Sunday, May 07, 2006

Going To the Sources: A Critique of The Seattle Debate and Creationist Lecture

Over the last two weeks I attended both a discussion in Seattle between the Discovery Institute and a UW Earth Sciences professor; as well as a lecture in my local community by a Creationist. In this podcast I will discuss both of these and where they both went wrong.
•Going to leave Creationist Claim section out this week. Got plenty of them in the last podcast, and will get more when I critique the local Creationist meeting I went to.
Going To the Sources: A Critique of The Seattle Debate and Creationist Lecture

Here you can find the entire discussion


Blogger Sarah said...

As a teacher, a Christian, and an evolutionist, I really enjoy your podcast. I just started with this episode. You really break down these arguments well. I only wish more people would listen and learn!

11:05 AM  
Blogger Lucretius said...

Thanks for the kind words sarah, I'm glad to see that some people are able tp realize that their faith and science should not be at odds.

What do you teach as a teacher? I'm guessing some sort of science?

5:41 PM  
Blogger Sarah said...

Right now I'm looking for a job in formal high school science education. I've taught in high school classrooms, including a few biology classes, an evolution elective, a physics class (conceptual), and even a middle school earth science class. I completed student teaching a few weeks ago.

Right now I am working in informal life science education at a local science center. It's a wonderful job. I work with younger students in general, but I also have an opportunity to talk to families and adults.

My student teaching experience has taught me so much about what I want in my classroom. I worked with a great teacher for the evolution elective I taught. Since my second student teaching assignment was in a mission setting, I found myself in a young earth creationist setting. Very, very uncomfortable. I hated that text. I told my administrator and he took my objection quite well, but this unfortunately makes me hesitant about teaching in the mission field. If it were more along the lines of how to understand faith in relation to science, it would be fine. But this young earth view is quite hostile to science, and that makes me very upset. It shouldn't be that way.

1:01 PM  
Blogger Lucretius said...

So, you're looking into becoming a high school science teacher? I'm guessing you have a lot of patience, I don't think I could manage to teach a high school class! I wish you the best in achieving your goal!

I can't imagine how odd it must have been in the Creationist crowd. Well, I can get a glimpse (a lot of people at my high school are Young Earthers, but with graduation only 15 days away, or so, hopefully I won't run into as many in college!)

I think it's great that you're going into teaching science, we need some people to teach actual science! That's interesting that a school had an elective on evolution; if someone made that class here they'd probably get run out of town or worse…

I plan to become a professor of physics or math so I guess in regards to teaching we have a similar goal. I'd say that being a high school teacher is more work though! I would hate having to deal with people like… well … a lot of kids my age, all the time.

Oh, you might have an interest in a quote one of my listeners, a retired physicist, sent to me. It's St. Augustine, addressing Creationism: "Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, [..] and this knowledge he holds as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason?"

8:57 PM  
Blogger Sarah said...

I do have to say that it takes a special sort of insanity to work with teens. And yes, that patience is definitely a requirement!

I loved that evolution elective. It was such a great way to really go in depth, because even in a biology class there's barely time to gloss over the concept. In the evo class we talked about the nature of science (I hope that I get a curriculum that allows me to spend some time on the nature of science at the beginning of class). Then we talked about cosmology (I learned quite a lot), geological concepts (I taught quite a lot), and right before I went to my next student teaching they were getting into plate tectonics. I think from there they got to look at biological evolution. Awesome class to have at a high school, but it wouldn't be okay at many.

I'm sure being so close to the end of high school that you're ready for the end. I know when I started touring colleges I was ready to get out of high school.

Great quote from Augustine! I've been reading some of his works... he's an interesting philosopher. He was a really deep thinker, and that's why I like reading what he had to say, even so long ago. It's always interesting to see that ancient problems are often still present in modern society.

6:19 AM  
Blogger Timothy Clemans said...

Intelligent design looks complex but it not appears to me to be simple with the repeated message in different versions. This is so boring, because Intelligent Design is not complex but DNA and the science of biology is. Abiogen. confused with evolution how stupid. What really sounds wreid to me is the idea the DNA and RNA is digital code, because code is created by humans. Our computers do not reproduce and code is not copied and subjected to the evironment that causes mutations in RNA copying. How can one use computers and their code to talk about cells and gentics.

8:47 PM  
Blogger Timothy Clemans said...

BTW I wrote that really fast and made many mistakes. You can not talk about biology in terms of biology. It just does not happen!

8:50 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home