Re: New Kansas Science Stds.

From: John W Burgeson (burgytwo@juno.com)
Date: Mon Feb 19 2001 - 17:44:04 EST

  • Next message: John W Burgeson: "Re: New Kansas Science Stds."

    Keith posted, in part:

    "I would argue that if we do not focus on teaching science as a
    particular
    way of learning about the natural world around us, or demonstrating the
    observational basis for our theories (gravitation included), then
    students
    will not have the foundation upon which to rest scientific claims. "

    I think we have no disagreement on this, Keith. That is what "teaching
    science" ought to be all about.

    The difficulty comes in when we HAVE to use (and insist on using) the
    facts (data) of science. George commented that teaching the dangers of
    standing under a tree in a thunderstorm ought to be one of those facts
    and that insisting on an old earth (to a YEC advocate) is not.

    The Kansas resolution makes no differentiation between these two, and
    many other possibilities, some of which I mentioned. Jack Haas's story of
    the different number of ribs, male vs female, is a particularly amusing
    one. It is quite easy to think of others which are less amusing and
    potentially very dangerous.

    Burgy (John Burgeson)

    web page (back in operation) is

    www.burgy.50megs.com



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 19 2001 - 17:46:52 EST