Comments on: Teaching the controversy in the UK http://wongablog.co.uk/2006/11/27/teaching-the-controversy-in-the-uk/ like balloons, only with dancing Sat, 06 Sep 2008 23:43:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Andrew http://wongablog.co.uk/2006/11/27/teaching-the-controversy-in-the-uk/#comment-4844 Andrew Mon, 04 Dec 2006 00:23:14 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2199#comment-4844 Quite. I guess it would be a good way to demonstrate how scientific controversies actually manifest themselves, should ID campaigners ever get this kind of requirement onto the curriculum. Quite. I guess it would be a good way to demonstrate how scientific controversies actually manifest themselves, should ID campaigners ever get this kind of requirement onto the curriculum.

]]> By: Skuds http://wongablog.co.uk/2006/11/27/teaching-the-controversy-in-the-uk/#comment-4843 Skuds Mon, 27 Nov 2006 23:09:08 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2199#comment-4843 "this wouldn’t constitute a scientific controversy. What would? Hard to say" Most scientific controversies are, I suspect, very specialised and difficult for most of us to follow. There is one famous one though, and within the field of evolution, so if they are so keen on teaching the controvery they could propose teaching about the argument/row concerning gradual evolution vs. punctuated equilibrium. (As if you couldn't guess I would bring this one up) One side says that evolution occurs all the time at more or less the same pace. The other side says that there are long periods where not much changes and then short periods (in geological terms. Still thousands of years) when lots of mutations occur, new species crop up etc. Only one theory can be right, but both are proposed in a proper scientific way, unlike the stealth creationism of ID. “this wouldn’t constitute a scientific controversy. What would? Hard to say”

Most scientific controversies are, I suspect, very specialised and difficult for most of us to follow.

There is one famous one though, and within the field of evolution, so if they are so keen on teaching the controvery they could propose teaching about the argument/row concerning gradual evolution vs. punctuated equilibrium. (As if you couldn’t guess I would bring this one up)

One side says that evolution occurs all the time at more or less the same pace. The other side says that there are long periods where not much changes and then short periods (in geological terms. Still thousands of years) when lots of mutations occur, new species crop up etc.

Only one theory can be right, but both are proposed in a proper scientific way, unlike the stealth creationism of ID.

]]>