Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Take Charles Darwin On the Road
Hugh Pickens writes "A team of evolutionary scientists recently traveled to the heart of America, visiting rural schools and communities in Nebraska, Montana, and Virginia to share their excitement about science on the birthday of Charles Darwin, and were overwhelmed with the graciousness, enthusiasm and sincerity of the teachers, school administration and particularly the students that hosted them. 'Over the course of our visits, the questions we received from students were thoughtful and founded in sheer curiosity about the science we presented,' writes MacClain. 'Indeed, the questions were the most exciting part of our collective visits.' Another purpose of the trip was to introduce people to the diverse types of research scientists do, open students' minds to the possibilities of careers in science, and offer an alternative to stereotypes of science and scientists in general. Some criticize the Darwin Day Road Show for being nothing more than a 'Darwinist ministry,' others for it not being more explicit in its discussion of evolution and Darwin, but with this year's success, there will be a Darwin Day Road Show 2012 and the National Center for Science Education is planning to hit all 50 states by 2015. MacClain says the team has found a middle ground that allows scientists to stop communicating at and start communicating with the public. 'It reminds us all that interactions between science and society need not be contentious. At its heart, science is about questions, and we all naturally ask them.'"
Darwin is "wrong" about evolution in the same way Isaac Newton is "wrong" about physics, you stupid troll.
Can a scientist be not "evolutionary"? Can you be an "creationist scientist"? Is creationism even considered "science"?
I interpret "evolutionary scientist" as a scientist specializing in evolutionary biology.
"This algorithm runs in constant time. Come on, 2,147,483,648 is a constant..."
Anything that helps put creationism back in its place- as a fairy story told to and by those who have a hard time with the scientific process...
Or anything much more advanced than 2+2 (which equals 4 for any Creationists reading this.)
Getting kids excited about actual science and rational though processes is a good thing. And needed to help counter what some "people" (note the loose use of the term) try to pass off as science- creationism, "Intelligent Design" and the Flat Earth Society.
Hell, maybe they can get some adults interested in rational thought too!
Linux computers, watercooled, photography
Great, now we have missionaries in science. Fight fire with fire?
Antibody response.
Kind of like the Gay Pride movement, which IMO was a response the the 1980s habit of social conservatives peaking into closets hoping to 'out' homosexuals. Well, now they're out, and the people who were outing them wish they were back in.
Law of unintended consequences, etc.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
A disproof of evolution as a whole would be tricky without finding something springing into existence in a fully formed modern state. Asking to disprove evolution is like asking to disprove gravity the question is too broad to be of much use. Specific theories within evolution are better things to attempt to disprove. Did species A evolve in manner B? Creationism on the other hand fall completely outside of proof because they rely on the intervention of things that aren't measurable or detectable.
Xavier Rabourdin for president 2012