Category: science education
|September 17, 2014||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, Climate change, science education|
He is demonstrating, it seems, that any number can play at that “science denial” game.
BA77’s observation: “many influential people in academia simply don’t want Design to be true no matter what evidence . . .”
|August 4, 2014||Posted by kairosfocus under Atheism, science education, ID Foundations, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society|
The inimitable BA77 observes: I [used] to think that if ID could only get its evidence to the right people in the right places then they would change their mind about Darwinian evolution and we would have a fundamental ‘paradigm shift’ from the ‘top down’. But after a few years of banging my head on […]
|July 22, 2014||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, science education, News|
The flattening of information hierarchies often means that small, independent outfits can draw level with or surge ahead of major approved sources of information.
|April 26, 2014||Posted by News under science education, News|
“Evolution,” used this way, = “magic” and we were all told not to believe in magic.
|April 26, 2014||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, Darwinism, science education, News|
If students knew more, they would be even less likely to believe classroom dogma
|April 1, 2014||Posted by News under Genetics, science education, News|
You must be a student at the University of British Columbia, but this may spark some ideas elsewhere as well.
|February 12, 2014||Posted by News under science education, News|
Textbook publishing is in the hands of a few conglomerates, scalping the property tax payer who is obliged to support the compulsory public school systems, however bad. The Darwin lobby helps prevent any serious evaluation of what’s in the biology books vs. what’s in reality.
|February 3, 2014||Posted by News under Intelligent Design, science education, News|
Increasingly generic language = there is less and less of a fit between Darwin’s followers views and the realities of biology, as known today. So it would not take much to offend them.
|January 28, 2014||Posted by kairosfocus under science education, academic freedom, ID Foundations, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society, Selective Hyperskepticism, They said it . . ., Darwinist rhetorical tactics|
Good day, my name is JoeG and I would like to get something out in the open and hopefully have it become fully understood by everyone. For decades I have been debating against evolutionism and for decades I have been told that my position is “anti-evolution.” I found that strange because my position allows for […]
ID Foundations, 22: What about evolutionary trees of descent and homologies? (An answer to Jaceli123’s presentation of a typical icon of evolution . . . )
As has been noted, sometimes people come to UD looking for answers to questions about what they have been taught regarding “Evolution”; typically in the context of indoctrination under the Lewontinian ideological a priori materialism that he outlined thusly in his infamous 1997 NYRB article: [T]he problem is to get [the general public] to reject […]
“Who de cap fit, let ‘im wear it . . . ” — a (preliminary) collection of seen-in-the-wild Darwinist fever swamp fallacies
I am thinking it is time we began a collection of Darwinist fever swamp fallacies found in the wild. (Make sure to get your Malaria shot before going there . . . ) After the now standard “your’e a quote miner” false accusation and the “it’s a Gish galloper” smear of a man not present […]
The famous Feynman Lectures on Physics hosted free for all by Caltech (and taking a peek at entropy . . . )
|December 7, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Education, Physics, science education, ID Foundations, thermodynamics and information|
Christmas is early this year. Here are the famous Feynman Lectures on Physics (Vol II is forthcoming) hosted for free by Caltech. A useful point of reference for one and all. Just for fun, note here on on entropy, irreversibility and the rise of disorder: Where does irreversibility come from? It does not come from […]
Ran across this Biola video lecture (in course BB ST 450) on scientism in a thread from a few months back, HT BA77 as usual. I think it is well worth pondering: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt So, thoughts? END
|June 6, 2013||Posted by DonaldM under Education, Evolution, Biology, Intelligent Design, Darwinism, Religion, Science, Legal, Humor, Evolutionary biology, science education, academic freedom|
Our old friend PZ Myers holds school boards in utter contempt. In a recent blog post at his widely followed Pharyngula blog site, he takes contemptuous pot shots at the Springboro, OH School Board for having the audacity to even consider a “critical thinking” policy in the curriculum. The Springboro Community City School District is […]
The ghost of William Paley says his piece in reply to Darwin and successors, on the commonly dismissed “watch found in the field” argument
Over at the KF blog, we have recently been entertaining some ghosts from our civilisation’s past, who are concerned about its present and now sadly likely future in light of the sad history recorded in Acts 27, of a sea voyage to Rome gone disastrously wrong because the voyagers were manipulated into venturing back out […]
The “ID is Creationism in a cheap tuxedo” smear championed by Eugenie Scott et al of NCSE is now Law School Textbook orthodoxy . . .
From ENV — even as Dr Eugenie Scott of NCSE retires (having championed the ID is Creationism in a cheap tuxedo smear for years and years in the teeth of all correction . . . ) — we see a development, courtesy a whistle-blowing Law School student: The latest attempt to insert creationism into the […]
|May 7, 2013||Posted by DonaldM under Education, Biology, Intelligent Design, Darwinism, Legal, Courts, Laws, Constitution, Creationism, Culture, Intellectual freedom, Evolutionary biology, science education, academic freedom|
Slate.com is all upset that repeal of the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008 was was rejected yet again in a 3-2 vote in the State Senate. 19 year old Rice University Student Zack Kopplin has been leading the charge to get this “outrage” done away with once and for all, with help from the […]
A “simple” summing up of the basic case for scientifically inferring design (in light of the logic of scientific induction per best explanation of the unobserved past)
In answering yet another round of G’s talking points on design theory and those of us who advocate it, I have outlined a summary of design thinking and its links onward to debates on theology, that I think is worth being somewhat adapted, expanded and headlined. With your indulgence: _______________ >> The epistemological warrant for […]
|April 23, 2013||Posted by andyjones under Intelligent Design, Darwinism, The Design of Life, Evolutionary biology, 'Junk DNA', science education|
Larry Moran has decided to educate me about junk DNA. I appreciate the level of detail he has provided. I am not an expert in this field. I do however have a brain and, as a physicist, a vastly superior brain (I joke, sort of). I am not an IDiot, nor am I a larey […]
ID Foundations, 18 (video): Dr Stephen Meyer of Discovery Institute presents the case for Intelligent Design (with particular reference to OoL)
Here, HT WK: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt Take an hour and a half to learn what ID is about (yes, what it is really about [and cf. here at UD for correctives to common strawman distortions . . . ]), with particular focus on the origin of cell based life [OoL], through watching a […]
Take an hour and a half to learn what ID is about (yes, what it is really about [and cf. here at UD for correctives to common strawman distortions . . . ]), with particular focus on the origin of cell based life [OoL], through watching a public presentation in the UK from a leading ID thinker, Stephen Meyer.
Notice the distinction he underscores relative to the common demonising rhetorical projection of “Right-wing Fundamentalist theocratic agendas” etc.
I clip from the video:
Let me also draw in the design inference explanatory filter considered on a per aspect basis, as was presented in the very first post in the ID Foundations series:
(NB: Observe Meyer here, on ID’s scientific bona fides.)
It is probably also helpful to add the following, from a reply by Meyer to a hostile review of his book, Signature in the Cell. (It seems that things have got worse over the past few years, we used to have no-views — hostile pretended “reviews” of books not read — now we have hostile no-views of books not yet published.)
The central argument of my book is that intelligent design—the activity of a conscious and rational deliberative agent—best explains the origin of the information necessary to produce the first living cell. I argue this because of two things that we know from our uniform and repeated experience, which following Charles Darwin I take to be the basis of all scientific reasoning about the past. First, intelligent agents have demonstrated the capacity to produce large amounts of functionally specified information (especially in a digital form). [–> Notice the usage] Second, no undirected chemical process has demonstrated this power. Hence, intelligent design provides the best—most causally adequate—explanation for the origin of the information necessary to produce the first life from simpler non-living chemicals. In other words, intelligent design is the only explanation that cites a cause known to have the capacity to produce the key effect in question . . . . In order to [[scientifically refute this inductive conclusion] Falk would need to show that some undirected material cause has [[empirically] demonstrated the power to produce functional biological information apart from the guidance or activity a designing mind. Neither Falk [[the hostile reviewer], nor anyone working in origin-of-life biology, has succeeded in doing this . . .
Food for thought.