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] |
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.
________________________________
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
note was a statement of concern about the effect on the average
My note had nothing to do with my understanding of what science is. The
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?
living world
Bob at PC - who sees evolution as the only viable explanation for the
communicate with my new Vista computer very well.)
(Please excuse the typos - my new wireless keyboard does not
_____________________________________________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