monitoradiation
New Member
Hey guys; so my city's trying to pass a dumb bill that parents can pull their kids out of classes that they find insensitive to their religion or somesuch nonsense. Here're two opinion pieces on that anti-evolution bandwagon that I wanted to share; I wrote up a rebuttal but I'm not sure I want to send it to the editor.
Here're two links:
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opinion/letters/Parents+should+have+child+education/1571665/story.html
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opinion/letters/What+Scriptures+mandatory/1571666/story.html
I'm sure most of us can tackle this issue fairly well, but I just wanted to share, as these opinion letters were posted on a medium that is different than the internet.
Do you guys think I should write in for a rebuttal? Here's a first draft of what I wrote:
_________________________________________________
"I have a sneaking suspicion that D.M. Hendrickson and Claire Helmers have fallen prey to the anti-evolution bandwagon helmed by the likes of Kent Hovind, and forgotten what "science" and "evolution" really mean.
Science is any systematic human pursuit to acquire knowledge through repeatable hypothesis testing. Science deals in known facts, and any hypothesis must be extensively tested to warrant the coveted title of "theory".
Evolution, on the other hand, is a fact. This is shown through the preponderance of evidence from the fossil record, portrayed in detail by corroborating evidence from numerous fields of science like paleontology, geology and physics. The explanation for the fact of evolution by various mechanisms, the primary of which is natural selection, is called the Theory of Evolution.
How it relates to the human species is the primary reason for denying this fact. Claire Helmers cited the adverse reaction of being linked to "a monkey" while evolution state that humans share a common ancestor with the other great apes. Two clear evidence of this link is Chromosome 2 fusion as well as Endogenal Retroviruses, which can be searched by anyone who cares enough about facts.
Appeal to emotion does not work with facts; we are still apes, whether or not one accepts it. To pull children out of biology classes simply because one disagree with known facts is asinine. The most revealing part of her letter is where she pleads "tolerance" for "religious folks". Tolerance and respect is reserved for individuals, not their opinions regarding known facts. Public schools must be committed to teaching facts, not opinions clouded with religious undertones. If Claire wants children to be shielded from facts, she has the right to place her children in private schools, or homeschool them; but should not delude herself into thinking that she's doing her children any favors.
As for D.M. Hendrickson's vague description of textbooks "[going] beyond what is warranted by the evidence", I suspect he's talking about cosmology, astrophysics, and abiogenesis, which are outside of the purview of evolution. Furthermore, the assumption that biology classes don't already teach "actual characteristics of flora and fauna" is ludicrous. Speciation events occur; one need not look further than flavobacteria for an example. Evolution shows advantages to these characteristics and why they are propagated in the species. To only teach the characteristics rather than how they got there gives one a very superficial understanding of the wondrous diversity of life."
Here're two links:
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opinion/letters/Parents+should+have+child+education/1571665/story.html
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opinion/letters/What+Scriptures+mandatory/1571666/story.html
I'm sure most of us can tackle this issue fairly well, but I just wanted to share, as these opinion letters were posted on a medium that is different than the internet.
Do you guys think I should write in for a rebuttal? Here's a first draft of what I wrote:
_________________________________________________
"I have a sneaking suspicion that D.M. Hendrickson and Claire Helmers have fallen prey to the anti-evolution bandwagon helmed by the likes of Kent Hovind, and forgotten what "science" and "evolution" really mean.
Science is any systematic human pursuit to acquire knowledge through repeatable hypothesis testing. Science deals in known facts, and any hypothesis must be extensively tested to warrant the coveted title of "theory".
Evolution, on the other hand, is a fact. This is shown through the preponderance of evidence from the fossil record, portrayed in detail by corroborating evidence from numerous fields of science like paleontology, geology and physics. The explanation for the fact of evolution by various mechanisms, the primary of which is natural selection, is called the Theory of Evolution.
How it relates to the human species is the primary reason for denying this fact. Claire Helmers cited the adverse reaction of being linked to "a monkey" while evolution state that humans share a common ancestor with the other great apes. Two clear evidence of this link is Chromosome 2 fusion as well as Endogenal Retroviruses, which can be searched by anyone who cares enough about facts.
Appeal to emotion does not work with facts; we are still apes, whether or not one accepts it. To pull children out of biology classes simply because one disagree with known facts is asinine. The most revealing part of her letter is where she pleads "tolerance" for "religious folks". Tolerance and respect is reserved for individuals, not their opinions regarding known facts. Public schools must be committed to teaching facts, not opinions clouded with religious undertones. If Claire wants children to be shielded from facts, she has the right to place her children in private schools, or homeschool them; but should not delude herself into thinking that she's doing her children any favors.
As for D.M. Hendrickson's vague description of textbooks "[going] beyond what is warranted by the evidence", I suspect he's talking about cosmology, astrophysics, and abiogenesis, which are outside of the purview of evolution. Furthermore, the assumption that biology classes don't already teach "actual characteristics of flora and fauna" is ludicrous. Speciation events occur; one need not look further than flavobacteria for an example. Evolution shows advantages to these characteristics and why they are propagated in the species. To only teach the characteristics rather than how they got there gives one a very superficial understanding of the wondrous diversity of life."