anniemiz

You Tell Me That It's Evolution

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved. - Charles Darwin

Went to the American Museum of Natural History the other day.  Every time I go I leave, thinking, we should go there more often, it's such a great place.  Kevin took Friday off and we went to see the Darwin exhibition.  Neat stuff!  The website's Darwin stuff is pretty much in line with what's in the exhibit, if you're interested.

The exhibit and website have sections devoted to the 'theory' part of the theory of evolution.  I was wondering if and how they'd address the intelligent design/creationism business.

I interrupt this post to note that His Spotted Greatness has very adorably cuddled up against me this very moment.  For your pleasure, a view of said spot:

.

.

.

.

.

.

Anyway, back to Darwin.  There's info re: what a theory is; misuses of the theory of evolution; 'social' or non-scientific responses to the theory of evolution; and a timeline of controversies surrounding the theory.  The timeline mentions the Dover, PA court case, wherein:

The Dover, Pennsylvania, school board rules that high school biology teachers must read a statement to students alleging "gaps" in Darwin's theory and advocating Intelligent Design as an alternative explanation. Seeking to block the requirement, eleven parents take the school board to court.

It looks like the timeline was prepared before the conclusion of the case, so it does not mention that the parents won.

Of course, the Museum took a rather straightforward approach to maintaining the scientific nature of the theory of evolution.  I mean, one wouldn't expect the AMNH to get all in yer face about IDC.  I hope that anyone who went there with an undecided mind found it at least helpful in understanding why evolutionists reject most of IDC (i.e., that it's not science).  The exhibit also notes that the theory of evolution is compatible with religion (for the most part; I guess if. e.g., you're a young earth/literal creationist, there'll be conflicts).

I've often wondered what is the best approach to such kinds of issues (e.g., IDC, the war in Iraq, etc.).  I like to think that reasonable debate and discussion would rule the day, but, well, it doesn't.  On matters of little import, who cares?  But when lives are at stake (e.g., American and Iraqi), what to do?  What are we justified in doing?  And how would we know we're justified in doing something?  We're not at all objective in the matter.  And, heck, we can't even figure out how S knows that S is justified in believing that S knows that p.

There's also info on Darwin's private life.  I had no idea there was much intermarriage between the Darwins and the Wedgewoods (they of Wedgewood pottery fame) and that he married his first cousin, Emma Wedgewood.

A methodical man, Darwin drew up a list of the pros and cons of marriage—and what he called the "nice wife on a sofa" won out. [emphasis in the original]

...

"Children-(if it Please God)—Constant companion, (& friend in old age) who will feel interested in one,—object to be beloved and played with.-better than a dog anyhow.—Home, & someone to take care of house-charms of music and female chit-chat.—These things good for one's health.-but terrible loss of time.—."

Seems like Chuckles had a sense of humor about him...'better than a dog anyhow'?

BTW, I want a study just as cozy and inviting as Darwin's.  Is that not an inviting room?

And no Darwin exhibition would be complete without TortoiseCam.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

The gift shop has all kinds of Darwin-related stuff: books, puzzles, models of the HMS Beagle, clothing, knick knacks, etc.  We bought a kids' book about evolution for a young friend, as well as the fellow you see here.  She's sure to be the only kid on the block with a Charles Darwin doll.

If this philosophy thing doesn't work out, I guess I can always make dolls: Darwin's made by The Unemployed Philosophers Guild.  Some of their other products from their website:

• Nietzsche's Will to Power Bar
• other dolls: Socrates, Marx, a 'plush, earnest Jesus', and sweet raisin danish, but it's a Jane Austen doll!
• Freudian slippers
• Anti Establish Mints, National EmbarrassMints, IndictMints
• Lost Civil Liberties Mug: 'Mug features the complete text of the Bill of Rights, but pour in a hot beverage and see what remains thanks to the Patriot Act!'
• Great Philosophers Magnetic Finger Puppet Set: Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Plato and Kant
• die-cut Wittgenstein blank card with stickers
• Sisyphus watch

Oops! They Did It Again

'Vote early and vote often,' the advice openly displayed on the election banners in one of our northern citites. - William Porcher Miles, speech in the House of Reps., March 31, 1858

As long as I count the votes, what are you going to do about it? - William Marcy Tweed (Boss Tweed of Tammany Hall) on the ballot in NYC (November 1871)

Yes, I voted today.  If you voted, great.  If you didn't, you can keep your kvetchin to yourselves.

In other election news, Kansas does it again:

Risking the kind of nationwide ridicule it faced six years ago, the Kansas Board of Education approved new public-school science standards Tuesday that cast doubt on the theory of evolution.

The 6-4 vote was a victory for “intelligent design” advocates who helped draft the standards. Intelligent design holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by a higher power.

Critics of the new language charged that it was an attempt to inject God and creationism into public schools, in violation of the constitutional ban on state establishment of religion.

...

The new standards say high school students must understand major evolutionary concepts. But they also declare that the basic Darwinian theory that all life had a common origin and that natural chemical processes created the building blocks of life have been challenged in recent years by fossil evidence and molecular biology.

In addition, the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.

This link doesn't say what is the new definition of science, but I am right curious about it.  I'd go looking for more info and write more about this, but Typepad ate the first attempt at this post and I don't feel like doing it all over again.

He Didn't Fall. He Was Pushed.

First there was 'intelligent design'; now there's 'Intelligent Falling': "Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory".

"Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, 'God' if you will, is pushing them down," said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.

...

According to the ECFR paper published simultaneously this week in the International Journal Of Science and the adolescent magazine God's Word For Teens!, there are many phenomena that cannot be explained by secular gravity alone, including such mysteries as how angels fly, how Jesus ascended into Heaven, and how Satan fell when cast out of Paradise.

The ECFR, in conjunction with the Christian Coalition and other Christian conservative action groups, is calling for public-school curriculums to give equal time to the Intelligent Falling theory. They insist they are not asking that the theory of gravity be banned from schools, but only that students be offered both sides of the issue "so they can make an informed decision."

"We just want the best possible education for Kansas' kids," Burdett said.

...

"Let's take a look at the evidence," said ECFR senior fellow Gregory Lunsden."In Matthew 15:14, Jesus says, 'And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.' He says nothing about some gravity making them fall—just that they will fall. Then, in Job 5:7, we read, 'But mankind is born to trouble, as surely as sparks fly upwards.' If gravity is pulling everything down, why do the sparks fly upwards with great surety? This clearly indicates that a conscious intelligence governs all falling."

Oh my head.

Ya know, I got no problem wrt people believing in and practicing whatever religion they want (as long as they don't harm others in the process).  Heck, they can believe anything they want about anything they want.  Why do they feel the need to force everyone else to learn about and believe their beliefs?  I really, really, really don't understand why some religious types think it necessary for their religious-based beliefs to be taught in public schools.  During the school year, I'll estimate that children spend about 30% of a 7-day week in school.  I'll also guess that - for better or for worse - parents are the biggest influence on children. Do these people not think they can successfully pass on their beliefs to their children without the aid of public school instruction?   These efforts to include religious-based instruction in public schools appear to me as manifestations of adult insecurity wrt their own religion and beliefs.

Say I believed this stuff.  Why in the world would it be necessary for my (imaginary) kid's public school to teach intelligent design or intelligent falling?  Why should the Muslim kids in town (and they are a sizable minority) have to put up with hearing this stuff?  These aren't Muslim theories.  These aren't even mainstream Christian theories.  Can these folks really not see that they are doing exactly the same thing as those they call 'closed-minded gravitists'?

(via Leiter Reports)