Creationists switch from pushing ID to... "critical thinking"?

Good one, LarianLeQuella.

This is a Chick Track (rabidly fundamentalist propaganda) that shows the direction some people want to take the class:

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0055/0055_01.asp

A single student appears to destroy an arrogant professor by dismissing evolution in favor of creationism before attacking atomic theory by saying that God, not the strong nuclear force, holds nuclei together.
 
Dinwar said:
Well, that's the thing--Creationists have learned to draft laws such that they SOUND reasonable, but once they're put into place they amount to nothing more than a smear attack against evolution and teaching Creationism without any in-depth examination.

Again, these people are not honest. The fact that they are still trying to get Creationism into schools, despite the fact that it's been ruled unconstitutional, attests to that. The fact that they're hiding behind wiggle-words and loose verbage does as well. And their goal is explicite--they don't want to teach science or critical thinking, but rather they want to institute a theocracy in the United States. Any time you hear of a law drafted by a Creationists you need to examine that aspect of it.
Click to expand...
Fair enough Dinwar. What I don't understand though is how anybody can expect to teach "critical thinking" and then expect to be insulated from critical thinking about creationism. Another thing I don't understand is why religious people have such a problem with evolution. I've had arguments with creationists, and I've won those arguments by essentially saying

"What kind of God is yours who creates you with all your vanity and weakness and sinfulness, who does not permit you to evolve and improve, and then burns you in hell for the very sinfulness you were created with?"

Anyway, I read the bill and as a parent who has witnessed indoctrination in the curriculum, I don't see it as a big big problem. Call me a sceptic, but it occurs to me that there's people out there who don't want kids questioning what they're being taught.
 
Ian said:
Good one, LarianLeQuella.

This is a Chick Track (rabidly fundamentalist propaganda) that shows the direction some people want to take the class:

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0055/0055_01.asp

A single student appears to destroy an arrogant professor by dismissing evolution in favor of creationism before attacking atomic theory by saying that God, not the strong nuclear force, holds nuclei together.
Click to expand...

So nuclear weapons are God's cleansing wrath!
 
Muldur said:
"Science" HATES it when it gets hoist on it's own petard.

How DARE those kids be taught to think for themselves? Don't they know they are supposed to accept as Secular Gospel the words of the Priests of Godless Knowledge?

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

They are not taught to think for themselves and will not be taught in the future to think for themselves. If you think that you are a fool. They will be herded toward careful formulating to think one way or another. The tools will be rhetoric and fallacy, painted under the false color of "critical thinking" when it will absolutely not be.
 
ben m said:
So you need to find some atheist Social Studies teachers to serve as test cases.

"Under the terms of SB 893, we can discuss both sides of controversial and disputed issues. A student asked me to talk about the controversy among historians about the authorship and historicity of the New Testament ... "
Click to expand...

This ^^^

I cannot wait for this to come back and bite the TN legislature in the ass. Perhaps we should encourage the Scientologists, Raelians, Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and Transcendental Meditationists to start pushing their nonsense in Tennessee schools? After all, it's only fair to "teach all sides".
 
Last edited:
Muldur said:
"Science" HATES it when it gets hoist on it's own petard.
How DARE those kids be taught to think for themselves? Don't they know they are supposed to accept as Secular Gospel the words of the Priests of Godless Knowledge?

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Science hasn't been hoisted by anything.

You confuse science with underhanded political tactics in an election year.

If you think science has been dealt such a hammer blow, please indicate to us how exactly you and your creationist buddies plan to manufacture modern medicines (such as vaccines, antibiotics, etc) without using anything related to evolutionary biology. What Bible passage indicates how to proceed on that front? Will you rely solely on prayer, such as the near-extinct Christian Scientists have done? (You know, there's a good reason why there aren't many of them around anymore - natural selection)

Talk is cheap, Muldur. Science delivers the goods, and you cannot stand that fact.
 
Last edited:
Aepervius said:
They are not taught to think for themselves and will not be taught in the future to think for themselves. If you think that you are a fool. They will be herded toward careful formulating to think one way or another. The tools will be rhetoric and fallacy, painted under the false color of "critical thinking" when it will absolutely not be.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

"Critical thinking" in this context is quite Orwellian. In practice, it will consist of "you can think critically (about topic x) when I tell you to do so."

I wonder how people like Muldur and creationists would react to encouraging students to think critically about the Bible in public schools?
 
Muldur said:
"Science" HATES it when it gets hoist on it's own petard.

How DARE those kids be taught to think for themselves? Don't they know they are supposed to accept as Secular Gospel the words of the Priests of Godless Knowledge?

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yawn. What crap. Science is all about critical thinking and teaching controversies. Just because that doesn't go the way of god believers does not mean it isn't true.... As the great collection of cartoons and other artistic satire in this thread demonstrates.

What skeptics in TN who care about this legislation could concentrate on is an amendment that defines who identifies those scientific controversies. And that would need to be carefully worded so the paid for campaigns by industry and religious interests cannot influence the definition. The Discovery Institute and Exxon, for example, spend a lot of money to discredit valid science in the public sphere.

If it is up to any and every teacher then perhaps some crazy teacher's beliefs should be exposed. LarianLeQuella's cartoons should be amplified in TN. By amplified, I mean they need to get lots of public play.
 
MattusMaximus said:
This ^^^

I cannot wait for this to come back and bite the TN legislature in the ass. Perhaps we should encourage the Scientologists, Raelians, Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and Transcendental Meditationists to start pushing their nonsense in Tennessee schools? After all, it's only fair to "teach all sides".
Click to expand...
This ^^^ ;)
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
Or, they may actually get what they do not wish for. ;)
Click to expand...

That was my first thought. Teach the controversy and teach critical thought? Thank you and welcome aboard. Any remotely honest effort will have the opposite effect to what they think.
 
MattusMaximus said:
Exactly.

"Critical thinking" in this context is quite Orwellian. In practice, it will consist of "you can think critically (about topic x) when I tell you to do so."

I wonder how people like Muldur and creationists would react to encouraging students to think critically about the Bible in public schools?
Click to expand...


Oh come on, that's an easy one.

They'll simply cry "separation of church and state... blah blah. Why are the atheist teachers only picking on us xtians blah blah?"

Of course, they'll miss the irony.
 
I know others have answered this but I will again anyway.
Muldur said:
So all of the following are too stupid to accept your "truth" or are otherwise dishonest?

Also see here for the issue of whether or not creation scientists ever publish in "mainstream" journals, and the issue of bias against them:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/1998/04/15/creationists-publish

Scientists such as Dr Behe would beg to differ with that assessment....
Click to expand...
No Muldur, we are not the stupid ones. The scientific and skeptic communities have willingly looked and all the arguments made in AIG. As you are probably aware but prefer to discount, every single scientific and pseudoscientfic point promoted by AIG is refuted in detail with valid science in Talk Origins.

Dr Behe's work, which was legitimate science at one point, was disproved by genetic science research. Behe looked at structure. When the actual genetic code was looked at it explained structure and disproved the irreducible complexity hypothesis.
 
They got humiliated during kitzmiller v. dover and hopefully they'll get humiliated again.

looks like its time for Round 2 :D
 
The Discovery Institute chimes in:

“This law is needed for two reasons,” explained Casey Luskin an attorney with Discovery Institute’s Center for Science & Culture. “First, unfortunately many science teachers around the country are harassed, intimidated, and sometimes fired for simply presenting scientific evidence critical of Darwinian theory along with the evidence that supports it."

“Second, many school administrators and teachers are fearful or confused about what is legally allowed when teaching about controversial scientific issues like evolution,” Luskin added. “This legislation makes it clear what Tennessee teachers may be allowed to do.”
Click to expand...


Tennessee Enacts Academic Freedom Law Protecting Teachers Who Present Both Sides of Evolution Debate
 
BTW, "teaching the controversy" is not new at all, nor is yet another attempt new to change education laws so god beliefs can be taught in public school science classes.

I'm not saying the thread topic isn't worthwhile. But I'm more interested in who is still promoting these attacks on science, are they increasing in numbers, is it all about the millions the Discovery Institute has to pump into this cause of theirs, or is this just one last gasp?

This stuff barely failed to pass in Kansas. We lucked out that the Dover Trial was assigned Judge Jones and not Judge 10 Commandments Moore. There are dozens of other laws and tactics god believers are behind especially in the Bible Belt.

So, is the problem the same, getting worse, or getting better? Possibly it is getting worse.
 
Last edited:
Interesting, the governor refused to sign the bill or veto it. What a wimp.
A bill that allows Tennessee public school teachers to teach alternatives to mainstream scientific theories such as evolution will become law this month after the governor refused to sign or veto the measure, ...

... The new Tennessee law comes after a similar measure was enacted in Louisiana in 2008.

“Just as the Tennessee bill was inspired by a similar law in Louisiana,” Scott told Nature magazine, “the Tennessee bill would surely inspire other states to go down this same dangerous path.”
Click to expand...
I pity the children.
 
Beerina said:
That was my first thought. Teach the controversy and teach critical thought? Thank you and welcome aboard. Any remotely honest effort will have the opposite effect to what they think.
Click to expand...

Yep. And in reality I think it'll be a mix of "honest effort", "business as usual", and "creationist baloney".
  • There will be a few teachers who take the law as an opportunity to construct new critical-thinking lesson plans, on topics beyond the right-wing hot buttons that the legislature imagined. Great.
  • There will be some science teachers who will continue their good, ordinary science-teaching work. Good for them.
  • There will be some good teachers whose students bring in "Expelled" DVDs and ask to watch them in class. Maybe these teachers previously said No with "... it's not in the curriculum standard" as an excuse, and with that excuse unavailable will throw up their hands and let it go.
  • There are always a few creationist-teachers, previously kept in check by their principal's fear of Dover-like lawsuits, who will take the law as an opening. They'll bring in full-on Discovery-Institute-approved lesson plans which feature "critical thinking" questions like "Are scientists lying about the 2nd law of thermodynamics? How did Hitler respond to the knowledge that his grandmother was an amoeba? Discuss."

Depending on the actual teacher population involved, this could be a net benefit or a wash or a net negative. My bet is on the latter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom