Originals WTF? La Culture Geekery WWJD? The South Blog

Science teachers need to learn how to teach evolution

All things awesome.

Postby SouthernFriedInfidel » Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:18 pm

In a study that is being published in "Science," research is showing that around 13% of America's science teachers are actively pushing creationism in class. And awful lot more -- close to 60%, take no active stance regarding the value of Darwin's work. Why?

From the responses of the teachers who were studied, it really appears as if they have no idea what makes the theory of evolution "science," and what makes creationism "mythology."

It seems to me that the real problem here is in how we train our teachers. If a science teacher can only recite the material in the assigned texts, then there's no way to verify that they understand the material they are charged with teaching.

I ran across teachers of this sort when I was growing up. Of course, I grew up in the 60's and 70's, at the end of the Baby Boom, when teachers were in such short supply that complete imbeciles who were themselves barely literate were put in charge of teaching "Fun with Dick and Jane" to 30 kids at a time. We should be past those dark days. Probably WOULD have been had we no had this bloody "No Child Left Behind" BS to deal with.

But be that as it may... our science teachers in this country need major changes, and they need them quickly. We're already far behind the rest of the civilized world in science education. With a group like this, we will only fall further back.

:doh:
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Posts: 1769
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.

Postby Liv » Tue Feb 01, 2011 12:07 am

I've been tempted to ask my Astronomy professor the question "Sooooo..... Where does God fit in this whole creating the universe theory?" Which likely would earn me a lesser grade, because I get the feeling he'd assume I'm just some Nazi Christian.... but I'm very curious about his beliefs.
User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

Postby SouthernFriedInfidel » Tue Feb 01, 2011 12:23 am

If he's keeping it professional by sticking to science, I'd advise you do the same. You're there to learn, not debate.
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Posts: 1769
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.

Postby Liv » Tue Feb 01, 2011 8:03 pm

SouthernFriedInfidel wrote:If he's keeping it professional by sticking to science, I'd advise you do the same. You're there to learn, not debate.


Yes, sir... SFI, sir.

Honestly I think he thinks I'm a dumb blonde 20 something year old. Which is mostly correct, except the dumb part.... :)

I'm not going to debate anything, honestly... I go, do my work, and get it done.... I know my place... but... I do find it interesting in that the whole Astronomy Science thing begins at "planet", ends at "universe", and no one bothers to ask what's beyond the universe. Perhaps we will get into it, but I find it odd that the curriculum seems to have a finite window of "what is", and no one bothers to ask "what is after".

We shall see...
User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

Postby SouthernFriedInfidel » Tue Feb 01, 2011 9:15 pm

Did you ever subscribe to the "Astronomy Cast" podcast? They have explored current thinking on cosmology like your question. I think the current answer to "what's beyond the universe's boundary?" is "we have no way to find out." Still, there are some folks who try to infer based on what we know. It's an interesting topic.
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Posts: 1769
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.

Postby jimfaster » Fri Feb 04, 2011 6:13 am

The mechanism of evolution is based on four principles: variation, inheritance, selection, and time. At the same time, keep in mind the nature of science - as we know what we know.
jimfaster
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 6:08 am

Postby A Person » Fri Feb 04, 2011 2:45 pm

jimfaster wrote:At the same time, keep in mind the nature of science - as we know what we know.


I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Science is not just a body of knowledge, it's a process of evidence based reasoning so that we can have confidence in the things that we 'know'
User avatar
A Person
 
Posts: 1740
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Slightly west of the Great White North

Postby Liv » Sat Feb 05, 2011 9:49 pm

So we're studying the rising and setting sun.... and I asked my professor at the end of class "Have you ever heard of a show called QI?" He goes "Uh no...."

Now since he proclaimed to be "a geek" in front of class... I was beginning to question his geekfullness... :)

I digressed...

"So errr... yeah, it was interesting.... on the show, the point at which the sun is already set it visible isn't set yet, but only appearing to be last visible...."

He's giving me a look like I'm nuts.

I continue sticking my foot in my mouth...

"So yeah, they like explain it by the bending of light."

His remarks....

"uh huh.... yes I'm sure it's complicated."

Ahhhhhh!!!!! I feel like a complete idiot.




User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

Postby A Person » Sat Feb 05, 2011 10:17 pm

To impress him you just needed the word 'refraction' which is the sciency way of saying bending

Image


Don't tell him about Earth's 'second moon'

QI were completely wrong wrong wrong on that, Cruithne orbits the sun, not the earth

Image
User avatar
A Person
 
Posts: 1740
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Slightly west of the Great White North

Postby Liv » Fri Mar 09, 2012 2:33 pm

Apparently they've found a way to teach about the dinosaurs...

http://donglutsdinosaurs.com/exhibits-1/ (NSFW)
User avatar
Liv
Imagine What I Believe
 
Posts: 2771
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:59 pm
Location: Greensboro, NC

Postby rosewhite » Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:37 am

before ateacher can teach evolution they have to have some evidence of evolution - and unfortunately there isn't any!
There is plenty of evidence of progress towards humanity but until soemthing turns up that can conclusivly be shown to be a Missing Link between two species we have to accept that we were created when the earth was ready for humans.
For a human to question their existence and insist they have evolved is like the bacteria that makes your feet smell at the end of the day explain how computers work.
As human life can't be traced back further than 4026BC when Adam opened his eyes it is nonsense to talk of millins f years of evelution.

A better topic of research by evolutionists migh be: Did Adam get erections before Eve was made? And, How soon after her creation was Eve ready for sex with Adam? And one for the fundies: If sex is only for proecreation why is it so much fun, so beneficial and so harmless if both partners keep clean and faithful?
rosewhite
 

Postby SouthernFriedInfidel » Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:56 am

Sigh. Yes, there is ample evidence to support the theory of evolution. There was more than enough evidence to support it in the 1830's when Darwin developed it, and evidence discovered since then has only led to confirmation and refinements of the theory that cover nearly all realms of natural scientific research. Only an ignorant cretin would claim that the question is still open. Please take that statement in the spirit in which it was offered.

:mrgreen:
User avatar
SouthernFriedInfidel
 
Posts: 1769
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:54 pm
Location: 5th circle of hell -- actually not very crowded at the moment.


Return to Geekery



cron