Going Hollywood

[Libralabrat]

I have been sticking around the FSM board mainly just to tie up loose ends. I have noticed some interesting changes there in the tone.....

But here is my main observation: Since the book has been moderately successful, it seems that the science has been dumbed down and the marketing aspect has been played up. I still do not speak as freely as I would, and certain wanna be supermods have taken on a tone so magnanimous that the smug waves are sucking all the oxygen out.

I have seen this before. Those of you from the south may recognize the name Kenny Wayne Shephard.He was a moderately successful white blues guitarist. He made one moderately successful album in the mid 90s. Since then, he has done little except proclaim that he is the second coming of Stevie Ray Vaughn.....

I think this may be what Bobbo is experiencing. Lets face it. The FSM idea is simply a slightly modified variant of the IPU set to a more marketable form.

Hopefully, this forum will encourage more scientific discussion. As I have recently discovered that several of my colleagues are creationists, I realize what a hard job we have ahead of us. IF people who work in a heavy science field such as medical laboratory research and testing believe in creationism, what hope is there for your average high school student?

[Aggie]

Their prospects are looking up, at least wherever you're going to be teaching.  Teach 'em to read a nutritional label while you're at it. 

Re: loose ends...  me too, but one just tied itself off (), and most of the others are negotiating the login process. 

[Teripie]

It was recently revealed here, that the majority of middle school children, locally, can not tell time on an old fashioned clocks with hands. They rely on digital clocks. Teaching science has got to be tough in a society where we don't even seem to be teaching the basics.

[Sibling Chatty]

I've discovered that i'm in a school district where they avoid the problem by NOT TEACHING ANY OF IT. ?? These kids literally get NO information about "that stuff" except what's in the textbook and the science magazine articles that the biology teacher assigns them to read.

And they wonder why the kids get out of school and move away...

(Hi there, LLR. )

[Sibling Lambicus the Toluous]

In the first class of grade 10 geography (where we'd get a grounding in geology as well), our teacher announced that he was a young-Earth creationist and didn't believe that the world was billions of years old, but would teach us the curriculum anyway.  He did teach the geology unit (including everything about the age of the Earth, Pangaea and all the rest of it), and nothing more was said of the issue.

It does make me wonder, though.  I think it's likely that most people accept whatever they're brought up with; I don't think most creationists or "evolutionists" would be able to adequately explain why they believe what they do.

In the sciences, though, I do wonder how someone would get through school while fundamentally disbelieving much of what they're being taught.

Especially in petroleum geology.  I've heard of young-Earth creationist geologists that somehow find oil (Agujjim - didn't you say something about that?); I don't know how someone could do that and still reconcile their professional knowledge with their personal beliefs.  That's the one that really leaves me scratching my head.

(Welcome, LLR!)

[Aggie]

Hmmm... there was a link I think.  Those types insist that oil is "spontaneously generated" by geological or subterranean biological processes. 

There's limited evidence that there may be mechanisms that could account for some oil production, but not the lot of it.

[Swatopluk]

I have ashamedly to admit that when the battery in my digital watch expired and I had to wear a "normal" one for a few days that lacked numbers. I noticed some difficulties to get the time on first sight. I actually had to think for a moment where which number is located and how the hands stood in relation to them.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

It does make me wonder, though.  I think it's likely that most people accept whatever they're brought up with; I don't think most creationists or "evolutionists" would be able to adequately explain why they believe what they do.

Some do.  Some, like myself, do not.

I was brought up in one of those fundamentalists sub-groups of evangelical Christians.

Fortunately, I had a pair of parents who not only thought for themselves, but taught that habit to their offspring.  It stuck to two of us - one is still hopelessly "lost" in non-think.

But, as a result of being taught to think first, I began to ask the hard questions at a very early age (pretty much as soon as they occurred to me).

Within my family, we often had pretty deep theological discussions around the dinner table - from when I was a wee laddy, up until today, actually (had dinner with my folks, and we eventually got around to theology).

Anyway - over time, when the hard questions were not adequately answered, I deliberately and with forethought, changed what I "believed" in.  It took years, of course - one does not simply drop the mental habits of a lifetime in a day.

Looking back, I choose to be what most would term  agnostic.  I prefer "quantum-faith" (from Schrodenger's cat, except with having faith and not having faith). 

So, I am one of those who did not keep what I was raised with, theologically at least.  I DID keep the "think for yourself" habit ...

... what hope is there for your average high school student?

Well, people like YOU, for one!