Intelligent Design/Creationism at Geological Society

[Joe Meert]

The Geological Society of America meeting. SHould be fun.

Cheers

Joe Meert

Abstracts:

http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2005AM/finalprogram/session_16171.htm

[Worldtraveller]

The abstracts for those presentations look interesting. Just skimming a few of them now...

I notice that they are only 15 minute presentations. Doesn't seem like enough time to really cover a lot of those topics.

I'm really interested in the "TEN GRASSROOT ACTIVITIES YOU CAN DO TO SUPPORT THE TEACHING OF EVOLUTION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND YOUR COMMUNITY" one. take good notes!

Oh, and "EVOLUTION IN KANSAS: IT'S THE POLITICS, STUPID!" should be a hoot. I've read about halfway through the transcripts from those meetings.

Actually, looking through the whole agenda, there are a number of related mini-seminars. Too bad I'm in the wrong field, some of that stuff looks quite interesting. The numerical modelling of Tectonics seminar in particular.

Cheers,
Lane

[RBH]

I cross-posted this to the KCFS site (http://www.kcfs.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=3&t=000553):

Kurt Wise, as many know, is a Young Earth Creationist who got his Ph.D. under Gould at Harvard as a YEC. I was struck by Wise's abstract (http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2005AM/finalprogram/abstract_96736.htm), especially this paragraph: Since YAC [Young-Age Creation] epistemology accepts Biblical claims over physical evidence and human reason, logical or evidential arguments for evolution and/or against YAC are likely to be ineffective in converting most YACists. This is consistent with repeated examples of YACists receiving the highest training as YACists, as well as the growth of the YAC movement despite better arguments against creation and for evolution. For the YACists in the classroom, acceptance of evolution is not an achievable educational goal. At the same time, teaching of alternative positions (including evolution) is embraced in virtually every YAC institution. Therefore, improving arguments and evidences for evolution will strengthen evolutionary claims without enraging YACists. The education goal recommended is increased familiarity with evolution and its evidences, while evaluation should be based upon cognitive knowledge, and not beliefs. (Emphases added)That boggles me, honest though Wise is: No physical evidence or human reasoning counts. I think I understand better now what Dawkins was talking about (http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/dawkins_21_4.html).

However, I find that I do agree with the last sentence: It's what the kids know that's important.

RBH

[Joe Meert]

Yup, posted it here too. I was also struck by Wise's statement which will be incorporated into my talk. Amazing, simply amazing. Basically, to hell with the evidence, we don't need it anyway. Honest, but truly ridiculous.

Cheers

Joe Meer

[RBH]

Rats. Missed that. I'l merge 'em.

RBH