Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
There are valid grounds for concern, but let's not
over-react. Alleging dishonest indoctrination is going
too far.
Two wrongs don't make a right. I agree that PbBA (Proof
by Bold Assertion) is unscientific. I agree that many
textbooks engage in it.
But let's keep a grip on reality. We have excellent
methods -- physics methods -- for determining the age
of fossil-bearing rocks. So the aforementioned bold
assertions about paleobiology !!could!! be rephrased
in scientific terms.
There are lots of fine, honest reasons for abbreviating
the discussion of a topic:
Constructive suggestion: this particular textbook
would have been much improved if it had included a
"for further reading" section with pointers into
the scientific literature.
We need to distinguish between
-- asserting a scientific fact, versus
-- trying to _prove_ a fact using PbBA.
There's nothing wrong with an assertion, as long as
you don't pretend that the assertion is a proof.
In second grade my teacher asserted that two plus
two makes four. I'm quite sure she didn't "prove"
it in any deep mathematical sense. (I very much doubt
that she, or anyone else within many miles, knew
enough about the axioms of arithmetic to even imagine
that such a thing was provable.)
The problem arises when lunatics see scientific facts
asserted without proof and think that if they make their
own assertions, without proof, they are entitled to an
equal hearing. They're not. To say that all assertions
should be given equal consideration is really bad policy.
It gives the biggest advantage to the biggest liar.
A thousand pieces of weak evidence do not outweigh one
piece of strong evidence. A million loud assertions do
not outweigh one piece of real evidence.