Discoveroids: Let the Children Decide!

The Discovery Institute, having utterly failed in their efforts to achieve any success in the scientific world, are returning to their campain to Teach the Controversy to school children.

They’re promoting yet another podcast at their creationist blog with their latest post: Great Idea: Let Students Debate Evolution! It was written by Klinghoffer. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

In an ID the Future podcast [a pile of creationism, a veritable Vesuvius of vomit] with Robert Crowther [the Discoveroids’ Director of Communications], Sarah Chaffee [whom we call “Savvy Sarah”] makes a GREAT point about science education.

Ooooooooooooh! The podcast makes a “GREAT” point! What is it? Klinghoffer says:

One of the malevolent untruths [Hee hee!] spread by Darwin defenders [The scoundrels!] is that we seek to strip evolution out of school curricula. The truth is that the Center for Science & Culture advocates improving education on evolution by increasing coverage of the subject through adding the element of critical analysis.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! We’ve discussed their concept of critical analysis (or critical thinking) before — see, e.g.: What Is “Critical Thinking”? Then he tells us:

Download the podcast or listen to it here.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! You want it? Click over to the Discoveroids’ post and hunt for the link. Klinghoffer continues:

Sarah is Program Director for Education and Public Policy at the CSC but also a veteran of high school debating who currently coaches high school debaters. As I can confirm from my own high school experience, debate is a fantastic way of sharpening intellectual and communication skills while deepening your understanding of a serious subject. … Imagine the same approach in a biology class when it came time to talk about evolution!

Why stop at evolution? How about debating flat Earth, astrology, Moon landing denial, etc.? Let’s read on:

This would be a wonderful way to train students in scientific thinking — which is not about passively absorbing approved ideas but about analyzing data, weighing strengths and weaknesses of one interpretation versus another, in search of the truth.

Yes, it’s the best way to learn The Truth. Klinghoffer ends his post with a provocative question:

If standard Darwinian theory is really as ironclad as we are commanded to assume, then the exercise should reinforce belief in evolution. What are you afraid of?

Well, dear reader, what’s your response? If you’re really that confident about Darwinism, then let government schools teach the children about Oogity Boogity! You’re not afraid, are you?

Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

16 responses to “Discoveroids: Let the Children Decide!

  1. Well Johnny how does ID work…
    Johnny: Gawd did it! Don’t know how gawd did it. Don’t know how gawd makes it work. Read genesis!
    OK, Judy how does evilution work?
    Judy: for over an hour we hear how the science works and how we are treating diseases, and getting rid of pests, etc. And then goes into how the ID dude is an incompetent ahole for all the things it made badly! If that was how it was done…Judy aint st00pid!

  2. Well, why not, and shouldn’t we let the children decide on the Pauli Principle of quantum states?

    No, I didn’t think so either. Only biology is bestowed this dubious honour.

    And oh, David Kllnghoffer, while we’re at it:
    One of the malevolent untruths spread by Darwin defenders is that we [DI] seek to strip evolution out of school curricula.

    No, that is not what they state. The claim is that you lot try to subvert scientific teaching by introducing supernatural phenomena into it.

  3. “debate is a fantastic way of …..”
    training rhetorical cheapos. Think of the great Duane Gish, famous for his Gallop and not for his scientific contributions.

    “What are you afraid of?”
    Of students not learning the scientific method, aka methodological naturalism. It’s worth repeating Leshner’s quote, presented by our dear SC:

    “But critical analysis, as a slogan embraced by the intelligent design movement, turns the scientific method upside-down,” he said. “Proponents start with their conclusion — that evolution alone cannot explain the origins of humanity — and then construct an argument to undermine evolution. They do no formal experiments to test their hypothesis, and so they have no findings to publish in scientific journals. They produce no hard evidence. They discover nothing.”

    But OK, let me go along with Klinkleclapper a bit. After all what’s turned upside down can be returned as well. Good Golly, Mister Klinkle! That one has been addressed as well several years ago!

    https://www.patheos.com/blogs/daylightatheism/essays/the-two-questions/

    It’s here that the debate should start. Klinkleclapper is, has been and remains invited.

  4. Whenever this comes up, I suggest that the “let the children decide” principle be applied to something which would attract interest in the parents and the public and the kids. And someting whch the kids know something about.

    Should the winner in football and basketball be dedcided, like it is in racing and golf, by the lowest score?

    Or, maybe, to take a somewhat different angle on this:

    Let the kids decide on the Infield Fly Rule (US baseball), icing (hockey) or Leg Before Wicket (cricket).

    Or maybe,

    Let the kids decide whether in recess, they play Calvinball

    Such issues will certainly attract the attention of the people really interested in K-12 eductation.

  5. Michael Fugate

    One of the malevolent untruths spread by Darwin defenders is that we seek to strip evolution out of school curricula. The truth is that the Center for Science & Culture advocates improving education on evolution by increasing coverage of the subject through adding the element of critical analysis.

    Does anyone, even Klinghoffer, believe this?

    Does this “critical analysis” include having students decide if Adam and Eve were the first humans? If the pair were created by a God from dirt and share no common ancestry with other life? If they were created in the very image of said God – whatever that means? If so, how? By debate and popular vote?

  6. Karl Goldsmith (@KarlGoldsmith)

    Great idea David, we should lie to children in every class and let them decide.

  7. Perhaps “let the kids decide” should be extended to Sunday School too? They can, you know, teach the controversy, on biblical criticism, lack of any real evidence, etc.

  8. Michael Fugate

    As I can confirm from my own high school experience, debate is a fantastic way of sharpening intellectual and communication skills while deepening your understanding of a serious subject.

    I take it that Klinghoffer never debated evolution in high school – either that or his misunderstanding was so mountainous his “deepening” had no effect?

  9. @TomS

    Or “Birth Control — We Teach the Controversy”.

    Et cetera.

  10. Would Klingy the Klown be so amenable to debates with Holocaust deniers?
    20th Century history is up for debate, kids: you decide. And students from Jewish schools could debate students from Islamic schools in the Arab nations.

    Why stop there? Armenian students could debate Turkish students. “Genocide: Did it really happen?”

    We already have too much “debate” in our culture between polarized sides, and it’s not doing a thing for critical thinking. Proponents are too committed to their personal agendas, and not to engaging with reality in the spirit of “disinterested inquiry.”

  11. Would the YEC be willing to debate the OEC, the IDers debate the theistic evolutionists, any of them debate the geocentrists or the Flat-Earthers?

  12. An excellent debating exercise is when you argue for the opposite view. In our context we would have an ID supporter arguing for evolution, against somebody who accepts evolution, but argues against it.

    Just for sharpening your debating skills, of course.

  13. If you had been assigned the job of defending creationism, what would you do?

  14. This is of course extra rich coming from a bloke who doesn’t allow even moderated comments on his blog.

  15. The Tooters yammer about high school because they get creamed when they go to a college campus. High schools, they know, cover biology generally and evolution superficially. It’s easy to bamboozle a high school student about the details of a flagellum when students have taken no biochemistry and barely have a concept of genetic mutation and natural selection.

    Even the best of the best, the cream of the, er, crop Tooters get upended if they’re not really careful on college campuses. In 2007, Dr. Dr. Billy “Bottle of Single Malt Bet Welcher” Dembski got his Dr.Dr. handed to him by a biochemist and flagellum researcher at what should have been a softball lecture in a Baptist church basement near Oklahoma University.

    Billy lamented, “You don’t know the steps!”
    Researcher replied, “Yes, I do, and you missed a step. There are four, not three.”
    Billy huffed and puffed, “FOUR? How do you know? Do you know the exact genetic changes?”
    Researcher, “We have examples of each stage of evolution and we’ve identified the genetic changes. So, yes, it’s clear.”
    Dembski, “Oh.”
    Audience, “HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!”

    The Tooters, like all cons, survive in ignorance cloaked in darkness. Remove those and they got nuttin’, honey.

  16. Michael Fugate

    @TomS
    Take the Robert Fitzroy approach:
    Lift an immense Bible over my head and plead with the audience to believe God rather than man.