SAN FRANCISCO — It was the last day of training camp before the preseason opener, but the first time the Warriors practiced on the new Chase Center court. It was the first time, also, that Draymond Green addressed the media since camp opened. After spending almost five days with his new teammates, Green had come to an important conclusion.“You can teach some things about basketball, but you can’t really teach IQ,” Green said. “This seems to be a pretty smart team. There’s not really any …
“The stakes are high,” said Constance Holden in Science,1 and both sides in the Dover, Pennsylvania case would probably agree – with equal trepidation. The ACLU is representing 11 parents who sued the Dover school board for ruling that intelligent design should be taught as an alternative to Darwinian evolution in their public high schools (05/27/2005). (This policy was later reduced to having administrators read a one-minute statement to students in their classrooms—01/11/2005.) The ACLU is arguing that “teaching ID is an unconstitutional establishment of religion,” and is supported by Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the National Center for Science Education. Why would the secular scientific establishments fear the outcome, after a long string of successes in the courts? Holden quotes ACLU lawyer Witold Walczak: “If we prevail, it’s not going to be a knockout punch… if we lose, … you’re going to see intelligent design taught in schools all across the country.” To try to prevent a loss that “could be a disaster,” according to Holden, the ACLU has lined up 25 witnesses, including “experts in philosophy, theology, science education, and mathematics as well as two veterans of the ID wars, Brown University biologist Kenneth Miller and paleoanthropologist Kevin Padian of the University of California, Berkeley.” ID proponents also have reason for concern. The leading ID think tank, the Discovery Institute, does not advocate mandating the teaching of intelligent design, and tried to pre-empt the situation by advising the Dover school board against it. “…they’re worried about a big court defeat,” in the words of a plaintiff counsel quoted by Holden. Now that the suit has come, it puts them in a difficult position of defending the right for students to hear alternatives but not endorsing the action of the Dover board. On advice of counsel, Stephen Meyer and William Dembski dropped out of the defense, leaving only Michael Behe and Scott Minnich to testify. Miller senses the defense strategy is to try to present as small a target as possible.1Constance Holden, “ID Goes on Trial This Month in Pennsylvania School Case,” Science, Vol 309, Issue 5742, 1796, 16 September 2005, [DOI: 10.1126/science.309.5742.1796].It is indeed lamentable that a scientific dispute, one that should be aired in the open marketplace of ideas, may come down to the decision of one or a few judges. Because courts do not generally have the kind of knowledge about these subjects to rule wisely, it becomes almost a matter of luck for either side, depending on which judge winds up on the bench. Will the court be swayed by the sheer numbers of alleged experts, or by the force of the arguments? If a judge rules that “ID is not science” will that make it so? Scientific positions are supposed to be evaluated on the preponderance of evidence, not by majorities of experts or judges. Any parents, school board members, public officials, activists or writers interested in giving ID a chance should learn to be very careful in their approach. Charging out with well-intentioned but misguided enthusiasm can do more harm than good. The strategy that is likely to succeed in these matters is defensive, not offensive. No one wants to hear authorities “mandating” anything – certainly not a position on a controversial issue. What makes sense to courts, politicians, and the public is defending students’ rights against indoctrination. The Darwinists have had unrestricted power to pour their philosophy into student heads without challenge. A large majority in the public feels that is wrong. Science is not supposed to be about indoctrination, but about critical thinking. That is the strong point of the “teach the controversy” approach to the origins issue. Progress in that strategy will bring much-needed fresh air into one of the most important issues facing the country. It is likely to garner the most supporters willing to fight past the Darwinist gestapo to open the doors and windows. Fresh air has tremendous healing potential.Food for thought: Based on their actions and proposals, which side is apparently the most confident that an open and fair examination of the evidence will lead to vindication of their views?(Visited 7 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Top Reasons to Go With Managed WordPress Hosting A Web Developer’s New Best Friend is the AI Wai… 8 Best WordPress Hosting Solutions on the Market As struggling newspapers file for bankruptcy left and right, the quest is on to find the new business models for news consumption in a new digital age. Recently the New York Times announced that it has begun investigating and testing a system for placing some of their content behind pay walls based on a daily allowance of free articles, but this may just be a new spin on an old trick. Entrepreneurs are needed to help the news industry as it shifts online, and that’s precisely who the Knight Digital Media Center (KDMC) is targeting for an expenses paid seminar this May.The KDMC is a partnership funded by the Knight Foundation between the USC Annenberg and the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism. Hoping to discover the next Adrian Holovaty, founder of local news aggregator EveryBlock; or David Cohn, creator of crowd-funded reporting site Spot.Us; the KDMC will be hosting the 2010 News Entrepreneur Boot Camp. “This intense one-week boot camp is designed for 20 competitively selected digital entrepreneurs with great ideas for community news and information initiatives in the public interest,” a description on the KDMC homepage says.Accepted applicants will be provided with food and lodging for the week-long seminar as well as a stipend to assist with travel costs. The KDMC will be bringing in expert professionals and professors to speak at the seminar and provide “coaching and virtual-learning during a six-month follow-up period.”For media entrepreneurs with an idea for changing the way media is consumed and monetized, this forum could be a valuable opportunity to receive feedback and network with other like-minded individuals. As new platforms like the iPad add to the mix of new media opportunities, perhaps all that is needed are some entrepreneurial minds to stir the pot. The KDMC is taking applications now, and the deadline to apply is February, 19.Photo by Flickr user katerha. chris cameron Tags:#events#start Why Tech Companies Need Simpler Terms of Servic… Related Posts
The decision of the Punjab government to appoint six Congress legislators as Minister-rank advisers to Chief Minister Amarinder Singh has come under severe criticism from the Opposition parties, which on Tuesday accused the government of overburdening the State exchequer.Five of the MLAs appointed by the government are in the rank and status of Cabinet Minister while one is in the rank and status of Minister of State.Demand for withdrawalLeader of the Opposition and Aam Aadmi Party MLA Harpal Singh Cheema warned that if the decision is not immediately withdrawn, the party will explore legal remedies as the move is an attempt to “bypass the constitutional cap on the size of the State Cabinet”.“When Punjab is already struggling with huge debt burden, giving Cabinet Minister-level amenities to MLAs will bring great loss to the public exchequer,” he said.“We are exploring legal remedies if the State government does not immediately take its decision back,” added Mr. Cheema.The five MLAs in Cabinet Minister-rank are Kushaldeep Dhillon (Faridkot), Amrinder Raja Warring (Gidderbaha), Sangat Singh Gilzian (Urmar), Inderbir Bolaria (Amritsar) and Kuljit Nagra (Fatehgarh Sahib). Tarsem Singh (Attari) has been accorded the rank of Minister of State.The Shiromani Akali Dal also condemned the Congress government for burdening the State exchequer. Former Minister Bikram Singh Majithia said “it seems the Congress is trying to save its government from collapse and has in this process decided to fritter away the scarce resources of the State to its partymen”.“This amounts to daylight robbery of the State exchequer. With the latest addition, the total number of political appointees in the State government have risen to 26. What’s the logic of the move except to fatten its legislators at the exchequer’s expense,” said Mr. Majithia.Claiming that the appointments were illegal and against constitutional norms, he said: “Legislators can’t hold office of profit which these appointments are.”BJP’s national secretary Tarun Chugh told reporters that the decision was an attempt to circumvent the Constitution (91st Amendment) Act, 2003. Mr. Chug said that under the law, the strength of Ministers cannot exceed 15% of the total members of the House. With Punjab Assembly having 117 MLAs, the maximum strength of the Council of Ministers can be 18, and including the CM, the State already has 17 Ministers.