The economy is now in control of the Sith, as Lord Vader surrounded by Storm troopers rang the opening bell. The shadow of the dark side has fallen…
It has begun, the google search of Sarah Palin turns up some interesting information about John McCain’s new VP running mate aside from her being currently under investigation in Alaska for abuse of power. She also thinks that creationism should be taught along side evolution in school… that in my book disqualifies her from my personal vote. This shows a lack of critical thinking on her part, as it is clear in the article she does not understand what a scientific theory is.
Palin was answering a question from the moderator near the conclusion of Wednesday night’s televised debate on KAKM Channel 7 when she said, “Teach both. You know, don’t be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it’s so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both.”
It seems the assault on science is to continue.
Creationists often love to say that no transitional fossils have ever been found, of course they are wrong. Just today the news came out of the earliest tetrapod fossil having been found, this is the most primitive 4 legged creature yet unearthed by science. It is another piece in the puzzle in how fish evolved in to animals that walk on land.
The 365 million-year-old fossil skull, shoulders and part of the pelvis of the water-dweller, Ventastega curonica, were found in Latvia, researchers report in a study published in Thursday’s issue of the journal Nature. Even though Ventastega is likely an evolutionary dead-end, the finding sheds new details on the evolutionary transition from fish to tetrapods. Tetrapods are animals with four limbs and include such descendants as amphibians, birds and mammals.
While an earlier discovery found a slightly older animal that was more fish than tetrapod, Ventastega is more tetrapod than fish. The fierce-looking creature probably swam through shallow brackish waters, measured about three or four feet long and ate other fish. It likely had stubby limbs with an unknown number of digits
This is just adding to our knowledge about life and the origin of species… creationists as I mentioned often claim there are no transitional fossils and will never concede that this is a transitional fossil which is just absurd. Instead they will insist that we show them the exact uninterrupted progression of one species to the next, so now that we’ve filled in this gap we’ve only created more to be filled in by other fossils. The ultimate in silliness are creationists for they demand unequivocal proof of evolution, while believing things came to be by magic…
Today’s NY Times has an article regarding the new face of
creationism, intelligent design nope its not either of those which have been given the smack down from science already the latest tactic of the religious movement is strengths and weaknesses language to be put in to the HS biology text books.
“ ‘Strengths and weaknesses’ are regular words that have now been drafted into the rhetorical arsenal of creationists,” said Kathy Miller, director of the Texas Freedom Network, a group that promotes religious freedom.
The chairman of the state education board, Dr. Don McLeroy, a dentist in Central Texas, denies that the phrase “is subterfuge for bringing in creationism.”
This is where the creationist/intelligent design/cdesignproentists are at since they have no actual science to support anything they claim. They are using semantic arguments without clearly defined meanings as a way to mislead the public and ensure children and teenagers do not get a good science education. Dr McLeroy say this is not subterfuge for creationism, however why is evolution the only theory they what to teach the strengths and weaknesses?
So what’s wrong with teaching the strengths and weaknesses for evolution or any topic? Really, there is nothing wrong with it, however prior to discussion or teaching of strengths and weaknesses a person should have an appropriate background in the science itself, that doesn’t mean you have to be a scientist. HS Biology’s course of study is an overview of the general science and not an in depth study of it. Strengths and weaknesses of evolution are taught in higher level college courses where you have the background to properly address the material. I have no problem with the discussion of the limits of evolution and identifying the areas that need further study. The weaknesses part of strengths and weaknesses are the areas where our understanding of science have yet to explain some part of nature this makes science exciting this where new questions and ideas come from this is how science makes progress everything is provisional based on new and verifiable information. The implication as I understand it in the strengthens and weaknesses is that due to the weaknesses of evolution the theory is invalid (god of the gaps) or to be looked upon as flimsy instead of what it is really is which the unifying theory of Biology .
The constant issue creationists never address… regardless of any criticism that they generate for evolution (which have been refuted) they never put forth a positive theory that would better explain the evidence. They tried to masquerade Intelligent design as such a theory but is was refuted shown decisively in the Dover Trial. Instead of a positive theory or an attempt at science what you find are often lies an example of which is no transitional fossils have ever been found which is a joke since there have been many transistional fossil discoveries most recently the frog-amander. It is just demonstrably false.
I don’t want to wander off in further refuting the long refuted creationism(and various forms). This has been done over and over, my point for this post is how Texas is allowing not only their schools but there entire state to be high-jacked by religious fundamentalist who wish to impose their religious views on all people and this could have a further negative effect for the rest of the United States due to the purchasing power of text books that Texas has, this will undoubtedly weaken our already weak science education if it takes hold. If there is valid criticism bring it on lets get to the bottom of it, if you have an alternative hypothesis that better explains all the evidence and is supported by the evidence then please present it.
Any appeal to magic need not apply.