tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post7119603276586664940..comments2024-03-28T15:39:28.239-04:00Comments on Vital Remnants: Will P. Z. Myers need to be tranquilized? More on scientific dogmatismMartin Cothranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16452612266051351726noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-68350157453906340172010-07-07T20:49:59.577-04:002010-07-07T20:49:59.577-04:00Thomas,
Didn't you pay attention to Bush'...Thomas,<br /><br />Didn't you pay attention to Bush's major federal initiative into local education? The federal government has a lot to say about K-12, more than they had before. Sure the federal courts have been very good about protecting schools from religious intrusion (<em>Kitzmiller</em> being the most recent example), but I don't know what Paul would want to do. He doesn't Free Lunchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12272965187978654322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-13827126802698836572010-07-07T17:33:06.192-04:002010-07-07T17:33:06.192-04:00Free Lunch,
What do you mean, how does that work?...Free Lunch,<br /><br />What do you mean, how does that work? Education is an area traditionally and (still primarily) run by the states. Curricular development is not much of an issue at the federal level, and it's quite reasonable to think the issue should be left up to the states altogether. <br /><br />The funding of scientific research is probably another matter.Thomas M. Cothranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07824873424225826685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-60569661340535629372010-07-07T17:32:15.443-04:002010-07-07T17:32:15.443-04:00... and believe that different colored layers in p...<i><br />... and believe that different colored layers in polar ice count as years ...<br /></i><br /><br><br />Actually, the most convenient annual marker is the change in the ratio (known as D18O) of the two most common isotopes of oxygen, O18 and O16. Because water containing the heavier O18 is harder to evaporate and easier to condense, water vapor in the atmosphere is preferentially jrenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-8373301003992215582010-07-07T15:32:15.221-04:002010-07-07T15:32:15.221-04:00Paul doesn't think the federal government shou...<em>Paul doesn't think the federal government should be involved in education at all, so I doubt that will be an issue.</em><br /><br />How does that work? Do you really think that he will recuse himself in any education debate because he doesn't want the feds involved? Would you expect a pacifist to say nothing about the Defense Department budget?Free Lunchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12272965187978654322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-89288888905707902352010-07-07T15:27:10.469-04:002010-07-07T15:27:10.469-04:00Evan Oliver,
Please give specific examples to sup...Evan Oliver,<br /><br />Please give specific examples to support your claims.<br /><br />By the way, no scientists claim that "a fish can evolve into a bird". Organisms do not evolve, populations evolve over time. There is a common ancestor of birds and fish (and mammals, including humans). There is a great deal of evidence, including the evidence that exists within your body.Free Lunchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12272965187978654322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-24244587914126957352010-07-07T15:24:36.147-04:002010-07-07T15:24:36.147-04:00@Evan Oliver
You say many outrageous things in yo...@Evan Oliver<br /><br />You say many outrageous things in your latest comment - and notably none of them are backed up with evidence.<br /><br />"Among those in their camp who accept (without proof) that a fish can evolve into a bird"<br /><br />Strictly speaking you are correct. There isn't any "proof". There are mounds and mounds of ~evidence~ to back that birds ~did~ Joe_Agnosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01527451040606921115noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-80260277973354200212010-07-07T15:14:01.802-04:002010-07-07T15:14:01.802-04:00Art,
I wouldn't want any politician to base c...Art,<br /><br />I wouldn't want any politician to base choices on something that is false or highly unlikely. Paul doesn't think the federal government should be involved in education at all, so I doubt that will be an issue.Thomas M. Cothranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07824873424225826685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-82474661824705564672010-07-07T15:04:53.395-04:002010-07-07T15:04:53.395-04:00Several people above have made the statement that ...Several people above have made the statement that the age of the earth is not controversial. Among those in their camp who accept (without proof) that a fish can evolve into a bird, and believe that different colored layers in polar ice count as years, I admit it is not controversial. However, among all scientists, and other researchers it most certainly is. The the dating methods are known to Evan Oliverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17403088816411469379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-75935772104823987142010-07-07T14:03:59.539-04:002010-07-07T14:03:59.539-04:00So does that mean that politicians must take a pos...<em>So does that mean that politicians must take a position on string theory? Or that they must defer to scientists on the subject?</em><br /><br />No on taking a position. Yes on deferring. Mocking specialists is very popular in American politics, but it makes no sense to do so. Few politicians understand science, even the ones with professional degrees in medicine (which does not make them Free Lunchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12272965187978654322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-25094103043647178932010-07-07T13:37:12.058-04:002010-07-07T13:37:12.058-04:00Scientists have been wrong before, and there's...<i>Scientists have been wrong before, and there's no reason one has to take any position one way or the other unless one is responsible for curricular requirements or something similar.</i><br /><br />Thomas, are you implying or suggesting that Senator Paul should recuse himself from deliberations and votes on matters that pertain to education policy (or science policy, for that matter)?<br /Arthttp://aghunt.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-44528617432556669432010-07-07T12:51:00.949-04:002010-07-07T12:51:00.949-04:00Thomas wrote: "Scientists have been wrong bef...Thomas wrote: "Scientists have been wrong before, and there's no reason one has to take any position one way or the other unless one is responsible for curricular requirements or something similar."<br /><br />while this is somewhat true, I think there are degrees to this.<br /><br />Something as UNcontroversial as the age of the earth should not require much thought in answering - Joe_Agnosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01527451040606921115noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-16559923139898460752010-07-07T12:29:25.397-04:002010-07-07T12:29:25.397-04:00"It takes more than a little hubris to say th..."It takes more than a little hubris to say that you haven't bothered to learn what the scientists know while still implying that you think that they are wrong or, at least, that a religious doctrine that has been shown to be wrong by the physical evidence might still be true."<br /><br />So does that mean that politicians must take a position on string theory? Or that they must Thomas M. Cothranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07824873424225826685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-87204190324329271512010-07-07T11:49:10.528-04:002010-07-07T11:49:10.528-04:00Thomas,
It might be quite refreshing for a politi...Thomas,<br /><br />It might be quite refreshing for a politician to say that they don't know enough about a subject to form an opinion about it -- but only if they then deferred to the experts who had done the work and had developed an informed opinion.<br /><br />It takes more than a little hubris to say that you haven't bothered to learn what the scientists know while still implying Free Lunchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12272965187978654322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-22254566915713660322010-07-07T10:49:35.471-04:002010-07-07T10:49:35.471-04:00You all seem to be missing the point. The argument...You all seem to be missing the point. The argument is not that the approximate age of the earth is unknowable in principle, or even that modern science hasn't come up with fairly reliable estimates. The argument is just that one doesn't have a particular moral obligation to do the sort of research necessary to publicly advocate a particular view on the subject, any more than one has a Thomas M. Cothranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07824873424225826685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-44901421747355172032010-07-07T09:06:21.215-04:002010-07-07T09:06:21.215-04:00The scientific method may only be pretty good at g...The scientific method may only be pretty good at giving us an approximation of what is correct, but it is very good at discovering when claims are wrong.<br /><br />Newton offered a good approximation about how mechanics worked. Even though we can say he was "wrong" in some sense, he was accurate enough that most engineering can be safely and reliably done using his methods today. On Free Lunchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12272965187978654322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-12902524740330740602010-07-07T08:29:46.739-04:002010-07-07T08:29:46.739-04:00By your definition of dogmatism, we, all of us, ar...By your definition of dogmatism, we, all of us, are dogmatists in almost every single aspect of our lives.<br /><br />Myers is right... what you are describing is pragmatism, because otherwise we couldn't function.<br /><br />Our entire history is one of building upon others work. If every single person had to start over, without the knowledge of others, we'd still be in the same place Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-27252293420006770042010-07-07T07:44:38.713-04:002010-07-07T07:44:38.713-04:00We are to trust people who say we should not trust...<i>We are to trust people who say we should not trust people.</i><br /><br />No, Martin, we are to trust people who say we should not ONLY trust people.<br /><br />Imagine 2 people make the same factual claim, and you reasonably reply "why should I believe you?" Person A says "don't take my word for it, here's how you can go and check for yourself". Person B says "Not that Martinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-16911428630580848362010-07-06T21:25:11.602-04:002010-07-06T21:25:11.602-04:00Ok, so if you consider yourself ignorant in these ...Ok, so if you consider yourself ignorant in these subjects and doesn't hold an opinion since you are not an expert and also, supposedly, not a creationist, then why do you draw a line separating you and the "Darwinists"? You are clearly showing that you are not a darwinist (as in the title of your post"Should scientists demand that others act unscientifically? Further proof Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-81648746779773548422010-07-06T21:10:43.144-04:002010-07-06T21:10:43.144-04:00From the recent book _Idiot America_:
“there are t...From the recent book _Idiot America_:<br />“there are two sides to every question, they both must be right, or at least not wrong. And the words of an obscure biologist carry no more weight on the subject of biology than do the thunderations of some turkeyneck preacher out of Christ's Own Parking Structure in DeLand, Florida. Less weight, in fact, because our scientist is an "expert"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-89728084418638782972010-07-06T19:51:46.416-04:002010-07-06T19:51:46.416-04:00Albert Mohler said this about the age of the earth...Albert Mohler said this about the age of the earth:<br /><br />"Secondly–and very quickly–if I’m asked why does the universe look so old, I have to say it looks old because it bears testimony to the affects of sin. And testimony of the judgment of God. It bears the effects of the catastrophe of the flood and catastrophes innumerable thereafter. I would suggest to you that the world looks oldKyCobbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-69262059182879596262010-07-06T17:52:43.375-04:002010-07-06T17:52:43.375-04:00The first rule when you find yourself in a hole . ...The first rule when you find yourself in a hole . . . stop digging.Ed L.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08093580743059072173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-38871422411826175402010-07-06T17:47:59.818-04:002010-07-06T17:47:59.818-04:00He's not saying that you should believe him be...He's not saying that you should believe him because he reads books, he's saying that <i>you should read those books too</i>.<br /><br />You do not need a deep level of expertise to know the current scientific consensus on the age of the earth and how they arrived at it. You need a high school education. You need to be able to read a short book written at, at most, a 12th grade reading truthspeakerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03322493751391590588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-36572532874463810912010-07-06T16:12:47.438-04:002010-07-06T16:12:47.438-04:00Martin -- just stay down!Martin -- <i>just stay down!</i>jrenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11542449.post-18304160600424836642010-07-06T14:48:33.936-04:002010-07-06T14:48:33.936-04:00My oh my, what a desperate attempt at digging your...My oh my, what a desperate attempt at digging yourself out of a whole of embarassment. The final paragraphs are particularly painful, You quote the scientist who has corrected the age of the earth and then completely misrepresent his position in a horrible effort at rescuing your respectability.<br /><br />I quote from your quote:<br /><br />'“When you start to try to unravel the sequence of Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com