Re: [asa] The fight in Texas over evolution training in schools

From: George Murphy <GMURPHY10@neo.rr.com>
Date: Thu Mar 26 2009 - 08:13:30 EDT

Randy's response to this implies that he got the "set of peer review stupidities" that Glenn said were "below" but the version of Glenn's post that I got is cut off before it gets to them (as below). Maybe others had this problem too.

Shalom
George
http://home.roadrunner.com/~scitheologyglm

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Glenn Morton
  To: Randy Isaac ; asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 9:58 PM
  Subject: Re: [asa] The fight in Texas over evolution training in schools

  Bull roar, Randy. You wrote:
>>Well said, Rich. You said "Until they get published in a peer-reviewed journal in the area of question they have not earned the right to be listened to and definitely not the right to be included in a science class at the high school level."<<<

    This is elitism at its best. Do you have any idea how hard it was for anthropologists who believed in a pre-clovis habitation of North America to be published? Yet they turned out to be correct. Science didn't used to be done via peer review. People earn the right to be heard by being human not by passing some conformance test set up by funding groups who won't allow anyone with a differing view to be published. Below is a set of peer review stupidities and places where the scientific consensus of the day was wrong. it is long, but you can read what ever of it you want to read. Scientists arrogantly think they have the right to censor other people's thoughts and ideas.

  Thi
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Randy Isaac
    To: asa@calvin.edu
    Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 7:20 PM
    Subject: Re: [asa] The fight in Texas over evolution training in schools

    I agree that getting published in a peer-reviewed journal is a necessary but not sufficient condition. Peer review only means that less than a handful of peers thought the paper contained some data or concepts that the broader community working in that field should consider. It doesn't mean they agreed with it or thought it was right--just worthy of note or of a response. To warrant inclusion in a high school class room means independent corroboration and acceptance by more than just a few other experts. On the other hand, I would also suggest that there are areas of frontiers in science where there is no consensus established and much of the data are not understood. These are valuable lessons in how scientific research is done and these could be included in some way in a high school classroom. What must be clear is what fields are in the frontier stage, which ones in a controversial stage, and which ones have consensus. In the right context, innovative ideas have a vital role in science education. Even here, those innovative ideas are the ones being contested in the literature.

    Randy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Mar 26 08:14:15 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Mar 26 2009 - 08:14:15 EDT