Re: possibly OT: NYT article on GA creationism/evolution debate

["John S. Denker" <jsd@MONMOUTH.COM>]

I wrote:
> > 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.

cliff parker wrote:
> I like your point here,

:-)

> but I know my students come to me proving almost
> everything they know by reference to the pronouncement of some authority.
> This past week I began the new year by asking my students to think about
> what a contrail was and how they were produced.  As I talked with several
> groups the thought that the cold temperatures at high altitude was part of
> the story inevitably came up.  When I asked what made them think it was cold
> at 30,000 feet they refereed to all kinds of authorities from Discovery
> Channel to an uncle in the Air Force.  It took several minutes of discussion
> before a few began to think about snow capped mountains and hail falling
> from the sky and things like that.  Without a good deal of prodding they
> never would have thought beyond reference to authority.

Let me reciprocate by saying that I like this point!

There's not much I can add except to say that the problem
is not confined to school-age persons.  Sometimes I think
that kids are more open-minded and more ready to think for
themselves than typical adults are.

Teaching people how to think for themselves is the most
important teaching we can do, far more important than any
particular facts.

And that's why the attack on evolution is so despicable.  It
is not just an attack on the facts of evolution;  it is an
attack against thinking.