Just After Darwin Day...

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

You really have to feel sorry for kids living in the world's last remaining superpower, don't you?

I mean, it is not their fault that they get fed on junk food from Macdonalds that gives them an obesity problem, is it?
And now, people who are old enough to know better want to bring in legislation that will ' teach the controversy' in schools, and develope their 'critical thinking'... yeah, right !!!

Oh, before I forget, have a link:-
http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2011/02/11/%E2%80%98science-guy%E2%80%99-speaks-out-bill-nye-says-nay-to-anti-evolution-crusade-as-bills-pop-up-in-the-states/

Now, the obligatory opinion....

The fact is, there is no controversy regarding biological Evolution in science. Scientists are people who go into the field and into the lab and do their own original research and make their own discoveries and publish the findings for peer review among people well qualified in the same and in related fields, and the consensus among the scientific community is that the Earth is billions of years old and that our species has been around for a lot longer than the 6,000 years allowed for by a literal reading of the book of Genesis.

OTOH, Craetionists turn out overwhelmingly to be people who quotemine and misrepresent the findings of others, and then go on to copypaste the claims on Creationist websites. Rather than doing original research and making ground breaking discoveries like 'Lucy', the big names in Creationism, people like Kent Hovind, Duane Gish and Ken Ham simply sell their books and videos to make money off of a gullible audience. These websites, and the related books and videos advertsied thereon, are packed with misrepresentations and inaccuracies - and sadly, this is what some adult Americans actually believe to be true.

In a recent discussion on Facebook, the following comment was made-
Marcus Clark What they don't tell you is that "Lucy" is not only a compilation of bone fragments of multiple bodies but likely of multiple species. These bone fragments were also collected over a rather large area. By doing a little "digging" you'll find that "Lucy" is a total farce.

And this was cited as ' evidence'

Marcus Clark
http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/x0714_lucy_fails_test.html
and
http://www.trueauthority.com/cvse/lucy.htm
and
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2004/0825lawrence.asp
...and
http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/reprints/truthlucy.pdf
just to show a few.See more

However, as this crushing refutal shows, the original claim was misrepresentation - nobody claimed that the 1973 find was part of the Lucy skeleton, (except the creationists , of course) and the guy who discovered Lucy was quite clear that the knee joint find was from another individual, albeit of the same species - A aferensis.

Go take a look -

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/knee-joint.html
Saturday at 12:53

Now, if this ever comes up in class, how many teachers of the creationist persuasion are going to show both sides of the case, and how many are going to do a good job in demolishing guys like Hovind, Ham and Gish? How many Creationists are actually honest?

It does not bode well for the future of the USA when an agenda driven by the Religious Right gets taught as fact in the classroom. I hope that American kids will get a good deal for once and that this legislation will be rejected for what it is, a cunning plot to bring Creationism into class - but I am a realist. I know how many Americans believe in Creationism, and that many of these will sit on School boards, and have a vote in State politics. People do have a right to be wrong if they choose, it goes with the turf in a democratic nation. However, I don't thiink that these people are making a choice that willbe good for their kids or their country's future if they allow Creationism into the class room.

Comments

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

It seems to me that you are defending the Democratic principle more than Creationism itself, but iif these states do enact these laws, then of course, we cannot complain and say that they should not be allowed.

However, before the vote takes place, we should be aware of what is actually involved here. We should be aware that one creationist website - Answers in Genesis takes the view that

"No apparent, perceived, or claimed interpretation of evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record.

This is putting the cart before the horse. How far can a teacher go , if they are to use this method?

Sure, a teacher can point out that the muscles on the back of the neck leave lesions on the skull where they attach to the bone, and that the lesions are short in humans and long in shimps and gorrillas. but is it ok to point to Lucy's lesions/ to point out that this indicates that she walked upright?
Ture science allows any interpretation to be offered, and then discussed.

RT Kendall's Westminster Chapel in London did not allow cross examination of Duayne Gish if it was too challenging , and niether will the AiG. If these people want to talk to schoolkids about their beliefs, if AiG material is presented in schools, is it going to be pointed out that critical peer review is not part of the process? Will 'critical thinking' be allowed to run freely over Creationist claims?

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

I said I was defending creationists.

Ok, point taken . I would agree that people have the right to be wrong, and I would also accept that many people in the USA , and also in Europe, sincerely believe that Kent Hovind is a real scientist, who makes valid points about human origins and the world we live in.

this does nothing , however , to address the fact that duane gish continues to make claims that other people have previously refutedin debates with him - there is a technical term for this in Evolution centred discussions "a PRATT - Point Refuted A Thousand Times".
The People who run the Creationist Websites, write the books and make the videos and DVDs do it for money. they make no real contribution to science, but merely cherry pick through real scientist's original work for 'evidence' that they can then sell to a gullible section of the public.

People who care about the quality of public life, about our childrens education and about things like honesty and tax fraud should be challenging the likes of kent hovind at every opportunity and point out real and relevant facts. Hence I make this post. as I said in my Op, people have the right to be wrong if they choose, but snake oil salespeople like Hovind, Gish and Ham have no right to evade paying taxes and no right to live off of people's ignorance, or complain whenmore enlightened people call foul on their deliiberate fraud and money making rackets.

About the Dover Trial...

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

I think these bills you linked to should be defeated because of their religious nature

I agree, and am curious to know how the verdict of the Dover trail will affect this issue. i am not an expert on American law or the US VConstitution , but I understand that seperation of Church and State is one of it's provisions.

Scientists point out that none of the creationists wanted to show up and be cross examined at the dover trail, whereas people like Kenneth Miller took the stand as expert witnesses.

Creationist apologists called foul on the judge not allowing their statements to be read as this would mean they could present without being cross examined - and this led to him being accused of 'being too political' in the judgement he handed down.

Given that Judge Jones was a conservative Christian , I would have thought that he was going strictly by the book in making such a verdict - but maybe someoen else can elaborate here on how things really are, in terms of what is and isn't constitutionally allowed in the USA.

[stewstewstewdio.livejournal.com]

One thing I will caution you on though, and it is something that Europeans often need reminding of, the U.S. is a nation of 50 nations.

So the "United" in United States has been canceled?

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

Well, as i see it, there is State Law and National Law - or federal Law as Americans call it. I know what they mean, that if texas makes it law, then California does not automatically follow suit.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

But you have to give them (the Feds) credit for trying :D

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

There are equally things the state governments very much cannot do and never have been able to do. Such as running independent financial presses. Now if someone would tell the good Teepers like Rand Paul this.....

[anadinboy.livejournal.com]

every american has duel nationality, his state and the usa

Not really.....

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Altho one usually has some kind of ID for the state they reside in, such as a drivers license.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

No, we're one nation with an extremely powerful and vocal fundamentalist minority that's attempting to pervert the system against itself.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

No, we are in fact one nation. We have one language, one common history, the differences in state structures are cosmetic, we have minimal cultural-linguistic differences even with our racial minorities (not that this ever particularly occurred to the racists), we have one overall federal governing structure. The problem is that the religious fanatics give the impression of being a majority that they are in fact not one at all and are simply what happens when one makes fringe movements part of a mainstream political party.

You can only appease a totalitarian fringe movement for so long before the demon you rouse turn and rends you.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Sure, there are local languages. Navajo is spoken in a region larger than Belgium. That doesn't change that the United States is a solidly Anglosphere Christian Republic.

Alaska would be the only one with an actual excuse to say that it doesn't have a common history. Well, Alaska and Hawaii. Both Texas and California were satellite states carved out of Mexico and swiftly absorbed in the war that nearly wrecked the United States 20 years later.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Again, sure, Navajo is spoken in a region larger than Belgium, the Haudenosaunee continue to speak languages older than Spanish in North America, let alone English. None of this matters a hill of beans. English is the language of entertainment, government, media, and the overwhelming majority of the population.

As above, Texas and California were satellite states and proxies for US expansionism at the expense of a Mexico then as now perpetually in a state of civil war and revolution. Absorbing both nearly wrecked the country 20 years later and California these days is Bankrupt and Texas is pseudo-Iran. Alaska and Hawaii have the best claims to secession of any states in the USA, especially Hawaii. And only Alaska has a legitimate claim to be truly "distinct" from the lower 48 as far as a territory is concerned, Hawaii having been a Polynesian Meiji state.

Do black people speak Igbo or Yoruba in the USA today? Don't all the minorities, Hispanic, black, Indigenous, and Asian have equal claims to have built the United States as it is today, particularly blacks?

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Decentralized. On a local level, maybe.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

No it's not, it doesn't matter how many times you make that claim, it's just not true :P

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

So at the end of the day, why are you defending creationists?