PDA

View Full Version : Sciencedebate 2008


tony hipchest
10-15-2008, 04:47 PM
very interesting site i found in a news article on yahoo that stated either obama or mccain will be much more science friendly than the current administration. see each candidates responses to 14 scientific field related questions and topics. very interresting and informative."For the last 60 years, science and engineering have been responsible for half the growth in the U.S. economy. But some reports suggest that by 2010 90% of all scientists and engineers will live in Asia. Asian countries are now graduating 10 times the number of scientists and engineers the U.S. is. Do the candidates have a plan to keep the American economy strong and to tackle America's major challenges like climate change, energy security, education and healthcare - all of which revolve around science? Who really deserves your vote?"

-Shawn Lawrence Otto
CEO, Science Debate 2008

http://www.sciencedebate2008.com/www/index.php?id42

revefsreleets
10-15-2008, 06:29 PM
Both Kennedy and Eisenhower made a direct plea to the American people and the educational system to add more science to the school curriculum. That dedication to science had a direct impact on the US leading the way for a generation.

Science has been marginalized by several factors that I won't get into, but we desperately need to add a TON of emphasis to math and science in this country if we want to stay even competitive, let alone lead the World in innovation.

Vis
10-15-2008, 06:51 PM
We can't have science here. First of all that carbon dating of the bones found in rocks is garbage. Then all the melting ice theories pop up. No, scientists aren't worth their weight in Alaskan crude.

Preacher
10-15-2008, 07:08 PM
We can't have science here. First of all that carbon dating of the bones found in rocks is garbage. Then all the melting ice theories pop up. No, scientists aren't worth their weight in Alaskan crude.

You are very arrogant.

The problem most Christians have with science is not the science itself, but the philosophical arguments used to tie scientific observations together.

Since when did it become unscientific to question findings? Seems to me that a certain dogma of scientific religion has replaced a dogma of christian religion, and anyone who questions that new dogma faces a new inquisition of ridicule.

Quite open-minded and unbiased, don't you think?

revefsreleets
10-15-2008, 07:10 PM
We can't have science here. First of all that carbon dating of the bones found in rocks is garbage. Then all the melting ice theories pop up. No, scientists aren't worth their weight in Alaskan crude.

With you on carbon dating....but you seem to be insinuating that some other Country has some secret new replacement for petroleum that we missed out on.

And I'm definitely not ready to say that humans are 100% responsible for global warming, and would consider any scientist who ignores natural heating/cooling trends of the planet as a hack.

Vis
10-15-2008, 07:20 PM
just a Palin, Alaska joke.

Humans aren't 100% responsible but we can only control our portion, not the natural trends.

Preacher
10-15-2008, 07:35 PM
Vis..

I came back to change my opening line on my post.

I don't want to cast you as an arrogant man. I do not know you and apologize. I do however, feel that it is an arrogant statement. I hope you know what I mean by the difference.

And BTW,

I, and millions of other people in this country, agree with Sarah Palin.

Carbon dating, amongst everything else, is based on human understanding of how events and processes happen. Like I have said. It isn't the observation I disagree with, it is the rationale of the observation and the fact that the resulting conclusions from the observation have an innate bias that all things observed today has acted in the same manner throughout the age of the world.

Let us say, for the sake of argument, that a meteor hit the earth. The atmospheric change would most definitely affect what radiation from the sun hits the earth. Would that affect carbon dating? Speed it up? Slow it down? What if there was multiple meteors? What other catastrophic atmospheric changes could affect not just carbon dating, but many aspects of science as we project back?

See, my problem is the assumptions made. Assumptions based on philosophical arguments derived from scientific observations.

revefsreleets
10-15-2008, 08:00 PM
What about redshift? Even if we throw out carbon dating (and I won't, because it's accepted scientific fact, but for the sake of argument) there are still many indisputable facts that show a Universe, and, by association, a planet Earth, that's much older than 4,000-6,000 years old.


This is Occam's Razor. Religion has only recently attempted to bend facts and omit inconvenient truths to try and re-establish a completely literal interpretation of the bible. You can't start with conclusions and work backwards, and it's even worse that the conclusions are based on dogma, especially dogma which has itself changed and shifted over long periods of time. This whole fundamentalist shift to literally interpret the bible really just started back up about 30 years ago. Science and religion had found a way to reconcile prior to that...

Preacher
10-15-2008, 08:04 PM
What about redshift? Even if we throw out carbon dating (and I won't, because it's accepted scientific fact, but for the sake of argument) there are still many indisputable facts that show a Universe, and, by association, a planet Earth, that's much older than 4,000-6,000 years old.


This is Occam's Razor. Religion has only recently attempted to bend facts and omit inconvenient truths to try and re-establish a completely literal interpretation of the bible. You can't start with conclusions and work backwards, and it's even worse than the conclusions are based on dogma, especially dogma which has itself changed and shifted over long periods of time.

Which is exactly my assessment of modern science. It no longer allows for basic questions concerning evolution or method. It is the only science, that is, scientia that no longer assesses its basic methods.

History does,
social sciences do,
theology does.

And yes, theology is classically still considered a science, which is why it is possible to get a Bachelor of science degree in the field of theology.

Rev., my main contention is that it is beyond science to proclaim absolutes beyond what it can currently (that is, this age) see, hear, smell, touch, or taste.

In other words, science can claim that by observation a rock dates 20000000 years old, but that only means that it dates that old as long as the process which is counted on is consistently valid at its current value. The same is true of ALL scientific observation. Thus, projecting back millions of years becomes just that, projection (learned projection), but far from absolute.

In a fit of Irony, the call of science is what bends around to bite science in the rear-end. You can only know what is observable... and because you cannot observe how evolution has happened, cannot observe how decay or other things happened millions of years ago, it cannot be known with certitude. Only with educated possibility.

revefsreleets
10-15-2008, 08:12 PM
Which is exactly my assessment of modern science. It no longer allows for basic questions concerning evolution or method. It is the only science, that is, scientia that no longer assesses its basic methods.

History does,
social sciences do,
theology does.

And yes, theology is classically still considered a science, which is why it is possible to get a Bachelor of science degree in the field of theology.

Evolution is ever changing. There are new developments all the time. When we see sexual maturity in a species evolve from a few years to less than one in just a generation or two, it forces scientists to revisit the whole "theory" again. AND evolution worked forwards, not backwards. Darwin wasn't trying to find data to fit his conclusions, his conclusions were derived from observed data. Creationism accepts facts that fit it's preconceived conclusion, and ignores or dismisses the facts that don't fit. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle was arrived at after all other possibilities were exhausted.

Fundamentalism is a regenerated idea. Literal translation worked until it didn't, and enlightenment had it's day, and relatively recently this movement reared it's ugly head again in a direct confrontation with "Science as devil".

revefsreleets
10-15-2008, 08:16 PM
Can't go on with this tonight...I have people coming over to watch the debate.

Preacher
10-15-2008, 08:16 PM
Evolution is ever changing. There are new developments all the time. When we see sexual maturity in a species evolve from a few years to less than one in just a generation or two, it forces scientists to revisit the whole "theory" again. AND evolution worked forwards, not backwards. Darwin wasn't trying to find data to fit his conclusions, his conclusions were derived from observed data. Creationism accepts facts that fit it's preconceived conclusion, and ignores or dismisses the facts that don't fit. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle was arrived at after all other possibilities were exhausted.

No.

Darwin observed facts, and then placed them in a popular philosophy of the day known as hegelian dialectical theory. Physical science wasn't the only science to pick up the philosophy. However, it seems to be the only science to not discard it after further study. My guess is because it fit preconceived directions within the larger culture.

Preacher
10-15-2008, 08:17 PM
Can't go on with this tonight...I have people coming over to watch the debate.


:laughing:

and I have a bible study to teach tonight!

You know, maybe we should find a way to take this to a private forum, that way we can have a good, ongoing discussion. I enjoy these discussions.

xfl2001fan
10-15-2008, 08:30 PM
Almost every civilization has used Religion as some form of control, with the religious leaders destroying products that do not fit their mold when the leaders become more fascinated with the power than the actual job of being a religious leader.

This is true of Christianity from several hundred years ago (think the Spanish Inquisition). You see it in the from of Muslim extremists today. The Jews were particularly bad during Jesus time with the Saduces and Pharisees (terrible at spelling these names).

Ultimately, blind faith is pure ignorance. Leaders who care for power prefer that.

Personally, I do believe in God. I also believe that, since we are made in His image, it's only right that we use the intellect He gave us. That means that we should use our intellect to question everything around us. If He wanted blind faith, He'd have made us robots.

So use your intellect to reason your way through what some very intelligent men and women have guestimated about the Earth. Yeah it's still a guess, but one that's been accepted by a large group of people who generally question everything.

It's generally accepted that Earth has gone through an Ice Age. How do we get out of an Ice Age? It takes Global Warming. Maybe we're not helping things along...hard to tell.

Personally, it seems much more like Global Shifting to me. It seems like the seasons are a month or so late each year. Each season seems to come a little later, but still last as long.

These are merely the observations of a non-science and non-religious nut. I dabble in both because I suffer from ADHD I think. LOL

stlrtruck
10-16-2008, 08:00 AM
Science has been marginalized by several factors that I won't get into, but we desperately need to add a TON of emphasis to math and science in this country if we want to stay even competitive, let alone lead the World in innovation.

I agree with what you are saying as far as increasing the education but the problem is that in most states you've got this testing system (in FL it's called the FCAT) which if the kid's don't pass they don't graduate. Teachers are now teaching for this test and not the real world. These series of tests have diminished the teacher's abilities to really get into subjects and do what they're suppose to do - TEACH!!!

Vis
10-16-2008, 09:23 AM
I agree with what you are saying as far as increasing the education but the problem is that in most states you've got this testing system (in FL it's called the FCAT) which if the kid's don't pass they don't graduate. Teachers are now teaching for this test and not the real world. These series of tests have diminished the teacher's abilities to really get into subjects and do what they're suppose to do - TEACH!!!

Very true. But how do you measure the effectiveness of teachers or schools? You test to measure but that has a consequence. I get in this fight a lot, not that this is a fight here. Someone defends a proposal for what it is designed to do and refuses to discuss what other, unintended but predictable things it will also do. Like vouchers.

Back to science and religion. If the Bible didn't exist, would the creation story and it's supposed time frame be anyone's hypothesis based on any discoverable facts? If so, what are those facts?

Mosca
10-16-2008, 09:51 AM
I make no pretense about being open minded on this issue; I don't have to be. Science is vital to our national interests, and science is best served by reporting accurate results.

To agree to open it for discussion is to lose the benefits of science.

I think we should start by debating the evidence for and against Christianity. Once we have settled that issue, along with positive physical proof, then we can turn our eyes to science. One thing at a time, after all.

tony hipchest
10-16-2008, 09:57 AM
not exactly the intention i was thinking this thread would go in but whatever.

90% of all scientists living in asia is startling. to remain a global power i would hope we can do something to get that number up here in the US as opposed to the continued dumbing down of america .

for one theres a referendum in my town to raise taxes for Spaceport America. i will definitely be voting in favor of it. (about 10 bucks a year- more if you buy alot of expensive high end items).

im just glad that either obama or mccain will be more science friendly than bush.

of course lets not update any planetarium projectors for school kids. God forbid :jawdrop:

revefsreleets
10-16-2008, 10:01 AM
No.

Darwin observed facts, and then placed them in a popular philosophy of the day known as hegelian dialectical theory. Physical science wasn't the only science to pick up the philosophy. However, it seems to be the only science to not discard it after further study. My guess is because it fit preconceived directions within the larger culture.

Part of the reason I read message boards is to learn new things from people who have a different perspective to me, and I'm sure others enjoy these discussions as well. Taking this off the board seems counterproductive to me...

As far as dialectical theory goes, it's intersting that you bring that up because it can neither be proven nor disproven, which runs a very close parallel to many religious views.

As far as applying it Darwin's Theory of evolution, the main problem with equating the two is that Darwin himself was a creationist and actually set out to prove creationism when he embarked on the Beagle (Creationsim was the prevailing theory of the day). Evolution was a revolutionary leap, something new from where there was nothing before, and while it could be conceived as the opposite of the previous metaphysical, anti-dialetic previaling view, evolution itself is not dialetic just because the conclusions it draws are anti-dialetic.

This is getting deep...

Oh, and I also wanted to chime in on standardized testing. I hear this over and over and over again, and it's startling. It seems the focus of all education now is geared towards making sure students pass these tests. That seems fine prima facia, but in the process kids are not being taught how to think, they are simply being taught what material they are going to be tested on. It all comes back to critical thinking and learning how to observe data and synthesizing new knowledge...and we are failing our children in this regard.

Vis
10-16-2008, 10:21 AM
not exactly the intention i was thinking this thread would go in but whatever.

90% of all scientists living in asia is startling. to remain a global power i would hope we can do something to get that number up here in the US as opposed to the continued dumbing down of america .

for one theres a referendum in my town to raise taxes for Spaceport America. i will definitely be voting in favor of it. (about 10 bucks a year- more if you buy alot of expensive high end items).

im just glad that either obama or mccain will be more science friendly than bush.

of course lets not update any planetarium projectors for school kids. God forbid :jawdrop:


I have four kids from 19 to 6. Just in that time the elementary school, while adding many computers, has dropped labs. It's all text work. There needs to be an understanding that we will never have the cheapest labor. We will never be a factory economy again. We need to be a tech economy and for that we need to have the brightest. That has to be part of the culture. Intelligence has to be a virtue. Joe straight A's and Joe physics needs some attention. Joe six-pack and Joe the plumber have had their 15 minutes.

tony hipchest
10-16-2008, 10:57 AM
and can i get a shot out for Joe Camel? :smoker:

RIP

stlrtruck
10-16-2008, 11:23 AM
Very true. But how do you measure the effectiveness of teachers or schools? You test to measure but that has a consequence. I get in this fight a lot, not that this is a fight here. Someone defends a proposal for what it is designed to do and refuses to discuss what other, unintended but predictable things it will also do. Like vouchers.


I think the tests are a necessary evil because otherwise, we don't have a standard by which to teach. However, it seems that the emphasis has become the testing and not the classroom and the teacher. I had teachers that used extraordinary measures outside of what I would call "typical" classroom instruction. Today, some of those things are unheard of - like playing games in the classroom to better understand theories etc.

Vis
10-16-2008, 11:34 AM
I think the tests are a necessary evil because otherwise, we don't have a standard by which to teach. However, it seems that the emphasis has become the testing and not the classroom and the teacher. I had teachers that used extraordinary measures outside of what I would call "typical" classroom instruction. Today, some of those things are unheard of - like playing games in the classroom to better understand theories etc.

If you were told your raise was based on one aspect of your job that's what you would focus on. Any problem that has an easy solution has already been fixed.

revefsreleets
10-16-2008, 12:12 PM
We are raising a nation of nincompoops:

http://www.ohio.com/editorial/commentary/31091544.html

Forget Gettysburg at our peril
By George F. Will



Published on Thursday, Oct 16, 2008

GETTYSBURG, Pa.: In 1863, 11 major roads converged on this town. Which is why history did, too.

The founding of the American nation was the hinge of world history: Popular sovereignty would have its day. The collision of armies here was the hinge of American history: The nation would long endure. Which is why 200 or so generous private citizens recently gathered here for a quiet celebration of their gift to the nation — a sparkling new Museum and Visitor Center that instructs and inspires.

In 1997, Bob Kinsley, a contractor in York, Pa., decided that something should be done about the decrepit facilities for explaining the battle and displaying its artifacts. His determination survived more than 50 public meetings and three congressional hearings, and two years of resistance from rival bidders, some Gettysburg merchants, and people who think the private sector takes up space that the public sector should fill.

He started the Gettysburg Foundation and hired Bob Wilburn, who had administered Colonial Williamsburg. Wilburn raised the $103 million that built the new center, which includes a theater for the scene-setting film narrated by Morgan Freeman, and the Cyclorama, the circular painting that depicts Pickett's Charge on the battle's third and final day.

Americans today are so constantly pummeled by the sensory blitzkrieg — the sights and sounds of graphic journalism and entertainment — they can hardly fathom how the Cyclorama dazzled viewers when displayed in 1884. Magnificently restored and presented, it is still stunning.

The battle here was fought in and around a town that continued to grow. At one point there was a Stuckey's restaurant where the second day of fighting raged. The Gettysburg Foundation's work includes recovering battle sites from urban encroachments.

It recently bought the 80-acre Spangler farm. The house, which was behind Union lines, was used as a hospital for both sides. Gen. Lewis Armistead of Virginia died there. He received his mortal wounds during Pickett's Charge, leading the deepest penetration of Union lines on Cemetery Ridge at the spot now known as ''the high-water mark of the Confederacy.''

Recently, a Gold Star mother finally visited Gettysburg, after driving by it often en route to visit the Arlington, Va., grave of her son, who was killed in Iraq. She was especially moved by these words from a Gettysburg newspaper published four days after the battle: ''Every name . . . is a lightning stroke to some heart, and breaks like thunder over some home, and falls a long black shadow upon some hearthstone.''

Gettysburg still stirs, but not as it used to, or should.

In Intruder in the Dust, William Faulkner wrote: ''For every Southern boy fourteen years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is the instant when it's still not yet two o'clock on that July afternoon in 1863, the brigades are in position behind the rail fence, the guns are laid and ready in the woods and the furled flags are already loosened to break out and Pickett himself with his long oiled ringlets. . . . '' Faulkner's sentence continued; you have just read less than half of it. To continue in his style:

Ours would be a better nation if boys and girls of all regions, and particularly the many high school and even college graduates who cannot place the Civil War in the correct half-century, could be moved, as large numbers of Americans used to be, by the names of Gettysburg battlefield sites, such as Devil's Den, the Peach Orchard, the Wheatfield, Culp's Hill and Little Round Top, instead of being like the visitor here who said it is amazing that so many great battles, such as Antietam and Chickamauga and Shiloh, occurred on Park Service land; and another visitor who doubted that the fighting here really was fierce because there are no bullet marks on the monuments.
Ten years ago, this column asserted that disrespect for the national patrimony of Civil War battlefields should be a hanging offense, and said: ''Given that the vast majority of Americans have never heard a shot fired in anger, the imaginative presentation of military history in a new facility here is vital, lest rising generations have no sense of the sacrifices of which they are beneficiaries.''

Today, at an embarrassing moment of multiplying public futilities, private efforts, in collaboration with the National Park Service, have done something resoundingly right that will help a normally amnesiac nation to long remember.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will is a Washington Post columnist. He can be e-mailed at georgewill@washpost.com.

Mosca
10-16-2008, 12:26 PM
I am 54. I've lived almost my entire life in Pennsylvania, but I'd never been to Gettysburg until this spring.

It is a must-visit destination. 145 years after the fact, it is hallowed ground, in the most profound sense. It is impossible go to Gettysburg and to remain unmoved.

I could go on, but there are no words to describe it. You really have to go there. When you do, the only thing you could say about it is, "Oh.... now I understand." because that's how I felt.

Vis
10-16-2008, 01:26 PM
Could you see the battle from the KFC?

stlrtruck
10-16-2008, 04:17 PM
If you were told your raise was based on one aspect of your job that's what you would focus on. Any problem that has an easy solution has already been fixed.

That's my point the school system has made it about the tests, not the students. There are teachers out there being handcuffed because they need to prepare these kids for a test, not reality - not the world.

And just like if my raise was on one aspect of my performance, the others would suffer. And that's where we are in today's educational system.

stlrtruck
10-16-2008, 04:26 PM
I am 54. I've lived almost my entire life in Pennsylvania, but I'd never been to Gettysburg until this spring.

It is a must-visit destination. 145 years after the fact, it is hallowed ground, in the most profound sense. It is impossible go to Gettysburg and to remain unmoved.

I could go on, but there are no words to describe it. You really have to go there. When you do, the only thing you could say about it is, "Oh.... now I understand." because that's how I felt.

I grew up in MD just a short drive from Gettysburg, Antietam, Sharpsburg, and other Civil War battle grounds. The things that you can see and the historical value of it is not something that can be taught in a classroom.

GutterflowerSteel
10-16-2008, 06:53 PM
I grew up in MD just a short drive from Gettysburg, Antietam, Sharpsburg, and other Civil War battle grounds. The things that you can see and the historical value of it is not something that can be taught in a classroom.

Ditto - we grew up in the same county :drink: School field trips were to places like The Smithsonian, Harper's Ferry, WV - Jamestown and Williamsburg, VA. I live in the town that houses the National Museum of Civil War Medicine. I feel lucky to have grown up in an area so steeped in history, especially because they're all day trips and fun to do when my niece and nephew visit.

Stlrtruck, have you been to Antietam on 4th of July for the fireworks? :cooldude:

stlrtruck
10-17-2008, 08:22 AM
Ditto - we grew up in the same county :drink: School field trips were to places like The Smithsonian, Harper's Ferry, WV - Jamestown and Williamsburg, VA. I live in the town that houses the National Museum of Civil War Medicine. I feel lucky to have grown up in an area so steeped in history, especially because they're all day trips and fun to do when my niece and nephew visit.

Stlrtruck, have you been to Antietam on 4th of July for the fireworks? :cooldude:

Nah, never made it that far. But I might be up that way for the 4th so that might be something to check out next year - if we can make it up.