AlbqOwl said:
If a person read a science text that casually mentioned that the earth and other hard heavenly objects are spheres, and then read the exhaustive 'scientific' opinion from the Flat Earth society, the Flat Earth society would look very authentic. That's the problem with all junk science: it looks so authentic. Get a few hundred or thousand other obscure people in scientific fields who agree with or at least don't dispute the report, and voila: you have a compelling consensus of scientific opinion.
Nope, you got a BELIEF. It is not "Scientific" until the data has been evaluated through the Scientific Method. THAT is what you are not grasping here, that science is not a consensus but rather about what the data actually shows.
Because of what scientific education I've had coupled with simple logic, I believe the Flat Earth Society deals in junk science. Okay, fraud. But those who have sensed or experienced the supernatural, who have reasoned and considered laws of probability, and who find the alternative implausible, intelligent design is not only reasonable but fact.
Ah, a misrepresentation. "Fact" is something that can be proven, something that has actual evidence for it beyond wishful thinking and "I can't believe it didn't happen this way" postulations.
And when the evidence directly goes AGAINST the claims, yet people continue to claim it to be "fact" and even will misrepresent science to make their point, then you have the flat earthers. You ALSO have the ID pushers, as that is exactly what they are doing, and you certainly have the creationists there as well.
So YOU have decided that the flat-earthers are different than the ID crowd and the creationists because the latter have "faith. They are as dishonest and false in their claims as the flat-earthers are.
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM.
They just can't prove it scientifically, at least yet.
It is more than that. Their claims have been directly disproved. They are deliberately distorting scientific claims. They are engaging in junk science and outright fraud. Again fervent faith is NOT a substitution for factual info, and to merely claim their validity because YOU are not aware of the science and the direct deception in the ID and creationist claims, that is the failing of YOU not being educated enough about what you defend.
Science is useless to explain love, original thought, creativity, etc. too, but most of us agree that such things exist.
Quite. Science doesn't deal with what can't be quantified and measured. Science deals with the "What" and the "How," not with the "Why." That is inherent in science. It also means that anything like that has nothing to do with science and that trying to present it as an alternative," thus is flagrantly dishonest.
So should teachers teach intelligent design? Of course not.
They can, but not in science class.
But should they discount it as a possibility? Of course not.
Ah, just like they shouldn't discount that the Earth might be flat and that they shouldn't discount that 2+2 might be 5.
Yes, that is EXACTLY the same.
When ID is in conflict with science, all s/he has to do is tell her class that there is much that we do not yet know and for which there is no scientific basis, and we're going to focus for now on what we do know and that for which there is a scientific basis. So keep an open mind, but learn the stuff you will have to pass on your science test, and ID won't be there.
yes, be sure to tell the kids that regarding the shape of the Earth, the makeup of atoms, the Germ Theory of Disease and every other scientific concept we teach. be sure to teach the kids that it is all wild speculation and that crackpot wild beliefs are certainly as valid to entertain as solid, evidence-based facts. What a great idea
Sorry, but to me, your idea is outright stupid and deceptive, it is child abuse.