Re: What should schools teach (e.g. _Pandas_) ?

Tim Ikeda (timi@mendel.Berkeley.EDU)
Tue, 7 May 1996 19:01:25 -0800

I agree with much of Loren's post except for the section about comparing
YEC arguments in schools.

I don't think that young-earth arguments have the support required to
justify their inclusion in a science curriculum (I don't think that
_popular_ support is sufficient reason for inclusion). I'm also not
sure that YECs will appreciate the way in which the their arguments
might be presented or discussed. Instead, I think there are examples
of other competing scientific models for students to investigate which
are less religious-oriented and less likely to draw heated debate. For
geology, one could examine the emergence of plate tectonics. In physics
and astronomy, one could compare the problems of an earth-centered solar
system vs. a heliocentric one. In biology, students could read about
how nucleic acids came to be recognized as carriers of inheritance.

I do agree that "watchmaker" arguments are a problem for teaching and
probably should be tabled. However, I think they could be introduced
briefly for purposes of historical perspective.

Regards, Tim Ikeda (timi@mendel.berkeley.edu)