The UK has two distinct education systems: one for England, Wales and Northern Ireland,(BM's Country lol) and one for Scotland. Each is compatible with the other. The Scottish Parliament has devolved responsibility for education in Scotland. Wherever you choose to study, you will be able to study relevant, world-class qualifications of exceptional quality.
Source - http://www.internationalstudy.in/why_choose_uk.htm

Were I live in Northern Ireland sis..it is said to have one of the best education systems in the world...I dunno if it is actually true but I do agree we have a good education system

very decent!

As I was telling Sheri...over here, if a kid is home schooled..he or she is picked on and seen as a dunce..and protrayed in such a way that if you are a kid and taught from home...you must have serious learning problems....sounds cruel...but thats how it is

People can be cruel...but I understand that in the USA it much different....

I was jsut saying state to stae its different...

not everyone wants to home school not every kid wants to either, i do feel its great growth the charters for us, we are in such bad shape to begin with....

Our standards are based on jsut being able to read and compute basically...this is where diversity backfires, on one hand they say no child left behind, so they impose tests to see which schools need the help, then they say, well they are so bad off no amount of money will help, and in it alot of kids that want to leanr get caught in it.. the school my son attended his kindergarten teacher told me up front get him out, find an alternative , we spent hours discussing magnets trumped up learning establishments yet they really only learn to be pitted smart against the not so smart, just alittle ditty to appease complaing parents( tax payers) without really changing anything, and the kid has to test 100 percent straight across the board for two years on the star testing unless they get a free pass in kindergarten the only year they can get in on a recommend from the teacher how's that for unfair?????

gotta love the goverments help..LOL

why , on your comment MW???

I literally pulled my son out in 1st grade , it was so bad...worse then one could imagiine....

Well I live in NY and perhaps its a bit different here. For two years I worked for the City of New York in a Community Board.

And you can't document Merry Christmas. I didn't mean to insinuate that you can't just say it.

truthfully sis, its not really been till the last 4 or 5 years that its been excepted here either, In the 80's i knew 2 familys that home schooled to much ridicule, yet because of them they are a door out of a failing system, ( nothte only way or the best but a way that wasn't there before) our schools are beyond repair at this point...all the same things here except the christians got a pretty bad rap, esepcially since the one mom who killed her kids was a Home schooling christian... I can't tell you how many folks brought that up when I decided to join the Hs movement and the disapproval, yet i addressed it, wanted to know myslef wht I was getting into...LOL I took it serious, looked into it, researched it bugged every teacher i had as a client and them found more to question and learn from, talked to alot of folks and home schoolers iwth college level kids etc........ and put my voice to it ..I now speak publically on this dealing with stigma and socialization, its been recognized by the goverment officals as a way in our state we have been on the news( our charter i sent you the link i think...) .... and its very real hope for the future its a start ..... i intend to take this as far as i can.....and matty alot of parnets talk with him too... people listen on both sides...... its become our passion...even my hubby who was not behind the idea at first, ( we retell this to eyes filled with tears in the audience) shares his story too....its all good sis LOL...l

LOL I always say Merry Christmas... and if the people I say it to aren't then they respond Happy Holidays. I will NEVER stop saying Merry Christmas... but that's just me.

As for schooling the only experience I have even known is Catholic Private and the same with my daughter. My son had to be pulled out in of Catholic Private in the 3rd grade and underwent multple "testings" by the county because he has some learning issues. He is now in a public school and I have no worries. That is what's better-suited for his learning needs.

Anyway, I'm a fake Catholic, baptised, confirmed and married in the Catholic Church BUT - I don't truly have a religion. I think 13 years of it (with church like 4 times per week) kind of made me RUN. I am spiritual. I try to be a good person. Other than that... oh well!

I'm glad to hear all is going well for your son she-ra...the programs institued for the kids that need help are actaully okay smaller classes alot more help....,

this is how i approach the holidays, if i know what one practices i use the appropriate salutation, if i dont' i ask.....i really don't care as each year we take turns and decide if and how we will celebrate christmas.. last year my son choose hannukah , we have done them all .. we just have fun with it.....

In How We Know What Isn't So, Thomas Gilovich describes the details of many studies which make it clear that we must be on guard against the tendencies to

1. misperceive random data and see patterns where there are none;
2. misinterpret incomplete or unrepresentative data and give extra attention to confirmatory data while drawing conclusions without attending to or seeking out disconfirmatory data;
3. make biased evaluations of ambiguous or inconsistent data, tending to be uncritical of supportive data and very critical of unsupportive data.




source
Sceptics dictionary

I'm not christian but I will NEVER stop saying Merry Christmas.

It's the most magical thing I can remember-ALL OF IT -the story of Jesus's birth-the tree-the smells-the snow-the lights-the Christmas songs..the smell ofsnow (yes snow has a smell) .cinnamon & pine

I love Christmas. Merry Christmas !!!!-please don't take it away !!-even alot of Atheists appreciate it to pieces-it's part of our childhood magic .
It was MAGIC and still is -even if we see it differently now.

for a kid its all magic , i agree M and i still love all the shows frosty and rudolf, it brings the wonder of literature alive and the wonder of imagination, gosh for me a kid in a abusive early enviorment this stuff took me away...... ... the most fun we ever had is pretending to be santa for the kids....

now we just have fun with it all learn about all traditions....

Wow , same here Sheri,it was my escape .

I AM a Christian and I don't even celebrate Christmas.

Thankfully, the rest of my non-Christian family doesn't either.

I love christmas too...lol I am not going to stop saying merry christmas just because the minority are offended..after all we dont complain when they speak in their language in front of us...so why should I or anyone else have to walk on egg shells around them?

I have already begun to do my christmas shopping...I do it all and have it done come NOV...so in Dec I have my money free to myself lol and not have to worry about last min rush!

Great information. That's kind of what frustrates me about people who are skeptics as a position. In other words they take a position of skepticism against one thing like say RELIGION but do all of the things that you mention in the above post.

Precisely.



Another example for me is the Snopes test that they ran. Snopes is a site that verifies Urban Legends.

They wanted to point out that one should always question what they are being told and not just accept that a respected source is going to give them the right information.

So they played a game.


http://www.snopes.com/lost/lost.htm


They tucked throughout the Snopes site in varying categories, UNTRUE stories which Snopes claimed were true or false but they were not.

It was all just a way of showing that you shouldn't always believe what goes against your common sense.

My favorite one is the Mr. Ed Lost Legend

http://www.snopes.com/lost/mistered.asp

Wow! I didn't know you were so involved in education with the homeschooling and curriculum. Awesome!
I'm having a curriculum class this semester, because I wanna get a minor in education, and I've loved it, way more than anything I've got in Civil Engineering. And the theme of curriculum although it's somewhat overlooked, in general, I believe it's very VERY important, not just what you're teaching the kids but also WHY the f*** you're teaching it. It's one thing that they can analyze something, trying to get to the bottom of a problem, instead of just memoryzing stuff and ending up like some... "zombie".
You've got to see how the system currently is in Chile. It's awful. It's really really awful. If you think the system in the States is bad, wait till you see this one. It's that bad. So bad that just last year the students made a huge riot demanding changes in the system, changes that although were necessary most of them I find were... shallow. It's a system where teachers don't want to be evaluated. Can you imagine that? It's a f***** invitation to mediocrity!! And not just that, in a lot of cases they don't even know what they're teaching . In private schools (I was educated in one) is somewhat better, but it's not something to throw rockets and celebrate. I'm grateful however for the education I've received anyways.
The system in the University (at least mine) is way better, I think. It makes you THINK, something school doesn't prepare you to. I remember the number of time I would "study" the break before a test and still do well. That kinda thing doesn't run here. It's frustrating, no, it's f***** frustratring, specially in a career like Civil Engineering which is dry, if you get what I mean, and I hate it.

K, I won't bother you anymore with my rant. Just my two cents. Keep up the good work girl!
BTW, what's the emphasis of the curriculum you're using right now?


True, I think skepticism, the way it's defined, it's related more to a method, and a healthy one at that. Although somehow, I don't know why, it's been asocciated more with a position. Heck, we're in the Spirituality vs. Skepticism forum!
Why is it related more to it? I don't know. I think it's time to clear the concepts once and for all.

thats it MW you are so off my chrissy card list and im not getting you that present neither...ner ner...*note to self strike MW off christmas card list*

hee hee!

screams for joy, oh my gosh you are so right J... thats exactly what I was saying to my hubby yesterday, rote is absurd its do they understand what they are learning and why yes ,yes, yes, MIT ( they put out a study on just this if i can find it I'll pm you with it...... I have help i have to give a shout out, i have alot of teacher freinds, and i hang on every word, i very humbly say i have awesome freinds without them gosh who knows, gosh it freaks me out htinking about it LOL.........I try things out for effectiveness...thank you, thankyou, thankyou, for your kind words..Bm wants me to talk on this alot more too she is always encouraging me .. and i do speak on this for a few HS groups i think the curriculum is everything, socialization and stigma are my topics...... .... the groups are always shocked when i tell them this is only my 3rd year...my matty talks too if you can believe that ..he was in public school so he has a contrast to draw from.......

J. anything you think would help Please, please, please, tell me i would apprecaite it immensley, and I'll let you know how it works .. i hope you go into education you have the passion my friend. and the kids need such passion.....((HUGS))

I'll Pm you , we have lots to rap about... my gosh i didn't know about chile....

Sheri,

Why is it you always talk to me about your charters like this is something I've never heard of before?

Do you keep forgetting that I unschooled my kid from 4-15 years old? (talk about letting go of "limits", you don't get much more limit-free than that)

Do you keep forgetting that I know quite well what Charters are and how they work? And that I researched them heavily for my own child 20 years ago? They weren't right for us. But if they're good for you, then great... have fun.

However, for 85% of the total number of school aged kids out there... Charters DON'T work for a LOT of reasons.

Really, I'm glad you like them, if your kid is learning something then that's peachy keen. I know a few kids that do ok with this method. But honey you don't hear me prancing around telling all parents that they should Unschool their kids like I did. Mine did turn out great (she'll have an MBA shortly after she turns 21) however, I'm also realistic in the notion that this is NOT NOT NOT the kind of education that works for 99.9% of kids. Most parents AND children fail horribly at the Unschool concept. It's not a good concept, unless you're VERY VERY careful about how you do it, and even then it has it's holes. Just as Charter schools do, just as public schools do.

Not all kids and parents can do Charter schools.... in fact, most can't. so it's not an answer to the problem and you're not doing anything to change the system. You're just lucky that you have the time to do this for your kid, and that it's working for him SO FAR. It might not always.

What's charter school?

Homeschooling?

you don't HS now and things cahnge MW.. ALOT.....
the charters I am speaking of just came into existance MW about 3 years ago for us...we are just now creating the high school curriculum...

many dont' unschool simply because the knowledge base may be lacking( not there) and its hard to filter through no data.....and i have said to you many times how mcuh i respect what you did.....

i didn't forget, i was genuinely sharing about my journey .. if its of no interest to you fair enough...but i will continue to share my experience and keep on learning....turns out it is of interest to some...


I feel in my heart you should of been supported and patted on the back alot more, and i still say this what you did was awesome, and thankyou becasue for me, and moms as me we have picked up where you left off... .
and its all good....

I am honored to be doing what i am doing ,and not a day passes that i am not grateful...

I am doing this now with alot of resources, and i don't share your pessimism we are different people.. i see the effectiveness of it, and the charter i am in has 6000 ( we grew from 4500 last year word of mouth) .. so its working for someone lol....

I also said this isn''t for every kid or every parent but it is helping....

That might be why you're so excited. Your schools haven't been in place long enough to see long term results. Which by-in-large are pretty good, a little better than traditinal public schools.

The Charters in my area have been in place for over 30 years. The alternative schools (not just for kids who are messed up) have been in place for almost 50. My mother-in-law was a Charter advisor, and an Alternative school teacher for 36 years, and she retired 12 years ago when she entered the Peace Corps.

I don't want a pat on the back for what I did for my kid. It wasn't really a conscious decsion. It was a means to an end. Nothing more, nothing less. It suited my lifestyle. Honestly, what I did 16 years ago was technically illegal. LOL. In fact, it still is, if done the way I did it. There's nothing particularly honorable or admirable about that, but I wouldn't go back and do it any differently.

If tomorrow I found out that I was going to have to raise my neices... I would NOT unschool them, I probably wouldn't even Charter school them. What I might do is public alternative education. Maybe. I couldn't know until I knew who those children were and what worked best for them. My eldest neice would probably do VERY well in a Catholic school environment when I think about it and who she is.

This thread is really about skepicsm, I am a skeptic... my stance on this kind of issue illustrates it fairly well. I look honestly and logically at most topics, the pros and cons (truths and fictions) and the parts that are essentially inert. In order to be a non-hypocritical skeptic, you have to be able to do that.

The best private high-schools in this country are religious or have a chapel on the grounds.

Here's a list that came out earlier this year of the best High Schools in the nation... both private and public, all were judged based on the same criteria.

The International School (#12) is the school my mother-in-law taught at for 9 years. It's a public alternative education school.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18757087/site/newsweek/

My father in law taught at #51, 34, and 108 (in the past, 34 and 51 have been #1) over 25 years. #51 and #34 are joe average public High Schools. But a very good ones. What's kind of funny is their ranking has DROPPED since that area has become more affluent and wealthy. Weird.

Keep an eye on #62... 3 years ago Microsoft and Bill Gates dumped MILLIONS of dollars into them (they're next door to the Microsoft Campus) and you can bet they're shooting for #1 in the coming years. It's a public school, but Microsoft is doing what it can to completely change how public schools work, and this school is their test subject to see how it works out.

OK I'd like to complain loud and clear. Could we PLEASE get this topic back on topic.


Sheri why must you bring your homeschooling into every frickin thread? Its enough already? Why not just start a thread about it if you're so chuffed?

You too MMW! Frankly I don't give a damned about Homeschooling. If you choose to do it fair dues, but please stop assuming that everyone else cares about your personal choices.

I think enough of this thread has been devoted to Homeschooling. Its about SKEPTICISM not HOMESCHOOLING.




So could we please have the damned decency to stop pushing personal agendas in the middle of conversations? It very RUDE in my opinion.

Don't feel guilty about Chile. If it isn't news about Pinochet or an earthquake this little corner of the world is virtually unknown to the world
Thanks for the words girl, although I've got a few questions for ya:
1- What do you mean by "curriculum"? Is it only the written programs of the "assignatures" or are they the experiences a kid passes through, programs included? I ask you before we start talking about curriculum we gotta have a clear ground over what it actually is.
2- What is the focus of your curriculum: the students (an example could be the focus by Paulo Freire), more as a product (what Tyler proposed), another thing, which is? I think you didn't answer it in my previous post.

About homeschooling: if it worked out for your boy, then hey, awesome!, although I'm not sure wether I would have wanted to miss the experiences I had in school, both good and bad, the friends, the laughs, and the sh*t times as well, for a homeschooling, and this is coming from a kid who wasn't the most sociable of all, specially as a kid, but not exactly an outcast. I know I would share time with other kids who are homeschooled, but I can't really know if I would prefer it over normal schooling, even with its flaws. *Sigh* Guess it isn't for everybody.
Anyways, do you use any particular method for the homeschooling, like the Montessori or the Waldorf method, or something completely different?
And what do you talk specifically about socialization and stigma in your talks?

Please, don't think of this as some kinda Inquisition, I just wanna know.
Thanks for the hug! Here, have some bubblegum:

You're absolutely right TrueThat...

My sincerest apologies. I get a little carried away sometimes when it comes to that woman. But that's no excuse.

I've actually seen the Snopes game... the Mr. Ed one was always my favorite one as well. It's a good exercise in "you can't always believe what you read" too.

Attention all - please remember what this topic is about. This is not about homeschooling, or school curriculum, or parenting styles and upbringing options. Keep the discussion on topic, thank you

I found this brilliant quote from Carl Sagan on Skeptics.

"Carl Sagan:
It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great openness to new ideas. Obviously those two modes of thought are in some tension. But if you are able to exercise only one of these modes, whichever one it is, you're in deep trouble.

If you are only skeptical, then no new ideas make it through to you. You never learn anything new. You become a crotchety old person convinced that nonsense is ruling the world. (There is, of course, much data to support you.) But every now and then, maybe once in a hundred cases, a new idea turns out to be on the mark, valid and wonderful. If you are too much in the habit of being skeptical about everything, you are going to miss or resent it, and either way you will be standing in the way of understanding and progress.

On the other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish the useful as from the worthless ones. If all ideas have equal validity then you are lost, because then, it seems to me, no ideas have any validity at all."

I rather liked this explanation. I think he said this quite well, and I agree.

Great post MMW.


The idea of skepticism is one that has always veen that tiny thing that seems to set some people apart in a conversation in that they are willing to listen to the other side, because they ahven't already made up their mind that they are wrong.

Listening to both sides is always important

If a guy sits down in work and I ask whats wrong, how come you look so down in the mouth?? and he rants on about his wife or girlfriend..doing this & that, up to no good here and there...after listening for about 10 mins I then think..there has to be another side to this...obviously he is going to make her look the rat in all of this, for she aint here to defend herself...so if he asks for advice...I would just be straight with him - tell him that the only real way to get around it, is for the two of them to sit and talk it out with eachother, and if she isn't willing to do this, then see if she is willing to talk to a relationship councillor?? for BOTH need to lay their cards on the table, and both need to listen ...the key word is LISTEN...for when you never hear anyone out...then you get nowhere, you find yourself more confused and angry than you where before you sat down to have the talk!!

Another example of something that has happened in my work recently....Our General Manager...was holding a briefing with all the staff that were on that morning at 9am.(I dont get to these briefings for I don't start work till 10am)..and it's a DIY store like Lowes or Home Depot...anyhoo...in our Tool section...they discovered..3 really expensive drills that were missing....and he mentioned how the empty boxes of these drills were found hidden in the overstock shelving...which is approx 9 ft high, so to reach them you have to use a set of air craft steps...and in my dept were I work - kitchen & Bathrooms sales/design...we had 2 expensive electric showers missing..and funny thing, the empty boxes of these 2 particular showers were in the overstock shelving above were the showers are displayed.....the discovery was made on all these items on a Monday morning....(thank goodness I only work we-frid lol_...and they claim they went missing over the weekend.
...and right away, no holes barred...the General Manager...automatically told the staff that it has to be a member of staff, for no member of the public would do this...for when a customer goes to half inch something from a shelf, they statch the empty box somewhere on the ground statched in behind other products...but NO WAY would they ever think of putting the evidence in the over stock shelves...so he was so adamant that it had to be staff thats pinching these goods...he was apparently really serious...had everyone shocked....even though he has no real proof...for they found sweet FA on the cameras!!it had to be the staff.....

So when I arrived into work and heard this, I thought...hold up a sec.....those aircraft steps are all over the joint...and how often have we seen customers use these steps?? how often have we told a customer, not to use the steps?? So is our GM has worked for our company for over 10 years now...then why is he looking at this with tunnel vision?? Why doesnt he remove the rose tinted glasses and think...how often do customers climb the steps and make off with the goods??...my friend said - Geri, there is no point in telling this to him, he is so sure it must be a staff member....he thinks it's the night crew staff.....I said - I think he should have more security on, be more villigant with the cameras, and wait till he finds out whats really going on BEFORE he points his finger at anyone....

IMO you must weigh up all possible options...for at the moment, they rely on 2 lousey security guards......I think he should have at least put more energy into it BEFORE he descided to play the blame game...I thought it was a joke, when he said - it has to be the staff!! ...he seriously needs to watch who he blames, if he dont have evidence to back it up

I am very skeptical if I IE pull someone on something and they feed me a story passing the buck on to someone else...then if i ask them again just to be sure, they change their story....any wonder I am skeptical with their story...for I always learnt, a lair can never remember what they told you the 1st time.....my dad always said - you can watch a theif..but you can't watch a lair!!...so true.

It was my repentance for being a poopy-head earlier

BUT, I think what it's also saying is -- everything in moderation, look at everything with a critical and open mind, and be prepared to be surprised occasionally.

I always dug Carl Sagan. He had a cool way of looking at things.

Of course. Just as a person that was still "skeptical" about the theory of gravity (meaning he wanted to examine the ball more carefully - maybe to see if it had a metal rod pushing it to the ground instead of falling because of GRAVITY and not be swayed by the supposition that GRAVITY was causing the ball to fall) even after having his simple little head patted and told "Ok little one, one more time. When I let go of this ball, something called "Gravity" will make the ball drop to the ground" would be regarded as a fool.

If wacko ideas were expected to be given the same consideration as widely accepted ideas then nothing could ever get done. No murderer would ever be convicted because the slimy defense lawyer could say something like "Your honor, doesn't it go against the scientific method to not consider as equally likely that my client did not commit the crime because at the moment the crime was committed my client had been teleported to the planet Pookie-7 and replaced with a jelly-filled copy".

Gravity and evolution are two different theories. If you need to replace evolution with something that is based more on science and less on guess work then you're changing the argument away from Pookie-7 and into something that is much different.

Ironically you make a good point. That is that an attorney would not make that argument for fear of being MOCKED for suggesting something so absurd. However you don't say if it is true or not?

If it was TRUE that the person was yadda yadda yadda, you suggest that no lawyer in his right mind would ever suggest it?

Oddly, that's what Darwin actually did, he said the unpopular thing that has now become the sacred cow not to be questioned.

There should be no problem whatsoever with anyone questioning evolution. The answers should speak for themselves.

Where there is a problem is when there isn't a conclusive answer and the science crowd becomes afraid of saying so because they worry its going to be picked up by the creationists and so they pretend there are conclusive answers when there are really guesses.

Reading your remarks true, I have to wonder if you are another person misinformed on evolution. There are a couple threads floating around here you could pose these questions on.

There is no problem questioning evolution, scientists do it all the time, a good scientist is a skeptical scientist. In my life as a scientist I can't recall yet meeting anyone (a fellow scientist) that is not skeptical of things. That is why we do independent verification and peer-review.

I think one of problems going on here is not that people don't question evolution, its that the average joe lacks the understanding of the subject to question the correct things. Since being a member here I have to see anyone asking the correct questions of evolution, rather they ask things proposed as false truths taken word for word from creationist websites and uncredible sources.

Darwin's theory of evolution is for the most part all correct, slight modifications to it over the years are not because the original hypothesis is incorrect, rather it refines the theory. Hence why it is a scientific theory and not another hypothesis.

Also, I have to wonder if you seem to be confused about what scientific theory is. That seems to big problem here on these boards, people tend to not be able to grasp the idea of theory in science and instead correlate it too what I like to call an "Andy Griffith Hunch". They are hardly one in the same.

A scientific theory is like litebrite from the 70's and 80's. Its like a very complex game of connect the dots. Each dot is a tiny observation or reproducible experimental result, the theory is the lines that connect all of these dots.

In regards to your comment in bold, I suppose you could point these points in evolution that are guess work?

yep, i stay off of these evolution threads for just this reason..."rather they ask things proposed as false truths taken word for word from creationist websites and uncredible sources. " your quote says it all ignorance and fear has created a understanding of evolution that is absurd and for some reason it has stuck..i call it the bible belt brand of evolution... I too would say to know the source of ones data....that is just as imperative...

I would be very appreciative if people would remember where the Scopes Trial was held. Especially when talking about 'ignorance and fear'.

Of course, I'm sure that data is also well known considering it's imperative.

gah, removed post... posted to the wrong topic. I'ma dork.

I agree that most people here are cynics an not skeptics. Most of them pretend like THEY are science, a person with no unique opinions on any subject. They go by ONLY what science says, and sometimes they take that too far. I consider myself an open minded skeptic. I will never say something is impossible, but I will question everything. I won't accept anyone's claims if I have absolutely no reason to, but at the same time, I won't just completely ignore it just because it's an "eyewitness account".



Dorks rule! =D

Why would you presume that I am confused about scientific theory? That is a lazy man's dismissal of a valid claim. You decide that I don't understand scientific theory and then you don't have to answer any questions. I've had that thrown at me for the last few years and I do understand the difference between a THEORY and a scientific theory.

I do not believe that mankind has the ability to comprehend what the surface of this planet looked like 4.4 billion years ago.

I don't care what science has come up with so far, its entirely limited in my book and any application of it to that length of history is a flat out hopeful guess. There is absolutely no way to prove it. So to offer it up as a theory is fine but I'm always going to question it.



Guess work in evolution is when for example scientists presume to illustrate a creature or to suggest theories about their life habits based on something found in a fossilized rock. While I understand that sometimes this is possible I also suggest that in other incidents its probably HIGHLY unlikely that everything they are predicting is true.


I watched a Discovery Channel episode the other day called Before the Dinosaurs where they discussed the habits of trilobites and the condition of the planet 4.4 billion years ago.

Both my husband and I sat there and waited to hear anyone say "Scientists presume" "Based on scientific theory we can assume" or any such disclaimer.

It never came.


The show was presented as a fact. Now for a young person it would sound as though everything they were saying was actually proven. But some of what they were saying was clearly guesswork.

And I don't have to discount ALL of evolution, or to reject evolution to see that Scientists absolutely patch in the holes with guesswork presented as fact.

http://shopping.discovery.com/product-59634.html


http://www.streettech.com/modules.php?op=m...r=0&thold=0

while I like the discovery channel they are very biased often times in their views. You have to remember, these these shows are for entertainment and to turn a profit, not to educate people. When you do a show like the kind on the DC, you sign release waivers acknowledging that your response can be edited. I have never heard in my career involved in academia, some state past conditions on evolutionary time scales with a certainty (at least not scientists, plenty of religious people though).

I can understand your confusion though, as people think channels like the DC and history channel are objective and truthful. They are a business, not a scientific forum.

As far as inferring behaviors goes, yes this is hypothesis and not fact, no one (again at least scientists) are claiming it is. This is why like anthropology and the like are considered soft sciences, you deal with many uncheckable ideas.


Is this your only problem with evolution? (Which turns out to be a problem with the media and not the science of evolution anyway). Or did you have more scientific objections?

That is a very closed opinion, I guess if your mind is made up then its made up.




Hmm, this is why I made the statement as to if you are confused about what evolution is. An animals previous behavior is not needed to know the history of life on earth, at least in taxonomical terms. Actually, its not really my opinion that you don't understand what biological evolution is, if you think that animals behaviors are the crumbling point for evolutionary theory, because that is just plain wrong.

To be honest I am almost tired of posting this, but will trudge on nonetheless.

Biological evolution: The change in inherited traits over time.
Natural Selection:Favorable traits become more common in successive generations, this is due to the organisms whose traits exhibit the greatest amount of fitness (survivability) in an environment are more likely to pass these traits on in the populace.

You are missing the point of the original post. The point was that merely asking questions is treated with derision. Which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever if its based on scientific method. (Take a look at your post where you assume all sorts of things about me based on the fact that I state I question evolution. Loving the reference that I get my information from Creationist web sites. Absolutely PAR FOR THE FRIGGING COURSE in this debate)

I am well aware of the difference between natural selection and evolution. When discussing the TOPIC of evolution its not the same thing as discussing the actual scientific evolution. Your inference that I meant it such a specific way is your choice. But in general most people refer to the topic as "evolution."

You might say this is akin to your favorite mantra of "Scientific theory" and "theory" are not the same thing.

I stand by my statement that anyone stating that they know what the surface of the earth was 4.4 billion years ago is mostly relying on GUESSWORK. There is some science but most of it is supposition.

Frankly, could you show me otherwise? Could you explain otherwise? I do understand that to someone who is willing to make that leap of faith that all those "Lite Brite" pegs are all lines up and in the right order, based on a few thousand years of research is going to get angry when other people won't go along with their vision.

I question why it is not enough to Scientists to state what they DO KNOW and separate that from what they are assuming. The lifestyles of most of the creatures they assume to talk about is based on our modern interpretation of how creatures behave. As science has unfolded the theory of evolution, there have been innumerable changes to it. So why does questioning it automatically make you a flat earther?

My opinion is that there is much that we do not know and as you both indicated. Much of it is hypothesis. So me questioning said hypothesis based on the idea that its actually very close to a "GOOD GUESS" no matter how much in raises your hackles to have to accept that, is actually what science is supposed to be all about. So what's the problem?




So why the argument? So why the insinuation that to question this is somehow wrong or Creationist frenzy?

Nope.

Its just that when scientific theory doesn't stand by its own credo it gets a bit ridiculous after a while.

Really? So as long as they make a disclaimer its ok? So its OK for channels like this to promote the idea that scientific GUESSES are fact.

I'm supposed to believe that the science community which does absolute BACKFLIPS to stop Creationists from pushing their agenda is just a silent victim to the money making industry of the Discovery Channel.

Why the double standard? Why are they so vocal about stomping out the religious push of things that they consider NOT SCIENCE. But they don't make a peep about shows like this USING their work to promote a fantasy version of what the world was like before dinosaurs roamed the earth.

Seems to me that the only difference is that the Discovery Channel is pushing the religion of choice to the science community.

Sorry but I'm not buying it.

I agree that skepticism is a method. The question I would pose is whether skepticism should revolve around the skeptic having reasonable knowledge of the subject they are skeptical of?

If they do not, should their reasoning be doubted or are they entitled to consideration?

My original response to your post on evolution was to this statement



By that I took it to mean you assumed evolution is junk science. As a physicist I can tell you, I wish we understood gravity as well as we do evolution.

My problem is not with questioning, this is something that occurs all the time in science and must for science to get it correct. You said you are questioning the hypothesis, but what hypothesis is that? I guess your post is rather ambiguous as too what parts of evolution you seem to be having problems with. You keep saying things like "Knowing what the world was like 400 million years ago is guess work, evolution is guess work" They are not one in the same. The former is paleontology, while the latter is a unifying theory of biology.

And some of these hypothesis are much better than a good guess, As far as inferring lifestyles, anatomy of the organism can greatly help you with that.




No its not ok for those shows to promote false ideas, but how often have you seen "The story of Noah", the "Story of the shroud" and what not on those channels? They do not disclaimer them, they are for entertainment value, they are not a scientific forum for scientific information to be disseminated to the general public, that is what school is for..

As far as the scientific community doing "backflips" to stop creationists I think you are mistaken again. The majority of the people you see out and about in the news stopping the work of literal creationists are not scientists nor representatives for the scientific community. While many of them have some form of scientific education, this does not make them scientists.

The idea that the "scientific community" does anything together is rather preposterous and mis-representative of what the scientific community is. You make it sound as if we all get together at some secret meeting and say "Ok, this month we will devote to stopping creationism".

I don't think there is a double standard going on here other than what you may wish to see. There are numerous complaints from scientists whose ideas and research is taken out of context for those type of shows. You may not hear it because the media fails to report it, but it happens nonetheless.

It seems to me people automatically assume because someone with some scientific credentials says something on a show they see on the discovery channel, that must be "how the scientific community behaves" or it must be "the scientific communities views".

As a graduate student I would have expected you would know better than that.



That is a very good point Leonardo. How can someone question something they don't understand? There are lots of people on here questioning all sorts of scientific things, but they questions betray their lack of knowledge.

I just spent the past weekend with an auditorium filled with Geologists, Paleontologists, and other science professionals and amateurs, discussing the origin and evolution of "horned" dinosaurs.

And after listening to, and seeing all the evidence they presented I can honestly say that your statement is absolutely FALSE.

Scientists know far more than you give them credit for, and it is based on real evidence not guesswork.

again, great point.. this is not qualtiy data, you have to watch the disc..and history channel with alot of knowledge inthe first place.... including the animal channel stuff too again they are interested in profit not education....


I personally took a course and I see that alot of whats discussed is when the understanding of evolution was really bad....thanks for taking the time to help us understand...

Only if the person asking the question is asking a question about something as obvious as the theory of gravity or the theory of evolution.

Evolutionary theory is not complicated.

All you need to do is ask yourself whether or not you think a creature would be more or less likely to survive in its current habitat when a random mutation expresses itself as a trait.

For example, the current habitat is a huge, inland sea that has been slowly drying up for the past several thousand years. A random genetic mutation has expressed itself as skin cells that absorb and transport oxygen into the bloodstream. This mutation is dominant and so it is passed on to offspring as long as at least one parent carries the gene. Now, as the lake dries up, only the fish able to absorb oxygen directly from the air will be able to survive.

If you are prepared to believe that this happened and that it happens today in all sorts of ways (for goodness' sake - what do you think "penicillin-resistant bacteria are???" do you think that a few bacteria started training other bacteria and taught them how to fight back against anti-biotics??? NO. Some bacteria contained genetic mutations that just so happened to make them resistant to anti-biotics. In an environment where there were no anti-biotics, this mutation would not make them more fit so the mutation would be diluted. But in an environment where there are anti-biotics - ONLY the resistant bacteria survive.) then you already accept the theory of evolution.

I gotta agree with you shaft, i recently took a course on classical mathematics....I gotta tell you after taking this, I am very resectful of good sceince...it was an awesome course it had alot to do with how we think and how we apply sceintific reasoning..