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]

Re: [Phys-l] Intelligent designists fight back.



You start from a couple of false premises. See below:


On Sat, 5 Jan 2008, LaMontagne, Bob wrote:



________________________________

From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu on behalf of Jack Uretsky
Sent: Sat 1/5/2008 9:04 PM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] Intelligent designists fight back.



Successful science is not measured by counting the number, or
wealth, or status, or cleverness of people who accept it. Your argument
demonstrates that you have no glimmer of understanding what science is
about.

---------------------------------
The trailer to the movie
False premise: The movie (which I know nothing about and never heard of) is a cause for our concern. A majority of Americans, apparently, believe in astrology, and a magic "magnetic bracelet" has made a mint (now being reclaimed by the government) for its purveyers.
A movie is often a piece of propaganda. The first amendment guarantees that we will be flooded with such.

had nothing to do with validating ID by counting
the number of people who accept it.
That was part of your argument, so IMO, you're stuck with it.

What it does show is that people who
are otherwise quite intelligent but are not trained scientist cannot
differentiate between the arguments presented by ID proponents
False premeise: The movie can only present a viewpoint. It cannot "show' anything about what people do.


and
Darwinists. The ID people not only understand how science works,

False premise: Dover demonstrated the falsity of this premise.


they
use that knowlege to form arguments that to non-scientists appear
structurally exactly the same as mainstream science. The intelligent
non-scientist listens to the two arguments that appear to to have the same
structural scientific integrity

Now who's being dismissive. The intelligent non-scientist is adept at distinguishing honest from dishonest argument. State governments, for pity sake, are taking the lead in this country to combat global warning.

and then listens to the derision heaped on
ID by the mainstream scientist.

Another false premise. Discovery Institute scientists have turned down invitations by the AAAS to debate ID. You don't find very good scientists "heaping derision" on any ideas -no matter how weird sounding.
As Pauli once said, 'Your idea is crazy, but it's not crazy enough".


One cannot then fault the intelligent
layman for concluding that the only reason for the derision is that the
ID propnent does not belong to the establishment "club". That is the whole
point of the movie. If you combine that conclusion with a strong religious
belief, the preference for ID is not surprising.

Another false premise: What preference for ID? Dover (and Kansas) voters got rid of their fundamentalist school boards.

My note had nothing to do with my understanding of what science is. The
note was a statement of concern about the effect on the average
non-scientist upon viewing the movie when it is released. The trailer
certainly is headed in the direction of equating the "scientific approach"
of ID with the science that leads to the theory of evolution. The
average college educated viewer has not had enough exposure to the
process of science to differentiate between true science and vary
cleverly designed faux science. When scientists who respond to ID when
interviewed by the press take the same dismissive attitude put forth
in the comment "no glimmer of understanding what science is about" they are
playing directly into the hand of the ID proponents. The average person will
simply think that the mainstream scientist is simply protecting his turf -
he certainly hasn't presented anything that refutes ID - just simply strung
together derisive comments.

Well, I do apologize to the extent that I thought you were trying to make a case for ID. Apparently, you're not.
Regards,
Jack



We are not doing the average college non-science graduate any good on this matter with the traditional science offerings. Astronomy, intro biology, conceptual physics, and intro chemistry merely give surveys of the very basic ideas that professional scientists need to know to practice their crafts. Rarely do these course seriously tackle the difference between science and pseudoscience. We should not be surprised when they don't see an obvious superiority of traditional science over that of the ID proponents.

I certainly don't agree with Ben Stein's decsion to accept the arguments of ID "scientists" over those of mainstream biologists, but I don't find his acceptance inherently disingenuous or ignorant. He is not a scientist - neither are most people who decide on their preference based on the presentations available on TV or in the press.

Bob at PC






Rather, it is the science community who has to get off their high horses
and come up with clear, easily understandable retorts to ID. Simply being
dismissive is going to drive more of the general population into the ID
court. They have seen scientists careen from Global Cooling to Global
Warming - they have seen demands for banning DDT followed by unforgivable
mass deaths of children in undeveloped countries because of the resulting
surge in malaria - they will not accept nuclear power because
scientists have created bombs from that science. Scientists have too
spotty a history to take a believable condescending attitude toward ID
that is readily acceptable by the general public.
__________________________________________________
What in the world does this have to do with Darwinism?



Bob at PC - who sees evolution as the only viable explanation for the
living world

(Please excuse the typos - my new wireless keyboard does not
communicate with my new Vista computer very well.)
_____________________________________________
Regards,
Jack




--
"Trust me. I have a lot of experience at this."
General Custer's unremembered message to his men,
just before leading them into the Little Big Horn Valley



_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l




--
"Trust me. I have a lot of experience at this."
General Custer's unremembered message to his men,
just before leading them into the Little Big Horn Valley