Quote:
|
Teaching evolution as one possibility for the beginning of life? Sure. But other possibilities should at least be mentioned as well, specifically the Creation theory common in several religions.
|
The reason for teaching evolution in school, as I understand it, is that it is because it is a huge part in the foundation of biology (along with cell theory). It isn't because there is some huge movement to dethrone the belief in god. Evolution is taught in schools because it is a cornerstone of biology. And we teach biology in schools because it helps us better understand this world. So many "advancements" today come from this field; medicines, better crop yields, vaccines, etc. Biology is a fundemental science and Darwin's work played a huge role in accelerating it. That is why it is taught. To be quite frank, when creation theory is up to parity in terms of tangible benefits and understanding the world around us, then I'll accept it being taught in public schools.
Quote:
|
I find it curious that the people who share my views on the climate are actually Meteorologists who teach the classes at the community colleges and State Colleges where I attend night classes. I have had a chance to meet several of them and many work for organizations like NOA, NASA, and NaRL here in the DC area. It is usually a pony-tailed hippy wannabe with a non-science degree that is pushing the "Global Climate" issue.
|
You do realize that James Hansen, head of the NASA Goddard Insitute played a huge role in bringing current climate change into the public spotlight. Hell he was being censored by the government and nearly lost his job.
John Holdren, one of Obama's newly appointed scientific advisors, is also another well respected scientist who has been doing research on climate change. He came to my school in fact and gave a damn good guest lecture.
And as I said earlier, a large number of professors and researchers in the academia field also don't dismiss it as junk science. The stereotype that it is "pony-taile hippy wanabee's" is true only as far as the general media is concerned. But to say that this is "junk science" done by people without a science degree is a bunch of crock. There are hundreds of well respected scientists doing research on this.
May their conclusions and assumptions be false? Absolutely. But don't instantly label it as junk science. There are actual real scientists doing real work, and I find that you are doing a huge disservice to genuine research when you call their work junk.