Skip to main content

View Diary: Creationist Demands Critical Thinking in Indiana (34 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No, just no. (10+ / 0-)

    The last thing we want is for every single teacher to be legally obligated to humor every disruptive asshole who phrases his or her disruption as a demand for proof.  "All right class, what's 6 x 6?  That's correct, 36."  "PROVE IT!"  And the teacher is bound by state law to do so?

    Auto-shop, "The catalytic converter helps remove pollutants from the exhaust gas."  "PROVE IT!"  Now, do you really need to know the exact reactions, or the statistical efficiency of a catalytic converter in order to be able to fix a car?  Really?  But now the kid who just doesn't want to admit he's not prepared for class is empowered to create a diversion, probably frustrate and embarrass the teacher, and ruin the educational process for everybody else in the room.

    And just try to show a high-school chemistry class the math that underlies molecular orbital theory in chemistry.  Just try.  Not only can't you do it, there's no go reason to do it.  The theory does a good job of predicting and explaining behavior without needing to go into advanced mathematics.  Those can be filled in later in a student's career.

    "And the President of the United States - would be seated right here. I would be here. And he would be here. I would turn - and there he’d be. I could pet ‘im." - Lewis Black

    by libdevil on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 09:20:55 AM PST

    •  Easy.... (4+ / 0-)

      What is so hard in proving 6x6=36? It is pretty straight forward. Duh!

      The multiplication operation in the domain of integers Z is written ×.

      Let us define [[(a,b)]]⊠ as in the formal definition of integers.

      That is, [[(a,b)]]⊠ is an equivalence class of ordered pairs of natural numbers under the congruence relation ⊠.
      ⊠ is the congruence relation defined on N×N by

      (x1,y1)⊠(x2,y2)⟺x1+y2=x2+y1.

      In order to streamline the notation, we will use [[a,b]] to mean [[(a,b)]]⊠, as suggested.

      As the set of integers is the Inverse Completion of Natural Numbers, it follows that elements of Z are the isomorphic images of the elements of equivalence classes of N×N where two tuples are equivalent if the Unique Minus between the two elements of each tuple is the same.

      Thus multiplication can be formally defined on Z as the operation induced on those equivalence classes as specified in the definition of integers.
      That is, the integers being defined as all the Unique Minus congruence classes, integer multiplication can be defined directly as the operation induced by natural number multiplication on these congruence classes.
      It follows that:

      ∀a,b,c,d∈N:[[a,b]]×[[c,d]][[a×c+b×d,a×d+b×c]] or, more compactly, as [[ac+bd,ad+bc]].

      This can also be defined as:
      n×m
      +nm=m+m+⋯m

      ... and the validity of this is proved in Index Laws for Monoids.

      It is possible to read the history of this country as one long struggle to extend the liberties established in our Constitution to everyone in America. - Molly Ivins

      by se portland on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 10:01:34 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  They only asked for 6x6, not the entire universe (0+ / 0-)

        of integral arithmetic.  And it can be demonstrated by content, by addition, and by division (and therefore by subtraction). But thanks for using ∀ and ∈, as I haven't seen "for every" and "is an element of" since geometry class.  You left out "there exists" and "such that" though.  My geometry teacher made sure we learned all that notation by lots and lots of repetition of them in proofs.

        •  I love Unicode (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          se portland

          There are character pickers now on all operating systems that let you do this, and formula editors in all major word processing software, as well as in math software. I do this stuff in Libre Office, Character Map, and GeoGebra on Linux.

          e^iπ+1 = 0

          (P⊃Q)⊃((Q⊃R)⊃(P⊃R))

          Unit classes: (x)(∃y)((x∈y)∧(∀z)((∼(z=x))⊃(∼(z∈y))))

          You're welcome.

          America—We built that!

          by Mokurai on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 05:40:54 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  I had a foolish tenth-grade English teacher (3+ / 0-)

        who was harassing an English class one time with the notion that none of us could define 3. I was in the middle of Quine's Mathematical Logic at the time (one of my father's textbooks), and quoted a recursive definition in which 0 is the unit set of the empty set, and each integer is the set of sets such that removing one element leaves a member of the previous number. Take a set with three members, remove one, there are two left. QED.

        Settled his hash.

        Not the only time, either. He hated teaching high school, and took it out on the students with some frequency. Fortunately, he enjoyed having a student who was good enough to beat his challenges. I was glad to be able to protect the others from him as much as I could.

        America—We built that!

        by Mokurai on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 05:22:38 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  It's a two part strategem (14+ / 0-)

      They intend for this to only apply in biology class.  They just can't say it that way because every time they try to do so, creationism gets struck down in courts.

      They're going to teach their children to harass the teachers, instead.

      Because, you know, that's not anti-social or anything.  It's christian.

      •  I Saw (5+ / 0-)

        a video of that worthless freak Ken Ham inciting an auditorium full of creationist children to greet any attempt to talk about the ancient world with "Were you THERE?"  The obvious answer, of course, is "You weren't there either, you little turd, now shut up and show some respect for the scientists your Gawd created!"

        There's no cure for stupid, and won't be if you keep cutting the funding for the research.

        by Ref on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 10:33:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  They want it in geography glass too (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ER Doc, madhaus, PeteZerria

        ...so they can teach kids that the Earth is flat.

        They want to get rid of math altogether — though a handful of elite students in the higher grades will be chosen to be taught numerology.

        Social studies will remind them every day that a woman is half a man & that dark-skinned people exist to pick the cotton.

        At any rate, the time to stop these Dominionist scumbags is now — before coercive exorcism has the force of law.

        Remember Savita Halappanavar!

        by Brown Thrasher on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 10:36:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Their ideology is weak. (3+ / 0-)

          They still believe in almost all of science.  They just don't understand that the same rigorous process leading people to understand how to build microwaves and rocketships also rejects their mythology.

          So I don't think there's any danger of them teaching numerology or flat Earth.  They want to learn science just as much as anyone.  They just desire to teach people that where religion conflicts with science, religion supercedes science.

          Instead of the 'correct' way of things.  Science superceding religion, where there are conflicts.

          •  It's authoritarianism, again (0+ / 0-)

            If your child doubts the creation myth, they could question anything else in there.  So no matter how loony their post hoc ergo propter hoc science is, they do it for the children. Because freedom.

          •  Also, it's supersede (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LilithGardener

            Just came from the language diary.  :). Supersede is the only word that ends in -sede. There are only three words that end in -ceed (including please proceed, governor, also succeed and exceed).  The others end in -cede.

            Do you concede?

          •  Actually, I gave a link to how much science (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LilithGardener, Brown Thrasher

            they have to deny to maintain their hallucinations. They can't have quantum mechanics and relativity, because they let the sun shine for billions of years, and they can't have astronomy, because that puts galaxies billions of light years away, and they can't have biology, all of which depends on evolution, and they can't have geology, and so on and on.

            All they have is their notion that Jesus is incompetent to save them unless the Fall is literal history. So, to my mind, they aren't even Christians. (To be fair, ThatIdiotPaul did write, "If Christ be not risen, then our faith is in vain," even though Jesus told people that their faith had saved him before he was crucified.) As conclusively demonstrated by the racism, bigotry, misogyny, and Mammon-worship inherent in Creationism, notably Curse of Ham theology.

            Racism is the specific reason why Young Earth Creationism, particularly Flood Geology, took hold of the South during the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s. You can't tell angry Southern White men that they are descended from Black Africans like the rest of us. They are so angry about that that they won't even say that that is their objection. Instead they go on about descent from "monkeys". Well, we know that Dog Whistle code.

            Darwinism
                The theory (some say "religion") that all humans, including rich White Southern males, are descended from monkeys, that is to say, from Black Africans, even though we know that Adam was White, and Africans are Black because of the curse of Ham.

            America—We built that!

            by Mokurai on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 06:08:45 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  They don't actually have to deny much. (0+ / 0-)

              They believe in all science, except the parts that are just somehow 'wrong' because it's a lie from Satan.  'Straight from the pit of hell', as someone recently famous might say.

              It's ridiculous, but it goes like this.  The very world around us is so broken.  So corrupt.  So vile with Sin that our senses, our scientific ways of knowing...  Are fundamentally corrupt.  Our senses and our minds desire Sin, they will conspire to show us things, to let us discover lies, and objectively and inevitably arrive at falsehoods.

              Sin controls science, in other words.

              The only people who can know the truth of things are those that reject the worldly truths that are based on corrupted Sin-related beginnings and start with an axiomatic beginning including the bible.  (Since the bible is holy, Sin does not come from it.  Throwing it out, as scientists do, is seen as evidence of their allegiance to Sin.)

              Sin created the fossils.  Sin created the light in transit.  Sin created the geology of the rocks.  Sin created everything in the universe that seeks to undermine the Truth.  Sin created the ability to doubt the Truth.

              All of this happened when the fruit from the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil was eaten.  That disobedience created Sin.  And Sin broke the universe so badly that science cannot work without a beginning axiomatic guide to reality (the bible).  That must've been some epic fruit.

              The upshot is, they only have to reject science when it has a direct and immediate contradiction with theology.  Quite simply, if there seems to be a contradiction?  There's not.  Somehow, god prevents what you think is a contradiction from being one at all.  Have faith, regardless of the world, because the world, at its very foundation, lies to you.  God performs miracles, and that explains what you don't understand.

              Fuckin' miracles.

              Personally, I think this is cosmic horror of the first degree, worthy of Lovecraft, but some people think this is pretty awesome.

      •  But my point is that he wrote his proposal (0+ / 0-)

        so badly that its effect would be to allow us to harass them. They can't only demand proof from us, and then deny that it is proof. They have to put up or shut up. And we get to teach our children how to point and laugh.

        America—We built that!

        by Mokurai on Sat Dec 08, 2012 at 05:43:16 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  From their viewpoint... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mythatsme

          We're already harassing them by insisting on the false doctrine of godless science.

          Making it legal for children to harass teachers and bring any class to a halt is just making the playing field even.  It's also providing a service to children by preventing them from learning the wrong things.  Or, learning at all.

          Probably what would happen is that some children would eventually catch wind of this process occurring, and try to avoid tests (and prove how silly they can be) by bringing ridiculous challenges.

          "Hey!  You can't prove that Hawaii really does exist!"

          "What's the evidence the Earth is round?"

          And so on, it's easy to come up with millions of these things without much thought.  And like the 'missing link' the challenges can never be satisfied.

          Probably the next thing that would happen is that school principals would just tell everyone to ignore the law, then when some fundie parent hears a challenge from their (sadly) persistent, ignorant child was snubbed, they'd sue the district.

          School destruction achieved.  Which is the real fundie goal, by the way.  Teaching evolution at all is unfair.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site