Steve Austin’s radiometric dating exercise has been throughly refuted. See http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/mt_st_helens_dacite_kh.htm.

As for the Georgia textbook issue, its the same old backdoor dishonesty the those seeking to confuse kids do. The “theory, not a fact” argument is bogus. If we’re discussing science, the word theory means an established conceptual model completely supported by fact. And, aspects of the theory of evolution are so completely established and completely documented that they are, for all intents and purposes fact.

No one suggests that kids in school shouldn’t ask questions. No one suggests that scientists shouldn’t question any and every point of data, every hypothesis, or even core arguments, if they do so with fact and valid logic. What the creationists attempt to do, however, is to attempt to disrupt valid instruction with a stream of bogus assertions, such as the Austin canard, and a myriad of other invalid arguments which takes time and effort to refute.

Despite the supposedly non-theistic pose you try to offer, the only motivation for this intentional obfuscation is devotion to religious dogma. No, it is not some supposed bias that leads scientists to see the theory of evolution as the only viable model for understanding the biological world that we have. It is devotion to reason and fact.

If you think the “tail bone” is useless, fall down the stairs and land on it. What happens? You can’t stand up; you can’t sit down; you can’t lie down; you can’t roll over. You can hardly move without pain. In one sense, the sacrum and coccyx are among the most important bones in the whole body. They form an important point of muscle attachment required for our distinctive upright posture (and also for defecation, but I’ll say no more about that). Far from being a useless evolutionary leftover, the “tail bone” is quite important.

Your comment about this list…just baffles me, A Harvard biology professor doesn’t get to be a Harvard biology professor because of where he goes to church. Because he may (we don’t know) go to church every Sunday Harvard should fire him? Students should be banned from his class? Even though he’s accomplished all you have to accomplished (peer review*) to be a Harvard professor he should be ignored? Because he doesn’t fit your template.

I sense great fear in you. I’ll concede that the motivation of SOME MAY be suspect. The sticker was to stand alone. No teacher, no teacher’s aid, no librarian, was to direct a student in any direction. Taking out the sticker says we don’t want the student to go by themselves to the library or the internet to study cell biology, anatomy, anthropology, plate tectonics, astronomy, etc. We will absolutely control what they can learn. Why is it so wrong, in an educational setting, to question anything? Why would you or anyone assume that as soon as a 13 year old, all by himself or herself, studied carefully and critically considered this theory (almost fact*) they will immediately turn to god. I’m willing to see if that 13 year old or someone some day will fill the holes that I see.

One final point. You are the one that brought up god in this discussion, not me. I’ve asked critical questions about the science and findings of evolution. You’ve called it humbug. You brought god in this discussion and have assumed I’m a christian, hypocrite, and vain. You made assumptions based on your world view of evolution. Is it even remotely possible that evolutionary scientists use these same biases and come up with wrong conclusions?

* for Hue

Whatever the motive for signing that, “Doubt” wasn’t the words they used…it was inferred by Gary that they said that. Hell, I agree with what they said when it comes to certain aspects of a very large and complex theory such as evolution, but they don’t have the ability to literally say what it seems they wish they could concerning the theory. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch but it seems that science prevails with even the more compartmentalized in the field…unfortunately theirs is not the only minds they are toying with when they say such things

Is my belief something I inherited genetically, or more accurately via evolution or did the Big Mazambo in the Sky put the idea in my head when he, she or it made me?

Your advice would be appreciated.

http://www.dangerouscreation.com

No one is preventing anyone from questioning on going questioning of questioning. Your either all or nothing understanding of evolution is unfortunately a difficult one to tackle at the school children level, so I suppose you may have a point…I for one never liked the one dimensional trees insinuating progress and instant jumps. That could look like the same magic taught in Sunday school when one reflects upon their past education

It’s why I start with unnatural selection first…it’s even easier because the results can be witnessed (so too can finch beaks, but this one’s easier). Dog breeders denying evolution would be funny. And how about them blood oranges? Tasty.

Sagan had some interesting examples (the story of the emperor crab should keep any short attention span enthralled) and Cosmos is a great read for anyone who still thinks evolution is about believing a monkey turned into a man.

A difficulty for many is grasping time as something different than their own short amount of it or as merely a number followed by more or less zeroes

The people who are taught to fire back with talking points about cross species impossibilities should educate themselves without the chattering preachers in the back ground.

In the kindest possible light this should suggest to you that peer review is and has been taking place

Lyle H. Jensen Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Biological Structure & Dept. of Biochemistry University of Washington, Fellow AAAS

Dean Kenyon Emeritus Professor of Biology San Francisco State University

Stanley Salthe Emeritus Professor Biological Sciences Brooklyn College of the City University of New York

Donald Ewert Ph.D. Microbiology University of Georgia

Russell Carlson Professor of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology University of Georgia

Scott Minnich Professor, Dept of Microbiology, Molecular Biology & Biochemistry University of Idaho

The full list is exhaustive. I only included a few biologists. The full list incudes men and women from other fields such as chemistry, physics, astronomy, anthropology, and others.

I attempted to give a introduction to something I am relatively educated on (evolution), but the insistence of some to demand that everything is “proven” to them at a 5th grade level assumes that scientists are in the same profession as the clergy and must compete with faith utilizing “proof”. Science does not deal in facts and the common use of the word, “theory” has been bastardized and relagated to the status of fantasy or paranoid musings of those who think reality is a conspiracy.

Theory is the closest thing you can get to a “fact” in science. Much has taken place before it arrives at this stage and is always open to peer review. There is no secret cabal of scientists that would be able to pull off what you people are suggesting without the other scientists (such as the ones who’s theories such as atomic or electricity many seem to embrace) calling them out. Of course maybe they’re all part of the grand conspiracy as well? After all, no one has ever seen an electron and I sure as hell don’t understand enough about splitting atoms to prove to you that Hiroshima wasn’t instead ignited by magic Pixie dust.

My last appeal would be to take my advice on starting with unnatural selection….it IS 5th grade easy and even easier to explain than carbon dating