Comments on: Evolution in the Schools http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/ A blog about ID and my other interests Thu, 01 May 2008 15:24:02 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: professorsmith http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-122 professorsmith Sun, 14 Oct 2007 02:30:51 +0000 http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-122 It happens to be the only instance we have where we know the origins of a lifeform. ID has been demonstrated. It happens to be the only instance we have where we know the origins of a lifeform. ID has been demonstrated.

]]> By: Jim Thio http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-106 Jim Thio Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:50:50 +0000 http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-106 Square water melons and genetically engineered food are samples that once in a while, life is created. Not a proof, but a plausibility. Square water melons and genetically engineered food are samples that once in a while, life is created. Not a proof, but a plausibility.

]]> By: Another creationist eruption « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-53 Another creationist eruption « Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:50:09 +0000 http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-53 [...] 1.25 million blogs.  It’s not there for brilliant writing or wonderful content — most of it seems to be apologetics for creationism and intelligent design.  I suppose creationist sites might have discovered [...] [...] 1.25 million blogs.  It’s not there for brilliant writing or wonderful content — most of it seems to be apologetics for creationism and intelligent design.  I suppose creationist sites might have discovered [...]

]]> By: Ed Darrell http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-52 Ed Darrell Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:44:01 +0000 http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-52 I deny that Haeckel's drawings have had any significant impact on evolution studies or theory, especially since they were outed by scientists three or four decades ago. Haeckel's drawings appear in a few textbooks these days to show how easy it is to be led astray -- you might pay attention to that lesson. Kettlewell's research is solid -- are you trying to suggest there was a problem with it? Yes, he posed moths to show the color difference for photographs. Are you trying to suggest that is a problem? He made the photograph show what the birds saw -- you think that's a problem? You're view is unsupported by any scientist -- and Dr. Majerus just this month published research reaffirming Kettlewell's findings. Wells claims Majerus differs with Kettlewell, and so Majerus has rightly called Wells a liar. Do you defend such lies in science? Name one thing Wells is right on. His book has been thoroughly rejected by scientists. Not a single chapter is free from distortions of other scientists' work, and most of them, sadly, resemble the moth chapter, <i>where every single citation claims exactly the opposite of the research cited.</i> It's a bravura demonstration of the lack of moral fiber among creationists. Sweep them under the rug? Hardly. Wells is a liar, and that should be broadcast with neon signs. Note it is you who is denying that Wells' work is false. Why would you try to sweep that under the rug? Evolution is the foundation of modern biology. What is it you have against good science, good medicine, and good agriculture? I deny that Haeckel’s drawings have had any significant impact on evolution studies or theory, especially since they were outed by scientists three or four decades ago. Haeckel’s drawings appear in a few textbooks these days to show how easy it is to be led astray — you might pay attention to that lesson.

Kettlewell’s research is solid — are you trying to suggest there was a problem with it? Yes, he posed moths to show the color difference for photographs. Are you trying to suggest that is a problem? He made the photograph show what the birds saw — you think that’s a problem? You’re view is unsupported by any scientist — and Dr. Majerus just this month published research reaffirming Kettlewell’s findings. Wells claims Majerus differs with Kettlewell, and so Majerus has rightly called Wells a liar. Do you defend such lies in science?

Name one thing Wells is right on. His book has been thoroughly rejected by scientists. Not a single chapter is free from distortions of other scientists’ work, and most of them, sadly, resemble the moth chapter, where every single citation claims exactly the opposite of the research cited. It’s a bravura demonstration of the lack of moral fiber among creationists.

Sweep them under the rug? Hardly. Wells is a liar, and that should be broadcast with neon signs. Note it is you who is denying that Wells’ work is false. Why would you try to sweep that under the rug?

Evolution is the foundation of modern biology. What is it you have against good science, good medicine, and good agriculture?

]]> By: professorsmith http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-51 professorsmith Sun, 30 Sep 2007 14:43:05 +0000 http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-51 Mr. Darrell, Do you deny that Haeckle forged his drawings? Do you deny that Kettlewell attached moths to trees, thereby calling his whole experiment into question? Wells may be wrong about some of his charges, but he is right about others. That Darwinists want to simply sweep those criticisms under the rug is rather telling. Odale, I'm not sure what you mean by your comment. What are the students being asked to "sort out?" Are you advocating that we teach them untruths just so they won't have to "sort it out?" I would never advocate such a thing. We need to tell our students the truth about matters such as evolution. There are questions about it, there is a controversy, and they need to know about it. Anything less is indoctrination to materialism. Mr. Darrell,
Do you deny that Haeckle forged his drawings? Do you deny that Kettlewell attached moths to trees, thereby calling his whole experiment into question? Wells may be wrong about some of his charges, but he is right about others. That Darwinists want to simply sweep those criticisms under the rug is rather telling.

Odale,
I’m not sure what you mean by your comment. What are the students being asked to “sort out?” Are you advocating that we teach them untruths just so they won’t have to “sort it out?” I would never advocate such a thing. We need to tell our students the truth about matters such as evolution. There are questions about it, there is a controversy, and they need to know about it. Anything less is indoctrination to materialism.

]]> By: Odale http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-49 Odale Sat, 29 Sep 2007 23:46:47 +0000 http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-49 I'm not sure what grade you're suggesting but, in my experience with middle schoolers (junior high) and high schoolers, I can only name a few that would be analytical enough to sort it out. I agree with the concept, just not too sure b/c of what I've seen. Maybe I should say, "sounds good in theory". I’m not sure what grade you’re suggesting but, in my experience with middle schoolers (junior high) and high schoolers, I can only name a few that would be analytical enough to sort it out. I agree with the concept, just not too sure b/c of what I’ve seen. Maybe I should say, “sounds good in theory”.

]]> By: Ed Darrell http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-47 Ed Darrell Sat, 29 Sep 2007 23:15:42 +0000 http://professorsmith.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/evolution-in-the-schools/#comment-47 Jonathan Wells' book is below par, academically. He relates as fact things that are soundly disproven. He makes claims that are completely unsupported by research, and contradictory to science. It's not suppressed by anyone. You can buy it on Amazon. It's in school libraries. Claims of oppression are actually quite bizarre, coming about a book from a guy who has actually advocated suppressing science. Wells advocates teaching crap to children. While that should be a sin, scientists are happy to simply point out his manifold errors and problems with veracity. (See his chapter on moths, for example. To read it, you'd get the idea that moth scientists think Kettlewell's research doesn't show natural selection in action. Each scientist Wells names has called Wells a liar, but in polite terms. Do you advocate dishonesty as a regular academic procedure -- or have you never bothered to read his footnotes?) Too bad Wells isn't willing to compete in a fair fight. [Do you actually profess stuff in a school? Would Wells' work pass your academic honor code? It wouldn't pass codes in any schools I've ever taught at.] Jonathan Wells’ book is below par, academically. He relates as fact things that are soundly disproven. He makes claims that are completely unsupported by research, and contradictory to science.

It’s not suppressed by anyone. You can buy it on Amazon. It’s in school libraries.

Claims of oppression are actually quite bizarre, coming about a book from a guy who has actually advocated suppressing science.

Wells advocates teaching crap to children. While that should be a sin, scientists are happy to simply point out his manifold errors and problems with veracity. (See his chapter on moths, for example. To read it, you’d get the idea that moth scientists think Kettlewell’s research doesn’t show natural selection in action. Each scientist Wells names has called Wells a liar, but in polite terms. Do you advocate dishonesty as a regular academic procedure — or have you never bothered to read his footnotes?)

Too bad Wells isn’t willing to compete in a fair fight.

[Do you actually profess stuff in a school? Would Wells' work pass your academic honor code? It wouldn't pass codes in any schools I've ever taught at.]

]]>