
    •  You don't teach both sides (4.00)
      of an issue if one of the sides is complete bullshit.

      (-7.12, -4.15)¡No Pasarán!

      by pilgrim99 on Sat Feb 04, 2006 at 09:30:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Here is what is wrong (none)
      with teaching ID as equal to Evolution.

      Yes - both are theories; however, one theory (Natural Selection) has been substantiated by hypothesis over hypothesis, evidence over evidence for well over a century.  The other has never presented a hypothesis designed to be disproven.  

      All it does is attempt to point out a clink in the other theory, and in so doing, claim that this clink, by being there, automatically proves the alternative wrong, while ignoring the huge holes in its theory.

      ID is so flawed, that its proponents look at the whale fossil evidence, and accept that speciation does occur, only that whales evolved during Noah's flood - which in fact turns their theory (that evolution doesn't occur) on its head.

      These proponents of ID aren't interested in science.  All they are interested in is promoting their religious dogma.

    •  both methods? (none)
      I don't get it.......there's the Big Bang with lots of evidence....

      and there is.......what?  What EVIDENCE do you have for any other way?  Facts anyone?

      Whatever anyone comes up with, it has to be supported with facts.

    •  What's wrong with it? (none)
      Please read Judge Jones's finding in the "Dover" court case if you want to know:

      http://www.aclupa.org/...

      In short, this sort of "teaching the controversy" is in violation of the First Admendment.

    •  what "method"?? (none)
      what method are you referring to as the other to the scientific method?

      ID HAS no method.. which is why the judge in the Dover case kicked its ass.

      ID is based on faith.. it belongs in a religion class.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site