"Intelligent Design" & Public Schools

“I love this thread.

I do homework with all three of my kids every night. They are getting a fine education in the public schools. They aren't covering the Big Bang (theory or otherwise), Darwinism etc but are basically taught that Science is naturalism. Of course my oldest is in the 6th grade.

I have contacted the local high school Biology teacher and verified that the course that is taught sticks strictly to naturalistic science. He was not aware of what the position of my local board of education was on this topic so I have started tracking the meetings.”

“I will say, however, that the way they are taught math (especially algebra) is wierd to say the least. Lots of "estimate" this and "guess" that. Lots of games with pawns and cubes. When I was a kid it was "group like terms" and "isolate the unknowns". Now it's pawns and cubes with numbers on them. I realize that it's all about "math you can use", but I am not sure how my sons and daughter will make it from this type of math to calculus, linear algebra, and combinatorics.”

“combinawhatsahooza?”

“haha!

That's how I felt. That class was a beotch!”

“Sarge: First of all tracing when and how psychology became a science isn't science it's history.

Psychology gradually became a science. There is still much that Psychological researchers do that is not science. 1875 - 131 years ago is when the process began in earnest with the experimental laboratories of William James and Wilhelm Wundt.”

“psy·chol·o·gy (sī-kŏl'ə-jē)
n., pl. -gies.

1. The science that deals with mental processes and behavior.

2. The emotional and behavioral characteristics of an individual, group, or activity: the psychology of war.

3. Subtle tactical action or argument used to manipulate or influence another: He used poor psychology on his employer when trying to make the point.

4. Philosophy. The branch of metaphysics that studies the soul, the mind, and the relationship of life and mind to the functions of the body.”

“Sarge: First of all tracing when and how psychology became a science isn't science it's history.

Do you realize how absurd that is? You made the claim that there are certain requirements for a field to be considered science, and I simply asked you when those requirements were met with psychology. If it happened just in the last 130 years, there should be NO problem determining when it happened, right? I mean, this isn't rocket science here. (get it?)

How can psychology "gradually" become science? Are you saying determining if something is science is a grey area? There is no black and white there? Are you saying that there is room for interpretation?

Why are you changing your story? I honestly thought you would have an answer that supported your previous statements, or at least tried to!

This is all very disappointing pedxing.

We're talking about SCIENCE here pedxing. I want to be able to test if something is science by using the scientific method.

Don't let me down.”

“There is still much that Psychological researchers do that is not science. 1875 - 131 years ago is when the process began in earnest with the experimental laboratories of William James and Wilhelm Wundt.

Was psychology suddenly "science" 131 years ago when they opened their labs? If so, why specifically? We're on your turf here pedxing, so this should be easy for you.”

“pitts - If you don't want discussion, don't open the thread. My points are valid. Your response demonstrates you feel threatened.

Interesting sarcastic post though after your last one helped to make my case.

psychology is considered a science even though some of it is based solely on, as TFD puts it, "the nature of reality".
last edited: 2/08/06 5:43:04 AM”

“Put me on ignore if you don't like what I post.”

“pitts - Put me on ignore if you don't like what I post.”

“I you were to put me on ignore I know you would peek. You're a peeker.”

“Better than being a pecker.”

“You would know.”

“Just what I've read from you online.”

“Sarge: Two things. There are disagreements that reasonable people can have over what consitutes science. There are gray areas. Just like with pornography: there are things that definitely are, there are things that definitely aren't and there are things that fall in a gray area.

As for Psychology, it is a huge field. At this point the majority of pscyhologists accept the limitations of the scientific method. Others don't.”

“How do you know psychology is science, as you claimed it was? Rest assured, I'm debating you, not reasonable people. (didn't necessarily mean that as it sounded)
last edited: 2/08/06 5:42:37 PM”

“At this point it must be clear to the intelligent reader that clinical psychology can make these wild claims, offer these questionable therapies, only because there is no practical likelihood of refutation – no clear criteria to invalidate a claim. This, in turn, is because human psychology is not a science, it is very largely a belief system similar to religion.

And, like religion, human psychology has a dark secret at its core – it contains within it a model for correct behavior, although that model is never directly acknowledged. Buried within psychology is a nebulous concept that, if it were to be addressed at all, would be called “normal behavior.” But do try to avoid inquiring directly into this normal behavior among psychologists – nothing is so certain to get you diagnosed as having an obsessive disorder.

In the same way that everyone is a sinner in religion's metaphysical playground, everyone is mentally ill in psychology's long, dark hallway – no one is truly “normal.” This means everyone needs psychological treatment. This means psychologists and psychiatrists are guaranteed lifetime employment, although that must surely be a coincidence rather than a dark motive.

But this avoids a more basic problem with the concept of “normal behavior.” The problem with establishing such a standard, whether one does this directly as religion does, or indirectly as psychology does, is that the activity confronts, and attempts to contradict, something that really is a scientific theory – evolution. In evolution, through the mechanism of natural selection, organisms adapt to the conditions of their environment, and, because the environment keeps changing, there is no particular genotype that can remain viable in the long term.

The scientific evidence for evolution is very strong, and evolution's message is that only flexible and adaptable organisms survive in a world of constant change. Reduced to everyday, individual terms, it means no single behavioral pattern can for all time be branded “correct” or “normal.” This is the core reason religion fails to provide for real human needs (which wasn't its original purpose anyway), and this failing is shared by psychology – they both put forth a fixed behavioral model in a constantly changing world.

The present atmosphere among many psychologists and psychiatrists can only be described as panic. This panic is clearly shown in the rapid, seemingly purposeful destruction of the DSM, the field's “bible,” as a legitimate diagnostic tool (because if everything is a mental illness, then nothing is). This panic arises in part from a slow realization that many conditions formerly thought to be mental conditions amenable to psychological treatment, turn out to be organic conditions treatable with drugs (or, like homosexuality, turn out to be conditions not appropriate to any kind of treatment). Further, many traditional clinical practices have been shown to be ineffectual and/or indistinguishable from ordinary experience or nothing at all.

In the final analysis, the present state of psychology is the best answer to the original inquiry about whether it is scientific, because if human psychology were as grounded in science as many people believe, many of its historical and contemporary assertions would have been falsified by its own theoretical and clinical failures, and it would be either replaced by something more scientifically rigorous, or simply cast aside for now.

But this is all hypothetical, because psychology and psychiatry have never been based in science, and therefore are free of the constraints placed on scientific theories. This means these fields will prevail far beyond their last shred of credibility, just as religions do, and they will be propelled by the same energy source – belief. That pure, old-fashioned fervent variety of belief, unsullied by reason or evidence.

http://www.arachnoid.com/psychology/”

“


last edited: 2/08/06 7:13:39 PM”

“I haven't read the whole debate about psych here but please note, if I'm not repeating anyone, that psychology/psychiatry will improve as a Science as Science improves.

As Neurology/Biochemistry deduces the Brain/Body more so will psychology evolve. Evolve of course being perhaps synonynous with being absorbed by Neurology.

Of course I merely am hypothosizing here. ;)”

“George C. Deutsch, the young presidential appointee at NASA who told public affairs workers to limit reporters' access to a top climate scientist and told a Web designer to add the word "theory" at every mention of the Big Bang, resigned yesterday, agency officials said.

Mr. Deutsch's resignation came on the same day that officials at Texas A&M University confirmed that he did not graduate from there, as his résumé on file at the agency asserted.

Officials at NASA headquarters declined to discuss the reason for the resignation.

"Under NASA policy, it is inappropriate to discuss personnel matters," said Dean Acosta, the deputy assistant administrator for public affairs and Mr. Deutsch's boss.

The resignation came as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration was preparing to review its policies for communicating science to the public. The review was ordered Friday by Michael D. Griffin, the NASA administrator, after a week in which many agency scientists and midlevel public affairs officials described to The New York Times instances in which they said political pressure was applied to limit or flavor discussions of topics uncomfortable to the Bush administration, particularly global warming.

"As we have stated in the past, NASA is in the process of revising our public affairs policies across the agency to ensure our commitment to open and full communications," the statement from Mr. Acosta said.

The statement said the resignation of Mr. Deutsch was "a separate matter."

Mr. Deutsch, 24, was offered a job as a writer and editor in NASA's public affairs office in Washington last year after working on President Bush's re-election campaign and inaugural committee, according to his résumé. No one has disputed those parts of the document.

According to his résumé, Mr. Deutsch received a "Bachelor of Arts in journalism, Class of 2003."

Yesterday, officials at Texas A&M said that was not the case.

"George Carlton Deutsch III did attend Texas A&M University but has not completed the requirements for a degree," said an e-mail message from Rita Presley, assistant to the registrar at the university, responding to a query from The Times.

Repeated calls and e-mail messages to Mr. Deutsch on Tuesday were not answered.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/08/politics/08nasa.html”

“He prolly just forget to pick up his diploma that his dad bought for him. When I got my degree I ran out of toner and it was a week before I got around to printing it out.”

“In the last frame... I get a kick out of the way the word science doesn't have quotes around it for climate and medical science but it does for creation science. That's almost as good as the single fig leaf the overweight dude is hiding behind.”

“Since no one has posted it yet, I'll post the newest b1tch-slap to the anti-evolotuion hucksters:

Evolution debate continues

Tuesday, February 28, 2006; Posted: 9:49 a.m. EST (14:49 GMT)


SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- House lawmakers scuttled a bill that would have required public school students to be told that evolution is not empirically proven -- the latest setback for critics of evolution. [snip]
http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/02/28/teaching.evolution.ap/index.html
last edited: 2/28/06 1:11:00 PM”

“I love to see the hucksters get beaten.
Thanks, Mutt!!



”

“The horse is not dead. If it was that legislation would not have needed to be shot down. That's why I go to the BoE meetings now.”

“






last edited: 3/06/06 11:02:48 AM”

“I'm sure that miller is not trying to draw any connection to the right wing christians . . ..”

“7:30 p.m. Intelligent Design: Who is Right? University Union Potomac Lounge

(Hmmmmm, tomatoes or eggs??)”

“What backwards assed university is that?”

“Its Religious Apprectiation Week here.

We are part of the University of Maryland System.

I guess they wanna keep the Campus Republicans happy.

Its a hotbed of liberal ideas.

Shoot me your phone number and I'll give you a call.
last edited: 3/06/06 1:14:56 PM”

“cartoons are always a fun break from reality, huh guys?”

“From reality?”

“I am very comfortable saying that you are not smart enough to understanding the comics.


And I mean that exactly as its stated.


From everything you have posted here I strongly doubt you have the intellectual capacity to understand either set of strips or their implications.

Oh. I'm sure you "get it" superficially. but I am also sure you dismiss it . .. and don't truly get it at all.”

“What is your point?

Is this your idea of how to treat one another on trailtalk? To insult their intelligence?

You should read Matt's Christmas message to everone. You apparently think it doesn't apply to you.

If it makes you feel better to single me out and throw insults at me, go right ahead. You apparently need the release from the daily pressures you experience in your life from your family, friends and co-workers. Let it out ...
last edited: 3/07/06 8:15:04 AM”

“That's great, bearmagnet!


Idiot religionists.”

“your note:

cartoons are always a fun break from reality, huh guys?”
Sarge
6:56:47 PM


was directed at me (and Bearmagnet).

My note was directed at you.


So what???

With regards to my being civil and Christmasy towards you or any single email you post . .forget it. You have burned every bridge of civil communciation that may have existed since the day you walked on to this site.

And I don't give a flaming rat's butthole about the "new reformed" Sarge. My religion doesn't require me to forgive, forget or turn the other cheek. You were an A$$ while you were alive, you were an A$$ while you were dead and you're and A$$ now.”

“lee - That's ironic. The only difference between the "old" Sarge and the new one is the new one doesn't respond in kind to other people, so if you thought I was an a$$ to you before, guess what that means ...

Also, my post wasn't directed to you. It was addressed to the board in good fun. Don't be so vain. (I hadn't even seen your cartoon until just now when you pointed it out - you're on my ignore list.)
last edited: 3/07/06 8:40:23 AM”

“lee should start a side business writing hallmark cards”

“"Socialism is infiltrating our country."
From Sarge's profile

Here's a guy who has taken a permanent break from reality.”

“i supposed it could be a sideline. . .

I would have to practice being more concise though. I tend to rattle on too long.





Anyhoo. My point was . ..i thought Miller did a nice job pointing out the irony of school board trying insert their mythological beliefs into science classes. Said mythological beliefs having no more validity than any mythological belief that has come before or will come after. From pan-theism to mono-theism. From Ancient Egypt to L. Ron Hubbard. All relgious belief is vested with the same value as mythology.

And that is reality.

In fact. For a true sense of what irony is.

Take a look at Sarge's fun joking response to the board at large (not to any particular individuals).

cartoons are always a fun break from reality, huh guys?”


then take a look at Salesbored's response:

“From reality?”


As salesbored pointed, spare retort indicates, Sarge's salvo is rich with unintended irony.”

“The carton, the ID thing and this discussion reminds me of a great cartoon I saw a long time ago. There is a wild eyed guy at a table that looks like a formal fund raising table with a big poster like the "thermometers" they use at displays (where different points represent dollar amounts up to the fund raising target).

Instead of money levels on the thermometer there are membership numbers:

1: Lone crack-pot.
2: Follie au deux
10: Psycho-fringe commune
100: Small Religious cult
1,000: Religious Cult
100,000: Minor religious sect
1,000,000: Religeon
10,000,000: Respected faith Community

The red line has reached "1" in the picture.”

“I read until the late night 'TT' finally closes my eyes, but still no clues in finding the,' Last lost jigger of salt'.”

“MarkO - Question for you. Are you saying that socialism is not infiltrating our country?”

“1.To pass (troops, for example) surreptitiously into enemy-held territory.
2.To penetrate with hostile intent: infiltrate enemy lines; terrorists that had infiltrated the country.
3.To enter or take up positions in gradually or surreptitiously, as for purposes of espionage or takeover: infiltrated key government agencies with spies.

Answer for you:
Socialism is NOT infiltrating our country.

That is paranoid nonsense!!

You and many other right-wing nuts have for years called your fellow countrymen traitors with your cavalier* use of phrases like that.

*Cavalier:
Showing arrogant or offhand disregard; dismissive: a cavalier attitude toward the suffering of others.

You have branded yourself a fascist by making statements like the one in question.

America is a country of laws made by legislative democratic process hopefully in the public interest.

The things that you consider "socialist" are laughably not socialist.

Inspite of how popular your opinions may be, facts are not subject to popular opinion.”

“... so you don't think that people with socialist ideas are trying to (and succeeding in) infiltrate our government and set laws in place to allow the spread of socialist ideas such as welfare, unionism and the spreading of wealth from the rich to the poor? Is that what you believe MarkO?”