Kentucky science standards derided as fascist, socialist

| 106 Comments

It’s bad enough that Kentucky has the Ark Park, but also subsidizes it - now its residents are complaining about the Next Generation Science Standards. The headline of the Courier-Journal article is “Critics: Kentucky science academic standards are ‘fascist,’ ‘atheistic,’” but that does not do justice to the sheer lunacy of some of the comments quoted in the article.

Here are two excerpts:

One parent, Valerie O’Rear, said the standards promote an “atheistic worldview” and a political agenda that pushes government control.

Matt Singleton, a Baptist minister in Louisville who runs an Internet talk-radio program, called teachings on evolution a lie that has led to drug abuse, suicide and other social afflictions.

“Outsiders are telling public school families that we must follow the rich man’s elitist religion of evolution, that we no longer have what the Kentucky constitution says is the right to worship almighty God,” Singleton said. “Instead, this fascist method teaches that our children are the property of the state.” …

At one point, opponent Dena Stewart-Gore of Louisville also suggested that the standards will marginalize students with religious beliefs, leading to ridicule and physiological [sic - surely she said psychological] harm in the classroom, and create difficulties for students with learning disabilities.

“The way socialism works is it takes anybody that doesn’t fit the mold and discards them,” she said. [sic] adding that “we are even talking genocide and murder here, folks.”

Other people predictably said that the new science standards would not encourage critical thinking (!).

Several people supported the new standards, and Daniel Phelps, president of the Kentucky Paleontological Society, expressed indignation at “comments suggesting that evolution leads to immorality and ‘death camps.’” Phelps added,

“I’ve actually read this [document], unlike many of the people who have commented today,” he said. “Everything is actually based on evidence – arguments from evidence are actually given priority in the Next Generation Science Standards.”

106 Comments

Well, they have the right to send their kids to private schools that will brain wash them into whatever religion they choose. Of course, when the kids find out that evolution is true and they were lied to, the might be a bit perturbed. But what they don’t have the right to do is substitute their religious beliefs for science in public schools. That would be wrong. If they disagree, then I get to pick the religion. I don’t think they would like my choice.

I wanted to see the whole article. When I clicked on your link, I got a page saying the story was no longer available. Do you know where the article is archived? I am a teacher (K-8). It is so discouraging to read comments like these. On the other hand, I noticed last year, that there were no complaints or arguments from students when the subject of evolution came up, even when talking about the chemical origins of life. I don’t know if I should interpret this as progress, or if it simply means the religious kids are going to Christian academies. I’ll be interested in seeing if the lack of argument continues at my school when we start back in August.

Ironically, AIUI the standards were developed exactly the way conservatives want the government to be run. I.e., they were developed by a voluntary group of States. You want states rights with no top-down federal enforcement? This is it - this is what it looks like!

I suspect that much of this complaining has more to do with timing than anything else - its being supported and promoted by a Department of Ed. run by democrats. Obama is the devil, ergo anything he supports must be bad.

When I clicked on your link, I got a page saying the story was no longer available. Do you know where the article is archived?

Odd – that link worked before. I scrolled down their home page and found a new headline, “School science is hotly debated in Kentucky New standards are called ‘atheistic,’ ‘fascist’ by some,” and a new URL. I have corrected the URL in the main article above. I think the text is the same, but I did not really check it.

eric said:

Obama is the devil, ergo anything he supports must be bad.

And and somewhere in the underlying strata is always “He’s a negro.”

It was quite the day. There was a lot of scientific illiteracy on display, but despite being outnumbered, we gave good testimony. The opposition won’t stop, though. There is still the Interim Joint Committee on Education, which could be swayed to weaken the standards. Then we get to look forward to the countless series of lawsuits and moves by the state legislature to pull funding from their implementation.

Please like our facebook page to keep up with what we are doing to promote science. https://www.facebook.com/Ky4Sci

“Instead, this fascist method teaches that our children are the property of the state.” …

As opposed to what? Does he believe that children are the property of their parents, who have complete freedom to raise them as they see fit? Or would he acknowledge that children are persons, with rights of their own? Once I get an answer to that, I would want to know his views on abortion, opposition to which is based on the view that fetuses are “persons” with the right to life.

Baptist Pastor Matt Singleton said:

… the rich man’s elitist religion of evolution …

Rich man?

Veterans of the Evolution Wars can go for long periods of time without seeing anything new come out of creationism. But this is the first time I’ve heard evolution associated with “rich men”. Maybe people from Kentucky view themselves as poor compared to the rest of the U.S.? I don’t get it.

Carl Drews said:

Baptist Pastor Matt Singleton said:

… the rich man’s elitist religion of evolution …

Rich man?

Veterans of the Evolution Wars can go for long periods of time without seeing anything new come out of creationism. But this is the first time I’ve heard evolution associated with “rich men”. Maybe people from Kentucky view themselves as poor compared to the rest of the U.S.? I don’t get it.

No, not new. It’s encoded in a lot of their language about “elites.” William Dembski once said that Intelligent Design was a middle class idea, while evolution was economically elitist.

diogeneslamp0 said:

Carl Drews said:

Baptist Pastor Matt Singleton said:

… the rich man’s elitist religion of evolution …

Rich man?

Veterans of the Evolution Wars can go for long periods of time without seeing anything new come out of creationism. But this is the first time I’ve heard evolution associated with “rich men”. Maybe people from Kentucky view themselves as poor compared to the rest of the U.S.? I don’t get it.

No, not new. It’s encoded in a lot of their language about “elites.” William Dembski once said that Intelligent Design was a middle class idea, while evolution was economically elitist.

Who’s that guy who bankrolls the DI? Doesn’t he count as rich?

Just Bob said:

diogeneslamp0 said:

Carl Drews said:

Baptist Pastor Matt Singleton said:

… the rich man’s elitist religion of evolution …

Rich man?

Veterans of the Evolution Wars can go for long periods of time without seeing anything new come out of creationism. But this is the first time I’ve heard evolution associated with “rich men”. Maybe people from Kentucky view themselves as poor compared to the rest of the U.S.? I don’t get it.

No, not new. It’s encoded in a lot of their language about “elites.” William Dembski once said that Intelligent Design was a middle class idea, while evolution was economically elitist.

Who’s that guy who bankrolls the DI? Doesn’t he count as rich?

Yeah, but he’s anti-evolution. Singleton apparently never got the memo.

I hereby repent of my attempt to draw any rationality from what Matt aptly calls the “sheer lunacy” of these comments.

Perhaps the angry Ken Ham is currently having a disproportionate influence in Kentucky. His followers and the AiG staff are getting dumber by the day (e.g., look at the latest solution to the distant starlight problem from Danny R. Faulkner, who replaced Jason Lisle at AiG).

This militant stupidity and hatred seem to be more prevalent these days since Obama was elected President. I suspect it has something to do with the fact that he is black. The sheer seething loathing from the Right Wing against this President has brought out racism, persecution of women, distain for education, hatred of Latinos and other immigrants, threats of secession from the US, gun fanaticism, and just about every form of jingoism and hatred typically associated with ignorant, white supremacist hate groups.

I haven’t seen this much vitriolic hatred and stupidity in the US Congress and in state legislatures since the battles over civil rights starting back in the 1960s and 70s. There is apparently some big money and nasty politics stirring up this kind of crap.

diogeneslamp0 said: No, not new. It’s encoded in a lot of their language about “elites.” William Dembski once said that Intelligent Design was a middle class idea, while evolution was economically elitist.

That “rich man” stuff goes back a long way. It echos William Jennings Bryan’s appeal to the little man, and it also sounds like resentment of “social Darwinism” that supposedly authorizes the rich to enslave us.

MaskedQuoll said: Does he believe that children are the property of their parents, who have complete freedom to raise them as they see fit?

That’s the way it works in the US. Parents can indoctrinate their children in any wacky cult or belief system they want; in most states parents can legally deny children medical care, and, except in extreme cases, the legal system generally views children as property and parents as owners. There’s a reason that the US is one of only three countries who refuse to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, (Somalia and South Sudan being the others.)

No magic chemistry?

Those atheists, pretending that chemicals form themselves without any kind of magic, and that lightning strikes without Thor throwing his hammer.

Disgusting!

Glen Davidson

I reposted the Courier-Journal story on Kentucky School News and Commentary. http://theprincipal.blogspot.com/20[…]ated-in.html

I’ve read and been involved in the analysis of the NGSS, including two previous draft versions.

While I don’t always agree with them and most people highly misunderstand them (including experts in the education, assessment, and curriculum), I am confident that “fascist”, “atheism”, “socialism”, and “death camps” are NOT in the standards.

I look at this report as the best example of why these types of standards are needed. I’ll also note that they didn’t appear to freak out when the common core (which does pretty much the same things for ELA and math) came out… though I don’t like in Kentucky and might not have seen the massive blow up… if one occurred.

Just Bob said:

eric said:

Obama is the devil, ergo anything he supports must be bad.

And and somewhere in the underlying strata is always “He’s a negro.”

No. They very rarely call him negro. They call him “Radical”, and we’re all supposed to prefix that with “Black” in our minds. They want us to believe a centrist is Huey Newton in a beret with a machine gun just because he’s black. “Radical” is the new “Negro.”

Moving a bit northwards (but not forward at all), the Republican Michigan legislature has defunded all work towards implementing the Common Core Standards (the standards for things other than science)

www.mlive.com/education/index.ssf/2013/06/common_core_standards_funding.html

No telling how they will react to the Science Standards, but I’m betting it won’t be pretty.

diogeneslamp0 said:

Just Bob said:

eric said:

Obama is the devil, ergo anything he supports must be bad.

And and somewhere in the underlying strata is always “He’s a negro.”

No. They very rarely call him negro. They call him “Radical”, and we’re all supposed to prefix that with “Black” in our minds. They want us to believe a centrist is Huey Newton in a beret with a machine gun just because he’s black. “Radical” is the new “Negro.”

Yeah, right. Any criticism of Obama’s and Holder’s ACTIONS are due to their race, because that is all that liberals can see.

The ‘elitist’ slur is not so much an observation (without, as usual, any hard evidence) as a Freudian yearning not to be ignored. A natural evolved human desire to be noticed, attract mates, reproduce etc. Dembski has a middling mind, and he’s just smart enough to notice that, he yearns for more unattainable recognotion (Fart jokes mocking Judge Jones gets some attention, but leaves him oddly empty). The dregs who call up these radio stations with their thinly veiled, ‘niggers is just dummer’n us’ rhetoric, are also unknowingly in a state of yearning. They are just dim enough to be aware of something that they will never attain. This causes unreasoned fear, this causes an unreasoning backlash. Happily however, they will leave the phone unfulfilled, and unequivocally confused.

KlausH said:

diogeneslamp0 said:

Just Bob said:

eric said:

Obama is the devil, ergo anything he supports must be bad.

And and somewhere in the underlying strata is always “He’s a negro.”

No. They very rarely call him negro. They call him “Radical”, and we’re all supposed to prefix that with “Black” in our minds. They want us to believe a centrist is Huey Newton in a beret with a machine gun just because he’s black. “Radical” is the new “Negro.”

Yeah, right. Any criticism of Obama’s and Holder’s ACTIONS are due to their race, because that is all that liberals can see.

Can this troll dropping be moved to the bathroom wall?

Can this troll dropping be moved to the bathroom wall?

I think not. It is true that the right opposes Obama so vigorously because of his race (Obamacare [ObRomneycare?] is quintessentially Republican), but it is not true that any criticism is dismissed as racial. Mr. H’s comment is thus at best exaggerated, but I think it is as legitimate a comment as many others. May I suggest, though, that we stick to discussion of the science standards and related matters, and not get into a wholly off-topic discussion?

I think KlausH should only go to the Bathroom Wall if he turns this into a thread derailment.

Herr Klaus said:

diogeneslamp0 said:

Just Bob said:

eric said:

Obama is the devil, ergo anything he supports must be bad.

And and somewhere in the underlying strata is always “He’s a negro.”

No. They very rarely call him negro. They call him “Radical”, and we’re all supposed to prefix that with “Black” in our minds. They want us to believe a centrist is Huey Newton in a beret with a machine gun just because he’s black. “Radical” is the new “Negro.”

Yeah, right. Any criticism of Obama’s and Holder’s ACTIONS are due to their race, because that is all that liberals can see.

Does the Foxist right ever have an argument that is NOT a straw man? If you could have refuted my actual argument, you would have. You couldn’t, so we get a straw man.

At no point did I assert that criticism of ACTUAL, REAL actions taken by the Obama administration is racist. It may not be racist, IF the same standard is applied to everybody.

But if you call Obama “radical” and “socialist” for implementing policies concocted in think tanks like the Heritage Institute full of white conservatives, and implemented first by white conservatives like Romney– people NEVER called “radical” nor “socialist”– then you’ve got a double standard.

What name would you give to the double standard Foxists embrace? I pick racist. What word do racists prefer? Heroic?

Getting back to the topic of the article, various rightwinged concerned Christian parents are deriding the new science education standards, claiming it’s an evil socialist plot to promote atheism and evil because it does not specifically promote Creationism?

apokryltaros said:

Getting back to the topic of the article, various rightwinged concerned Christian parents are deriding the new science education standards, claiming it’s an evil socialist plot to promote atheism and evil because it does not specifically promote Creationism?

It significantly increases the presence of evolution in the biology curriculum - not just at the high school level, but beginning much earlier, too. Evolution becomes one of a few guiding themes around which biology lessons at all levels are organized. Clearly they would have a complaint about that no matter which administration was in charge.

The ‘marxism’ label could either refer to their rejection of mainstream history teaching (i.e., as not christian-manifest-destiny enough), or just a dogwhistle for ‘democrats in office, kill any proposal associated with them.’ IMO the latter is probably more of what’s going on than the former, but both are probably in play to some extent.

Stolen from someone else “Kentucky 10 million people 5 different gene pools”

Gods participation in this world, this planet, hasn’t lived up to the standards that you would have thought a supreme God, who has boasted, should have produced, or you would believe as you would see what it is that you are not seeing as per the perfection you would expect from our Creator. But there are people who do see and understand where God is at, because some don’t I don’t think it is right that science should be the only explanation of life because whether the evolutionist and scientist likes it or not or believes it or not there are objectives that people who believe associate with God, and not to allow the freedom to distinguish your believes from science or science from belief is still not a sound direction. Because it is said it is science that has discovered for example how biology works it couldn’t discover it if it wasn’t there to be explained and discovered in the first place. Science is the conveyance of learning and discovering whether it is breakthroughs in evolution or biological wonders like the double helix. God is the person who helps you assemble all the discoveries into the right order so the perfection you want to see is achieved. If you don’t believe He has the right map then you could be missing a link and find yourself at fault and not God.

The litany of dangers is longer that the side-effects mentioned in an anti-arthritis product commercial. “‘Darwinism’ may cause socialism, fascism, insomnia, and narcolepsy.”

ogremk5 said: If you like, I could recommend a few books that are very interesting, entertaining, and have the correct science. For example, Neil Shubin’s Your Inner Fish (you can get it at Half Price Books for less than $7).

I’ve got this book on order now, it will be a change from reading how we came from apes, no I do think it sounds like a good book.

I am a member of the Sheffield Astronomical Society http://www.voyagerdome.co.uk/sas/ If ever you or any of you come to South Yorkshire you might come and visit.

As for my previous comment, a bit of research shows that there are three creationists with similar names, one of whom showed up in the video from the hearing in Kentucky:

Don PattEn (b. 1929), author of “The Biblical Flood and the Ice Epoch”; Don Batten, a fruit researcher and plant physiologist, who wrote 101 Proofs of a Young Earth, and works with Jonathan Sarfati at CMI; and Don PattOn (b. 1941), our speaker in the video from Kentucky, who is infamous for his fake science degrees.

Amazingly, both Don Patton (b. 1941) and Don Patten (b. 1929) promoted the fraudulent Paluxy River man-prints found alongside dinosaur prints. As for Don Batten, he is really another idiot, but did not promote the Paluxy fraud-prints.

Don Patton’s Alleged Credentials

Since early 1989, Don Patton, a close associate of Carl Baugh and leader of Metroplex Institute of Origins Science (MIOS) near Dallas, has claimed a Ph.D. (or “Ph.D. candidacy”) in geology from Queensland Christian University in Australia.[33] However, QCU is another unaccredited school linked to Clifford Wilson. [34] When questioned about this at a recent MIOS meeting, Patton indicated that he was aware of some problems relating to QCU, and was withdrawing his Ph.D. candidacy.[35]

However, the printed abstracts of the 1989 Bible-Science conference in Dayton, Tennessee (where Patton gave two talks) stated that he was a Ph.D. candidacy in geology, and implied that he has at least four degrees from three separate schools.[36] When I asked Patton for clarification on this during the conference, he stated that he had no degrees, but was about to receive a Ph.D. degree in geology, pending accreditation of QCU, which he assured me was “three days away.”[37] Many days have since passed, and Patton still has no valid degree in geology. Nor is the accreditation of QCU imminent. Australian researcher Ian Plimer reported, “PCI, QPU, PCT, and PCGS have no formal curriculum, no classes, no research facilities, no calendar, no campus, and no academic staff.…Any Ph.D. or Ph.D. candidacy at QPU by Patton is fraudulent.”[38]

With surprising boldness, Carl Baugh recently appeared on a radio talk show in Texas claiming the same degrees discussed above, plus a new “Ph.D. candidacy in paleoanthropology from Pacific College.” Baugh complained that critics were now attacking his credentials and those of other fine creationists, including “Dr. Don Patton.”[39]

[Source: Glen Kuban]

I think that Marilyn is in for a big surprise.

So was it the same Don Patton or Don Patten or some other idiot with the same name?

Seems to be this guy. He claims a PhD from the Pacific School of Graduate Studies in Melbourne, Australia, whose link yields “404 Not Found.” Indeed, its Web site seems to be for sale. Cheer up, though, John Blanton of the North Texas Skeptics tracked it down here in 2009:

Pacific International University had its roots in Melbourne, Australia, and in 1993 obtained accreditation from the Higher Education Division of Victoria to offer Masters and PhD level qualifications. This accreditation was short lived though, and the university relocated to Missouri, USA. For a period of time it still maintained a Victorian address for correspondence and delivery; however, this was removed due to pressure from the Victorian Office of Tertiary Education and Training. In the USA, where it still operates today, it claims accreditation from the ‘American Accrediting Association of Theological Institutions Inc.’, an unrecognised accrediting agency.

Mr. Blanton states unequivocally that PSGS is a diploma mill and adds, “I will state without additional proof that creationist Don Patton does not have a legitimate Ph.D. degree of any kind.”

You can see Don Patton, the guy in the Kentucky video, at this link promoting various ICR-style YEC creationist frauds, like the infamous Malachite Man (aka Moab Man), the “Fossilized Hammer” (actually a concretion, not a fossil), the “fossilized human finger” (actually just a rock), etc. Many of these frauds, like Malachite Man, have been debunked by Glen Kuban, to whom we owe a great debt. It is illustrated with a cartoon of Alley Oop riding a dinosaur.

Did I remember to mention that our friend Bradley Monton of the University of Colorado is mentioned favorably at 19:20 as a philosopher who agrees that “challenges to Darwinism can have merit”?

Marilyn said:

ogremk5 said: If you like, I could recommend a few books that are very interesting, entertaining, and have the correct science. For example, Neil Shubin’s Your Inner Fish (you can get it at Half Price Books for less than $7).

I’ve got this book on order now, it will be a change from reading how we came from apes, no I do think it sounds like a good book.

[bold added above]

As DS touched on, you may be in for an unpleasant surprise. But Marilyn, it’s hoped this won’t discourage you from reading the book. I found Your Inner Fish very informative and fun to read just like the Richard Dawkins book I read about a month ago, but without any anti-religious diatribes. I honestly don’t know if Shubin is a theist or not; in a way, this is irrelevant for as long as a scientist is properly using the scientific method, it doesn’t matter if he/she is a theist or non-theist.

While there are many nice Neil Shubin lectures on YouTube and elsewhere on the net, perhaps you might be interested in Ken Miller’s humorous (a Miller trademark) take on Shubin’s Your Inner Fish here (video #4). If you have limited time, the last part of video #3 into most of #4 is where Miller talks about Shubin and Your Inner Fish (including video clips from Shubin himself). There are also many other videos on YouTube of Ken Miller himself as well.

There are other books I also recommend, such as those by biologist Sean B Carroll (including Endless Forms Most Beautiful which is a nice introduction to Evolutionary Developmental Biology [evo-devo for short] ). Sean B Carroll is not to be confused with physicist (and outspoken atheist) Sean M Carroll.

If you are looking for more popular level books by scientists that accept evolution and happen to be theists, here’s a partial list:

Perspectives On An Evolving Creation (Keith Miller, geologist at Kansas State University, officer member Affiliation of Christian Geologists, officer member of Kansas Citizens For Science which has successfully challenged anti-evolutionism efforts in Kansas) [Keith is not related to Ken Miller]

The Language of Life, and The Language Of God among other books (Francis Collins, led Human Genome Project)

Finding Darwin’s God, more recently Only A Theory (Ken Miller, biologist at Brown University, co-author of leading high school biology books, lead expert witness for plaintiffs at 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Board [Intelligent Design] trial in Harrisburg)

Saving Darwin (Karl Giberson, physicist at Eastern Nazarene College, former YEC)

Beyond the Firmament (Gordon Glover, former YEC, producer of 16 video lessons about Christian education and science)

The Dinosaur Heresies (Robert Bakker, paleontologist that proposed during the 1970s that dinosaurs were bird-like/warmblooded)

Coming To Peace With Science (Darrel Falk, biologist)

Marilyn said:

ogremk5 said: If you like, I could recommend a few books that are very interesting, entertaining, and have the correct science. For example, Neil Shubin’s Your Inner Fish (you can get it at Half Price Books for less than $7).

I’ve got this book on order now, it will be a change from reading how we came from apes, no I do think it sounds like a good book.

As opposed to Swindlers and Liars for Jesus playing on your vanity in order to feed their own Egos for Jesus and Bank Accounts for Jesus?

apokryltaros said:

Marilyn said:

ogremk5 said: If you like, I could recommend a few books that are very interesting, entertaining, and have the correct science. For example, Neil Shubin’s Your Inner Fish (you can get it at Half Price Books for less than $7).

I’ve got this book on order now, it will be a change from reading how we came from apes, no I do think it sounds like a good book.

As opposed to Swindlers and Liars for Jesus playing on your vanity in order to feed their own Egos for Jesus and Bank Accounts for Jesus?

Now, now. Don’t be mean just for meanness sake. Marilyn at least appears to be honest about what she believes, she appears to answer questions forthrightly and directly (even if we may not like the content or quality of the answers), and in this willingness to try a new book (even when she said she doesn’t have much time for reading) she appears open to the possibility of new ideas. Give her some space to try.

And if my assessment is wrong, her approach is at least a refreshing break from our usual wearisome trolls.

Now, now. Don’t be mean just for meanness sake. Marilyn at least appears to be honest about what she believes, she appears to answer questions forthrightly and directly (even if we may not like the content or quality of the answers), and in this willingness to try a new book (even when she said she doesn’t have much time for reading) she appears open to the possibility of new ideas. Give her some space to try.

And if my assessment is wrong, her approach is at least a refreshing break from our usual wearisome trolls.

Precisely; thank you! I have occasionally corresponded with Marilyn, usually concerning one of her photographs, and I cannot but reinforce that she is completely honest and by no means, um, trollish.

We did not descend from apes. Humans and apes descended from a common ancestor which has since gone extinct some 6 million years ago.

Marilyn said:

ogremk5 said: If you like, I could recommend a few books that are very interesting, entertaining, and have the correct science. For example, Neil Shubin’s Your Inner Fish (you can get it at Half Price Books for less than $7).

I’ve got this book on order now, it will be a change from reading how we came from apes, no I do think it sounds like a good book.

I am a member of the Sheffield Astronomical Society http://www.voyagerdome.co.uk/sas/ If ever you or any of you come to South Yorkshire you might come and visit.

In fairness, in one of the later videos, Miller quotes Charles Krauthammer on Newton and Einstein. The fact is that Newton was an Arian and Einstein was, at best, a Deist. Darwin himself after the 1840s was an agnostic. Thus, none of these individuals was a believing Christian (or in the case of Einstein, a believing Jew), contrary to Krauthammer’s claims.

Tenncrain said:

Marilyn said:

ogremk5 said: If you like, I could recommend a few books that are very interesting, entertaining, and have the correct science. For example, Neil Shubin’s Your Inner Fish (you can get it at Half Price Books for less than $7).

I’ve got this book on order now, it will be a change from reading how we came from apes, no I do think it sounds like a good book.

[bold added above]

As DS touched on, you may be in for an unpleasant surprise. But Marilyn, it’s hoped this won’t discourage you from reading the book. I found Your Inner Fish very informative and fun to read just like the Richard Dawkins book I read about a month ago, but without any anti-religious diatribes. I honestly don’t know if Shubin is a theist or not; in a way, this is irrelevant for as long as a scientist is properly using the scientific method, it doesn’t matter if he/she is a theist or non-theist.

While there are many nice Neil Shubin lectures on YouTube and elsewhere on the net, perhaps you might be interested in Ken Miller’s humorous (a Miller trademark) take on Shubin’s Your Inner Fish here (video #4). If you have limited time, the last part of video #3 into most of #4 is where Miller talks about Shubin and Your Inner Fish (including video clips from Shubin himself). There are also many other videos on YouTube of Ken Miller himself as well.

There are other books I also recommend, such as those by biologist Sean B Carroll (including Endless Forms Most Beautiful which is a nice introduction to Evolutionary Developmental Biology [evo-devo for short] ). Sean B Carroll is not to be confused with physicist (and outspoken atheist) Sean M Carroll.

If you are looking for more popular level books by scientists that accept evolution and happen to be theists, here’s a partial list:

Perspectives On An Evolving Creation (Keith Miller, geologist at Kansas State University, officer member Affiliation of Christian Geologists, officer member of Kansas Citizens For Science which has successfully challenged anti-evolutionism efforts in Kansas) [Keith is not related to Ken Miller]

The Language of Life, and The Language Of God among other books (Francis Collins, led Human Genome Project)

Finding Darwin’s God, more recently Only A Theory (Ken Miller, biologist at Brown University, co-author of leading high school biology books, lead expert witness for plaintiffs at 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Board [Intelligent Design] trial in Harrisburg)

Saving Darwin (Karl Giberson, physicist at Eastern Nazarene College, former YEC)

Beyond the Firmament (Gordon Glover, former YEC, producer of 16 video lessons about Christian education and science)

The Dinosaur Heresies (Robert Bakker, paleontologist that proposed during the 1970s that dinosaurs were bird-like/warmblooded)

Coming To Peace With Science (Darrel Falk, biologist)

We did not descend from apes. Humans and apes descended from a common ancestor which has since gone extinct some 6 million years ago.

Really? You think that common ancestor wouldn’t have had enough ape-like characteristics to qualify it for being called an ape?

Henry

SLC said:

We did not descend from apes. Humans and apes descended from a common ancestor which has since gone extinct some 6 million years ago.

When did we stop being apes?

Marilyn said:

ogremk5 said: If you like, I could recommend a few books that are very interesting, entertaining, and have the correct science. For example, Neil Shubin’s Your Inner Fish (you can get it at Half Price Books for less than $7).

I’ve got this book on order now, it will be a change from reading how we came from apes, no I do think it sounds like a good book.

Do you think we lost the wings to protect us from bird flu.

Marilyn said:

Marilyn said:

ogremk5 said: If you like, I could recommend a few books that are very interesting, entertaining, and have the correct science. For example, Neil Shubin’s Your Inner Fish (you can get it at Half Price Books for less than $7).

I’ve got this book on order now, it will be a change from reading how we came from apes, no I do think it sounds like a good book.

Do you think we lost the wings to protect us from bird flu.

No. Please don’t be stupid. If you bothered to read the book, or any other science article written by some with at least a high school education in science, you would know that humans got the bird flu when a strain of the virus mutated, enabling it to infect humans.

But, if you choose to remain deliberately stupid and deliberately ignorant simply because some Swindlers and Liars For Jesus lied to you that science education is an evil communazi plot, please, be our guests. Just don’t complain when people notice how stupid you sound.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Matt Young published on July 24, 2013 8:31 AM.

Young sex chromosomes are very active was the previous entry in this blog.

Ideas for figures - comments welcome is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.38

Site Meter