Posted on 11/28/2005 6:54:46 AM PST by Right Wing Professor
Intelligent design — already the planned subject of a controversial Kansas University seminar this spring — will make its way into a second KU classroom in the fall, this time labeled as a “pseudoscience.”
In addition to intelligent design, the class Archaeological Myths and Realities will cover such topics as UFOs, crop circles, extrasensory perception and the ancient pyramids.
John Hoopes, associate professor of anthropology, said the course focused on critical thinking and taught how to differentiate science and “pseudoscience.” Intelligent design belongs in the second category, he said, because it cannot be tested and proven false.
“I think this is very important for students to be articulate about — they need to be able to define and recognize pseudoscience,” Hoopes said.
News of the new class provided fresh fuel to conservatives already angered that KU planned to offer a religious studies class this spring on intelligent design as “mythology.”
“The two areas that KU is trying to box this issue into are completely inappropriate,” said Brian Sandefur, a mechanical engineer in Lawrence who has been a vocal proponent of intelligent design.
Intelligent design is the idea that life is too complex to have evolved without a “designer,” presumably a god or other supernatural being. That concept is at the heart of Kansas’ new public school science standards — greatly ridiculed by the mainstream science community but lauded by religious conservatives — that critique the theory of evolution.
Hoopes said his class would be a version of another course, titled Fantastic Archaeology, which he helped develop as a graduate student at Harvard University.
The course will look at the myths people have created to explain mysterious occurrences, such as crop circles, which some speculate were caused by extraterrestrials.
The course will explore how myth can be created to negative effects, as in the case of the “myth of the moundbuilders.” In early American history, some people believed the earthen mounds found primarily in the area of the Ohio and Mississippi river valleys were the works of an ancient civilization destroyed by American Indians. The myth contributed to the Indian Removal Act of 1830, which relocated American Indians east of the Mississippi to lands in the west, Hoopes said.
“It was that popular explanation that then became a cause for genocide,” Hoopes said.
That example shows the need to identify pseudoscience, he said.
“What I’m trying to do is deal with pseudoscience regardless of where it’s coming from,” he said.
But Sandefur said intelligent design was rooted in chemistry and molecular biology, not religion, and it should be discussed in science courses.
“The way KU is addressing it I think is completely inadequate,” he said.
Hoopes said he hoped his class stirs controversy. He said students liked to discuss topics that are current and relevant to their lives.
“Controversy makes people think,” he said. “The more controversy, the stronger the course is.”
"How come you're so new and you know my habits? "
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/user-posts?id=32680
You're in a lot greater danger if you don't believe in gravity than if you don't believe in evolution.
You could just google "mamzelle astronauts", you know. Your footprints aren't exactly hidden, nor is the fact that this anti-evo kick is merely your latest hobby.
In humor, there is truth.
It's what I do. Thanks for the fun.
together for a sneer-fest.
Oh drat! I thought it was a BEER-fest.
True and yet we don't really know what gravity is
True and yet we don't really know what gravity is
Gravity is when the stuff on top on my mashed potatoes doesn't stay up at the top.
Creationists should pray that science doesn't go all the way and challenge the existence of God altogether. Granted, science can't dis-prove the existence of God, but it can put such faith into the same category of Islam, paganism, etc. Things that have no affirmative evidence at all.
I've taunted my share of astro-fanboys--maybe because I know them very well, and would like them to get a better life. But if you want to start a new thread on the subject, you're welcome to. There's a new Armstrong bio coming out--have at it.
Granted, science can't dis-prove the existence of God
Nothing can disprove or prove the existence of God but the faith of the individual in him.
But do you understand that human races are not subspecies? There just isn't anywhere near enough variation there.
There's just no pleasing some people.
My definition of "faith" is something that one believes in for no rational reason other than the fact that they want to. If there were a rational reason, then we'd study God in science class, and the scientist that discovered how to detect and measure Him would be as famous as Newton or Einstein.
In other words, faith is wishful thinking.
And you're on this thread to contribute . . . what?
Almost like an alert goes out.
Would appear to be an effective hint to hint--
Perhaps I misunderstand the article, then. In reading it I understood that the idea was to keep religious motivations out of the science curricula and put them into courses concerned with mythology, etc.
Why, you did.
Maybe that fellow who emailed me with such solicitous courtesy, asking me for personal identification? I knew better than to trust him.
I'm sure I don't know what on earth you're talking about. OCD with a touch of paranoia, perhaps?
There's a new Armstrong bio coming out--have at it.
Need a new catbox to poop in, do you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.