In my day we didn't have discussions in science classes. There were hard facts to be mastered and our job was to master them. We left discussions for more touchy-feely subjects like English lit.

Apr 5, 2012 -- 5:49PM, Ken wrote:

In my day we didn't have discussions in science classes. There were hard facts to be mastered and our job was to master them. We left discussions for more touchy-feely subjects like English lit.

Not even discussion regarding an experiment conducted in class?

I recall having to discuss conclusions and what they meant.  And, lots of times I got things wrong or concluded something different from what teacher had intended.  LOL!  Makes me the scientist I am today (Yikes!).

Irene.

Apr 5, 2012 -- 5:41PM, IreneAdler wrote:

Ya know, I too question this ‘protection’ of teachers whose students wish to discuss points of view counter to theory of Evolution. Foothold indeed!

Any theory “worth its salt” can stand up to critical examination. Sound theory is based on solid, substantiated, verifiable, repeatable data in as controlled an environment as possible to reduce confounding variables. The true skeptic provides rigorous critical assessment of that theory; what survives is of robust nature. Skepticism is of benefit to science- when that skepticism is based on reason.

As to allowing students to use Creationism or ID to refute Theory of Evolution, I would posit that students be allowed to bring this into discussion. Not as a segue into a discussion of religion in the classroom; rather as a lesson on how to refute or counter properly.  The science student must learn that the provenance of one’s evidence must be ascertained; the source of facts presented must be vetted by qualified scientists before it can be considered a proper challenge to any theory (and the work by said scientists must be peer reviewed as well). Student will quickly discover that “my Bible tells me so” or “I’ve been told” are woefully inadequate counters in any scientific discussion. Cite a paper, carry out a well-controlled experiment. Science is about verified facts –not beliefs or customs or old wives’ tales. Just cuz something is written down –or published- doesn’t make it a fact nor does it make it correct. Biblically-derived is not an automatic pass to validity. Theories or counterpoints derived from questionable data are worthless. It would be made clear very quickly that Biblically-derived arguments lack solid data, peer reviewed substantiation and are worthless. In the words of DUO: “do better!”.  Hopefully the whole issue of creationism as an adequate counter-theory to Evolution can be laid to rest in minutes.  

And, this isn’t to say that theories must never change. Who’s to say that, tomorrow, some field scientist will happen upon a discovery that might alter our understanding of Evolution (note: I did not say ‘refute’ Evolution)? But, this discovery would be well-studied and properly vetted by a whole lot of qualified people before that even begins to happen (ahem, Piltdown Man, anyone?). Science ain’t done yet. We are always learning.

In short, it would be a lesson for the student in prudent judgment - know your sources. Learn to employ sound evidence to properly bolster one’s position. But I will concede that it is a great deal easier on the teacher to simply restrict any mention of belief-based theories of origin. Some folks just will not accept the premise that good science is never based on beliefs- no matter how divine the origin. This can make such discussion very difficult-not trying to create an undue burden on teachers. And, while this might open up the classroom to all kinds of notions (dowsing anyone?), I would hope it would impart to students the importance of reasoning.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

Irene.

+100

Apr 5, 2012 -- 11:27PM, loveontheair wrote:

I think this needs to be moved...perhaps the Atheist forum. It doesn't belong here. My $.02

This is a hot topic, something currently in the news, even with a link. This is exactly where this discussion belongs. Or do you really believe that people should not discuss what you do not want to hear?

love

Where?

Apr 5, 2012 -- 11:27PM, loveontheair wrote:

Hello,

I think this needs to be moved...perhaps the Atheist forum. It doesn't belong here. My $.02

love

Why? Is this hot topic a little too hot for you to handle? 

(And don't worry -- this thread will probably end up being sent to the Discuss Atheism or the Science and Religion boards once it sizzles out and no one has posted to it for a week or so. As you know, all Hot Topics threads are eventually sent to other boards when they cease to be hot topics.)