Once again, I'm reminded why Carl Zimmer is one of our best science communicators. His latest "Missing the Wrist" at Discover Magazine provides a cogent summary of the idiocy of the "teach the controversy" movement espoused by the Discovery Institute and its fans, with my emphasis:
We're all for open and objective discussions of scientific theories, right? Who wouldn't be? If your kids are taking physics in high school, you want them to read critiques of gravity, right? After all, shouldn't they know that there are some serious weaknesses in the theory of gravity? Right? For instance, the theory of gravity says that gravity makes things fall down. But planets don't fall into the sun. They go around it. So which is it - down or around? Clearly the theory of gravity is deficient. Right?
Wrong, of course. You don't teach critical thinking with patent nonsense.
Wrong, of course. You don't teach critical thinking with patent nonsense.
Zimmer patiently and civilly eviscerates the latest non-science criticism of Tiktaalik from the non-scientists at the DI. Zimmer illuminates the difference between actually doing science, as Shubin and the other professionals do, and resorting to factually-deficient challenges. Those erstwhile challenges emphasize the necessity of actually undergoing extensive scientific training and study before venturing to criticize the work of other experts in the field.
If Luskin were offering a real scientific hypothesis, he could do an anlysis of lungfish, Tiktaalik, tetrapods, and other vertebrates - comparing not just their limbs but their heads, spines, and so on to figure out their evolutionary relationships. That's exactly what Shubin and his colleagues did in their original paper on Tiktaalik. They compared 114 traits on species from nine different lineages of tetrapods and their aquatic relatives, including the lineage that produced today's lungfish. And that analysis shows that Tiktaalik is more closely related to us than to lungfish.
Luskin apparently doesn't need to do this sort of science. He can just announce what seems right to him personally.
If this is the sort of stuff that's used to promote "critical thinking" in Louisiana classrooms, don't be surprised to hear about the great gravity hoax.
Luskin apparently doesn't need to do this sort of science. He can just announce what seems right to him personally.
If this is the sort of stuff that's used to promote "critical thinking" in Louisiana classrooms, don't be surprised to hear about the great gravity hoax.
If you're a fan of intelligent yet accessible science writing, check out Zimmer's site.
Please note - I won't be around the 'net for the rest of the day. Please keep the comments civil.
posted by Cheryl Shepherd-Adams
