Re: [Phys-l] Is evolution something to believe in?

["cliff parker" <cparker@charter.net>]

Hey don't steal my thread.  Take the global warming debate somewhere else.
I want to know why I am the first person in my student's lives that tells
them that science is about imperfect models.  I have read with interest
ideas posted about changing the way we teach to a more inquire based
approach and I think that has some merit.  However I really don't think it
will ever happen on any kind of a large scale.  It is just not a very
efficient way of transferring the vast amounts of information students need
to be productive citizens.  It may give some of them more insight as to how
science is done and perhaps more of the work we as educators do should be
devoted to that issue, but why can't we just tell them, tell them over and
over again that none of this is right.  It is extremely useful but it is not
right.  That's not what we are doing here.  Ok, we probably can not do that
to 10 year olds, but by the time they are in high school surely we can start
letting them in on the secret.  By the time they are through college and
teaching our children why in the world don't most of them know by then?  I
submit it is not because we have failed to use a sufficient amount of
inquire based teaching techniques on them; it is because we haven't told
them!

Cliff Parker



-----Original Message-----
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
[mailto:phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of Hugh Haskell
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 4:22 PM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] Is evolution something to believe in?

At 10:46  -0400 4/3/08, R. McDermott wrote:
> And it isn't just religion, of course; global warming as being a man-made
> effect is another area where unpopular points of view seem to require
> routine attack.  Anyone spouting a contrary view is, apparently, deluded,
> ill-informed, or a shill for "big oil".  And what difference does it really
> make?  If we ARE primarily responsible, does anyone actually think there's
a
> chance in hell that we can get things under control?  With China and India
> entering explosive expansions of their economies?  With the villification
of
> nuclear power trumping the ecological damage done by harvesting and burning
> fossil fuels?  With an ever-accelerating world population?  Pardon me for
> being a pessimist, but it seems to me that at this point it's inevitable
> that we will find SOME way kill ourselves off - If good old mother nature
> doesn't do it for us first.
It is entirely possible that we won't get things under control. But 
if that happens, we are in big trouble. I think most of us here don't 
need a tutorial on what that big trouble is. The issue is can we do 
something? I think the answer is yes, provided we recognize that the 
"something" is what *we* do. We cannot sit around and wait for the 
government to act. They won't take the lead until the people make it 
clear to them that if they want to keep their jobs they'd better. And 
the way we convince them is to start the necessary actions on the 
local level. There are plenty of them that can be initiated at all 
levels-international, national, state, county & municipality, 
neighborhood and finally personal. Current polling indicates that a 
substantial majority of the people in this country realize that there 
is a problem. It's just that at the moment they don't quite know what 
to do about it. Some serious public education is in order.

There are actually a couple of things that governments can do that 
are pretty simple, but politically very difficult as long as those 
who resist those changes have, through their money resources, the 
political clout to keep them from happening. The two things that can 
be done that will have a huge effect, and will result in other things 
happening that will help even further, are stopping the building of 
any new coal-fired power plants that don't include carbon-capture and 
storage and setting fuel standards for road vehicles that will force 
a conversion to more eco-friendly fuels--biofuels (not from food 
crops), electric (not from coal plants), or distributed-production 
hydrogen (or all three). This isn't enough in itself, but it does 
make a big dent in the problem and it will make it easier to do the 
necessary follow-on stuff.

As for China, India, and the rest of the third world, their 
per-capita use at the moment is tiny compared to ours. It is not 
unreasonable for them to aspire to a standard of living comparable to 
ours, but it is incumbent upon us (that is, the west) to make sure 
that they do it in a sensible way, so that their per capita GHG 
emission remain low, and hopefully even decrease. This is possible if 
we make the effort to lead the way.

Hugh
-- 

************************************************************
Hugh Haskell
<mailto:haskell@ncssm.edu>
<mailto:hhaskell@mindspring.com>

(919) 467-7610

Hard work often pays off after time. But Laziness always pays off now.

			February tagline on 2007 Demotivator's Calendar
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l