Comments on: Academic Freedom, Sometimes http://academicfreedomblog.org/2009/03/22/academic-freedom-sometimes/ An opportunity to discuss the interface of faith, science, and culture Tue, 22 May 2012 08:47:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 By: caged vole http://academicfreedomblog.org/2009/03/22/academic-freedom-sometimes/#comment-10682 caged vole Mon, 01 Jun 2009 13:17:55 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2009/03/22/academic-freedom-sometimes/#comment-10682 Hey there Dave, you again? - It's getting tiresome to repeat this too, but I'm afraid ID hasn't been shown to be "failed science and pseudoscience". It's only been declared to be so (and by those with a clear motive and agenda) which is by no means the same thing. Now, brace yourself -- yes of course the controversy should most definitely be taught. What could be a better way of sharpening the minds of the rising generation? If you're right about it, you have nothing to fear. Even if you're wrong you have nothing to fear except the chance to replace error with truth. No controversy? Don't be absurd. What else makes the blogosphere go round? Hey there Dave, you again?
- It’s getting tiresome to repeat this too, but I’m afraid ID hasn’t been shown to be “failed science and pseudoscience”. It’s only been declared to be so (and by those with a clear motive and agenda) which is by no means the same thing.
Now, brace yourself — yes of course the controversy should most definitely be taught. What could be a better way of sharpening the minds of the rising generation? If you’re right about it, you have nothing to fear. Even if you’re wrong you have nothing to fear except the chance to replace error with truth.
No controversy? Don’t be absurd. What else makes the blogosphere go round?

]]> By: Dave R http://academicfreedomblog.org/2009/03/22/academic-freedom-sometimes/#comment-8256 Dave R Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:23:37 +0000 http://academicfreedomblog.org/2009/03/22/academic-freedom-sometimes/#comment-8256 As far as I can tell none of these people are advocates of either failed science (like creationism) or pseudoscience (like ID). It seems that they have been banned due to their opinions about politics. That's regrettable, but this is not analogous to situations where the ACLU takes up the battle to keep failed science and pseudoscience out of science classrooms. The difference between politics and science is that opinions are a standard currency in politics, but in science you have to deal with facts. It's getting tiresome to repeat this, but science has shown that neither phlogiston, nor geocentrism, nor astrology, nor creationism/ID are consistent with known facts. <b>If you have new facts, let's hear 'em</b>. If you still just have opinions, don't call it science. And please, please, please don't argue that it should be taught in science classes in public schools! As far as I can tell none of these people are advocates of either failed science (like creationism) or pseudoscience (like ID). It seems that they have been banned due to their opinions about politics. That’s regrettable, but this is not analogous to situations where the ACLU takes up the battle to keep failed science and pseudoscience out of science classrooms.

The difference between politics and science is that opinions are a standard currency in politics, but in science you have to deal with facts. It’s getting tiresome to repeat this, but science has shown that neither phlogiston, nor geocentrism, nor astrology, nor creationism/ID are consistent with known facts.

If you have new facts, let’s hear ‘em. If you still just have opinions, don’t call it science. And please, please, please don’t argue that it should be taught in science classes in public schools!

]]>