🚀 go-pugleaf

Greetings jj, curmudgeon

jj, curmudgeon and tiring philalethist wrote:

> In article <3937E7E8.CD1F3CE2@flash.net>, Bob  <rdwillia@flash.net> wrote:
>
> >My original position was a posting of the "16 Theses" which were felt to be
> >valid objections to the current Theory of Evolution. The page contains a
> >request to various members of the education community to include these
> >Theses in the teaching of  Evolution, if they are not found to be in error.
>
> And the theses are found to be completely ill-taken, constructed of
> straw men, misrepresentations, misunderstandings, and the like,
> and therefore they have no possible place in a school, except
> as examples of misleading rhetoric.

Yes, this is your opinion. But unless you are "Universal Authority", you may be as
wrong as you suspect the Theses are. As has been requested before, why not just
simply refute one of them and by this you will show the vulnerability of the
author. The reply to the post above yours suggests a refutation of Thesis # 12.
All you have to do is show the falsity of even one of the arguments and the the
whole Thesis will come apart. It could probably be done in less space than your
rounding condemnation, above.

Your denunciation is probably the tenth/twelfth. Where are the arguments?
Shouldn't it be evident by now. that the reason for such posts is to exchange
ideas, not condemnations. You have voted many times against the Theses but where
are the arguments.

> I think that every school should require a rhetoric class, where
> such "theses" as these (those are quotes of contempt to be sure)
> are examined, deconstructed, and shown to be the nonsense that they
> are.

Teachers note. Excellent idea! That is exactly what I propose. Put contrary ideas
such as those of the 16 Theses out for your students to discuss. Let them write an
essay on how "wrong", "stupid", "constructed of straw men, misrepresentations,
misunderstandings" they are. This is exactly the point of the thread, "teaching
evolution". Challange Darwin's theory.

But before you do, work up some arguments that are contradictory toward them; as
you can see, you will get no help from anyone in this thread. All they seem to
know about them is that they are "wrong", etc. (But see the reply by McDermott
above).

> Furthermore, anyone who can not explain the nonsensical nature of
> such "theses" should not be able to graduate from jr. high.

The real problem is, in reality, that those who are unable to explain them by way
of refutation, have already graduated.

Bob

> Copyright jj@research.att.com 2000, all rights reserved, except transmission
> by USENET and like facilities granted.   This notice must be included.  Any
> use by a provider charging in any way for the IP represented in and by this
> article and any inclusion in print or other media are specifically prohibited.