Letters to the Editor
-
On second thought, don't ...
Also send him the judge's opinion from the Dover case.
Since when is science decided in a courtroom? More to the point, if you do send him the "decision," be sure to point out that more than 90% of it was lifted directly from the ACLU's complaint, complete with factual errors. That's not deliberation; that's just a lazy, corrupt judge.
First, get him to acknowledge a definition of science. Something like "a process that seeks empirical evidence to confirm or disconfirm hypothesis in order to develop falsifiable theories which predict and postdict natural events." Then ask him to judge whether ID can meet that standard. It simply cannot.
Neither can Darwinian evolution. It's not testable, nor is it falsifiable, and it has no predictive power.
-
Well, ask Darwin himself
Should he be able to teach children that African's are not as intelligent as Europeans?
Well, let's see what Darwin himself would have said about that.
"With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed." -- from The Descent of Man
Hmmm.
-
Trivializing abuse
Beating a child into the hospital is abuse. Starving them, leaving a small child alone unsupervised is abuse. Molesting a child is abuse. Teaching them creationism is NOT abuse. It's not right, but it's not abuse.
I know people who were abused. There are distinct issues and pain there. A child mistaught is a very different thing.
When you trivialize abuse, you look like a fanatic.
Just tell your friend no and contemplate how you are lucky if this is the worst thing in your navel-gazing life while people lose jobs, health insurance, etc. Contemplate why you are such a srama loving diva that this drives you to nausea when there are people with real problems out there (like in Iraq or the Sudan). IF it upsets you so much, grow a backbone and just say no.
What a whiny letter.
-
Thank-you Cary
Dear Cary,
Thank you for your post. It was a wonderful read and I am sure I will return to it in the future.
It is very interesting to observe the creationist-atheist debate occurring in the USA. In Australia, the issue has not reached such emotional extremes. To me, it appears that the debate has become dangerously polarized and irrational on both sides. Extreme atheism is damaging to the scientific cause, as it does nothing but promote dogmatism and intolerance.
Cary is right. In countries like America, where rights are enshrined in the Constitution, respect for freedom of speech and freedom to develop one's own beliefs should be paramount.
-
Young earth people DO have evidence for their beliefs.
And that evidence is...the Bible. There it is, right there in Genesis. The fact that YOU don't think that evidence amounts to a hill of beans is irrelevant. They will say they have evidence. And within the framework of a conservative Christian environment, they are right. They have evidence supporting their beliefs.
Now, if he wants to teach that the mainstream scientific community supports creationism, that would be demonstrably false. If he wants to teach that the mainstream scientific community supports the universal flood theory, that would be false. But if he wants to say in his science class that the Bible supports creationism and run with that, he is correct. It does. The fact that his private school science class doesn't look like YOUR idea of what a science class should look like is your problem, not his.
-
Yeah, how 'bout that!?
But what it teaches these kids is, if there is physical evidence in front of you, and it doesn't fit with your belief system, then you should deny the physical evidence. -- KayWWW
Yeah, that's a real problem.
"The living results of natural selection overwhelmingly impress us with the appearance of design as if by a master watchmaker, impress us with the illusion of design and planning." --Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker
Damn the evidence! Full speed ahead! It's just an illusion!
-
Don't blame you for throwing up, but when you're done ...
... here's a fairly short, intelligent and entertaining book to recommend to your friend: Kluge, by Gary Marcus. Its about how the human brain, um, evolved. Maybe your friend's brain will do the same as he reads.
The definition of kluge, which I didn't know until I found the book, is: a clumsy or inelegant solution to a problem. Which kind of describes "creationism".
-
abuse
There's abuse and there's abuse, domini. I know of a child who had lighter fluid poured over him and was set on fire. That he exists doesn't mean a child who was given a black eye wasn't abused. Shoplifting and murder are very different but both are "crimes." Calling shoplifting a crime doesn't trivialize murder.
Yes, knowingly teaching lies to children is a form of abuse.
I realize I never answered Cary's rhetorical question: I believe the rational alien would, like any other rational being, know the importance of truth in communicating to others about the world, and the natural betrayal felt by both those who are lied to, and the empathetic who witness others being lied to.
-
LW could always quote the Dalai Lama . . .
Who wrote:
"If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change. In my view, science and Buddhism share a search for the truth and for understanding reality. By learning from science about aspects of reality where its understanding may be more advanced, I believe that Buddhism enriches its own worldview."
Creationism (young or old) is not science and religiosity does not preclude belief in science.