|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Earth science curriculum tailored to fit wavering fundamentalists | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
Faith, I did not response to you or refer to you in that post. RAZD suggested a well thought out science experiment and I responded as to it's value. Full stop.
Please be respectful of the thread topic and discuss verifiable science. ThanksJB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
Faith writes: RAZD was responding to ME, TAD, not to you, Faith, notice that the RAZD post that I quoted from includes a note to me (#450):
quote: See how that portion was direct SPECIFICALLY at me and not at you. I only responded to what RAZD directed at me. I had no comment whatsoever on this conversation with you. Before you insist that I was continuing a discussion you are involved in, please read what is written. I will not be having ANY exchanges with you other than to ask you to respect the thread topic. Nothing more. JB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
petrophysics1 writes: Now you've shown that things are sorted by size and specific gravity in water. Excellent idea. Different sizes of same materials as well as and same sizes of different materials. I wonder if anyone has ever worked out any formula for this and was able to predicted the results? ThanksJB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
ThinAirDesigns writes: I wonder if anyone has ever worked out any formula for this and was able to predicted the results? I should have been more clear than just the big grin that I had moved to humor. I have a long background in engineering with a fair bit of aero thrown in so I'm reasonably familiar with the formula, Reynolds numbers, etc. Sorry to throw everyone off track, but it's just another demonstration of how folk on this thread are super willing to help and educate. Appreciated.JB |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
Just before the thread post rate went through the roof, I asked a question in Message 222 that may have simply been lost in the crowd. It also may be just that biology isn't well represent among the participants, but I'll ask it one more time. If there's not local answer, I'll find a forum where I can get it answered and report back.
ThanksJB quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
kbertsche writes: I would view plants as a reservoir. Their growth pulls CO2 out of the atmosphere. Their decay puts most of it back into the atmosphere, but also sequesters a small amount in the soil. Thanks. That makes a ton of sense. The reason I wanted that understanding is so I can create a hypothetical calibration curve, one that would show what the curve *would* look like if what Morris was saying was true. There would be serious departures in the steady line shown in the actual curve if it were true. It's interesting to read where may YEC sites now say radiocarbon dating is no good past about 4000BC. This allows them to fit it in to the biblical artifacts where they want to use it, but claim it's unreliable otherwise. JB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
Tangle writes: It's a complex question, generally plants and trees (and blue-gree algae) have been regarded as a net consumer of CO2. But as the climate warms, that reverses. Apparently 2003 was the first year when they produced more than they absorbed. That's very interesting how that would change. The 'battery' part is rather easy to understand though. ThanksJB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
RAZD writes: Also google carbon sequestration Ah yes ... don't know why I didn't think to search that term. The Wiki link for that is excellent. Thanks for that and the other info. JB Edited by ThinAirDesigns, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined:
|
LOL, yeah - it's that biblical water canopy theory on one site and magnetic fields on another and rotting vegetation on another and sequestered rotting vegetation on another. It's always something.
In reading the history of the multiple failed and surviving creation "science" organizations, it's funny how most of them failed by breakup due to no one being able to agree on what version of the Creation/Flood story to "prove". That's what happens when you dive in with your mind made up ... every story that someone decides on needs a different set of evidence. JB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
Wow -- who'da thunk that people have spend entire lives working out the ability to predict such fine details. That really is something that people who have been sheltered (willfully or otherwise) from the world of science don't realize.
I was telling a family member about the CERN large hadron collider and describing it's forerunners (such as SLAC) and the shutdown of the amazing SSC in Waxahatchie. She really had no idea that humans expended SO much effort attempting to learn how things actually work. I could tell she still had no idea as to the scope of human effort planet wide related to science so just to rock her world I explained the 17 mile long tunnel and then showed her this picture:
She couldn't fathom that sort of project just to explore things we can't see. I'm pretty sure she has imagined all her young life that science operates just like the religion she knows -- new knowledge in that realm comes from some charismatic (or charlatan) fundamentalist theologian interpreting portions of the bible in some new way and argument ensues. If enough people are convinced to follow the new guy a split occurs. Groups die and are born based purely on the ability to persuade folk of some meaning of some text. Fingers are pointed. Accusations of apostasy are hurled. In the end, nothing REALLY settles it. Science is SO different from that and I have to figure out ways to show them that. JB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
kbertsche writes: Perhaps you mentioned it earlier (or perhaps you don't want to be too specific on a public forum), but what part of what state do you live in? I think you mentioned "the South", but that's a lot of territory. I ask because there are likely some good science labs nearby that you could take your relatives to visit. After nearly 35 years in the SF Bay area, currently reside near Chattanooga, TN. Suggestions welcome. JB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
kbertsche writes: Oak Ridge National Lab would be a good field trip for your friends and relatives. There's lots of good science going on there, including the SNS, which is a high power proton linear accelerator. The ORNL is legendary in my family due to the despicable way they treated Robert Gentry, the Seventh Day Adventist man who while doing research there proved beyond a shadow of a doubt through polonium halos that the earth was created ex nihilo just a few thousand years ago. Once he proved this conclusively and exposed their satanic lies, they blacklisted him from the scientific community and destroyed his reputation and his work. His example is proof that the scientific community is evil and isn't interested in the truth at all but will terrorize anyone brave enough to go up against it. Great story ... all true. (EDIT: I'm not always good about make sure folks get my version of humor. The above story is true only from the perspective of my family). I grew up at the base of Lookout Mountain, staring up at Covenant College soon after it became such. The only scientific instrument I was allowed as a child was a 6" reflector telescope. From my house I entertained myself watching activities through the College windows. I'm staring at it out my window now. Having such a local resource as your friend would be FANTASTIC. Appreciated.JB Edited by ThinAirDesigns, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
One of the things I'm up against with fundamentalists is as you know, the position: "Science is often wrong and has been wrong about almost everything at one time or another, so why should be we believe science on anything".. This has been just *drilled* into the young minds for generations and they of course can come up with scores of examples to highlight that position.
When they say to me "Turns out science was wrong about X", my first and honest reaction is to grin and say "Yeah, ain't it cool? Science insists on change as new information comes to light." For me, growing up in a rigid environment where everything was supposedly perfect and fixed for eternity (when I could see it wasn't), the relatively supple nature of science was freedom to explore and discover. To me that's a strength of science, not a weakness and I really can't help but smile when I think about the changes science has gone through. But then I broke free of the programming fairly early. Here's the weird part -- no matter how much they complain about science being wrong, they drive cars packed with technology and use satellites to spread "the word of God" (just two examples). No matter how much they bitch about the "traditional medical establishment", when their life is on the line they dial up 911 (from their cell phones) and beg to be taken to an emergency room. I have to figure out a way to get them past the "Science can't be trusted because it makes mistakes" programming. They fly on airliners for crying out loud. Yes, I know it will take time, but I'm in for the long haul. My methods need to be just step by step, but I do need a plan in the curriculum. Do you folk think that as science has broken free from theology it has come to react faster to mistakes than in the past? Do you think that as science participation has multiplied (exponentially?) more eyes on the prize have created a more robust correction mechanism? Was the 1300 years of scientific error between Ptolemy and Copernicus caused by lack of scientific participation, lack of scientific tools, or theology holding science back (or all of the above)? Perhaps it's just wishful thinking on my part, but it seems to me that science has the basic knowledge, the tools and the participation to be far better at getting things right in a timely manner than in the past. JB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
JonF writes: Asimov covered that issue very well in The Relativity of Wrong (I think that's not it's original publication). Oh, that is PERFECT!! Thanks JB
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThinAirDesigns Member (Idle past 2404 days) Posts: 564 Joined: |
kbertsche writes: Many people don't realize it, but Galileo's earliest and strongest opposition came from academia, not from the Church. In fact, the Church encouraged Galileo's early telescope investigations. But the academics had significant pull with the Church, Galileo was very abrasive, and eventually the Church turned against him. That's really interesting and highlights something that I've wondered about as I read the accounts -- there was a delay of something like 65 years between the death of Copernicus (and the publishing of his seminal work) and the decree that his book(s) be put on the banned list of the church. I never could figure out why that delay. Would love to read more about that. Distinctly different from the Catholic Church, the Protestant reformers (Calvin, Melanchthon, Luther, et al) responded quite rapidly with denouncement. I've always wondered why the Protestants responded 50 years quicker than the Catholics and then why after waiting so long, the Catholics responded with such fervor. JB
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024