Re: Kansas Closing arguments

I was taught geology in the 60s at Oxford and we were taught
controversially. Thus we were taught that continental drift was almost
certain but Canadians like Tuzo Wilson just wouldn't accept it. He later had
a Damascus Road! We were expected to disagree with everyone - professors
included. I, for one among many, always took an opposite view to our profs
who then shot us down in flames! I had one complaining to me about students
who wouldn't argue and were like blotting paper. The dept was excellent for
both geology and Critical Thinking.

We were also taught all the controversies over radiometric age-dating.

But nonsense was not allowed and it never should be - hence ID and YES cant
be taught.

Michael

----- Original Message -----
From: <gmurphy@raex.com>
To: "Sheila Wilson" <sheila-wilson@sbcglobal.net>; "Michael Roberts"
<michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>; <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 4:54 PM
Subject: Re: Kansas Closing arguments

>
>
>> You call Moorad "stubborn" and commented on the "invincible
> ignorance" because he wants to teach the controversy. Count me with
> Moorad. If we cannot teach the controversy and the problems with the
> theories in any discipline then we will never search for better, more
> valid theories.
>>
>> In geology, the theories before plate tectonics had many flaws.
> Because science searched for a better explanation, the new theory was
> developed. While plate tectonics also has flaws, it is still better
> than previous theories. Unless we research the theories and the flaws,
> we will never learn more.
>>
>> Let's always teach the controversies.
>
> Fine, but the "controversy" should be taught in classes that deal with
> the areas in which controversy exists - in this case religion,
> sociology or political science. What is misleading is to suggest that
> there is serious controversy in science about whether or not evolution
> has occurred.
>
> Shalom,
> George
>
>
Received on Wed May 18 17:38:56 2005