3 ms·
"In board testimony, Bigelow said PPS’ science textbooks are littered with words like might, may and could when talking about climate change." Skepticism in sc
by elgabogringo 10y ago
"In board testimony, Bigelow said PPS’ science textbooks are littered with words like might, may and could when talking about climate change."
Skepticism in science? Unacceptable!
- stdbrouw 10y agoWould you accept a geography text that explains to your kids that the world may be round and that the evidence suggests that the earth is not the center of the universe?
- fleitz 10y agoI would accept one that cited the IPCC report noting a warming hiatus for the last 15 years :)
- whatshisface 10y agoI'd support that. Elememtary textbooks contain almost exclusively the seminal theories that we are very sure about. If we expressed our certianty there, kids might get the idea that all of science is similarly so. In science, "the evidence suggests..." is a very high seal of approval. I'd place more emphasis on making them understand that than I would on adding a few nines to their certianty that the earth is round.
- stdbrouw 10y agoCan't say I know what the US curriculum is mostly like, but I was taught about the Bohr atomic model before learning about how they figured out why it wasn't exactly right and we talked about how Newtonian physics was superseded by relativistic physics. There are better ways to express the scientific ethos than to just prefix every statement with "maybe".
- tomp 10y agoAny other formulation is disingenuous. We don't know that the Earth is the center of the universe. Hell, even Elon Musk said we might be in a simulation a few days ago! Ideally, you should also tell the kids which evidence suggests a theory. Elon Musk: The chance we are not living in a computer simulation is 'one in billions' http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/elon-musk-ai-artificial-intelligence-computer-simulation-gaming-virtual-reality-a7060941.html http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/new...
- stdbrouw 10y ago"Knowing" is generally considered to imply that we think something is beyond reasonable doubt. If you can only speak of knowledge in the sense of logical entailment, the word would be useless because then nobody knows anything. Words like "maybe" and "possibly" would also become useless, because they then apply to all knowledge. A distinction that doesn't distinguish between things is not a useful distinction to make.
- kaleidic 10y agoReasonable doubt is a legal term, not a scientific one.
- Joof 10y agoAre we not the center of the observable universe?
- qbrass 10y agoMost of the observable universe is in front of you, so you're not in the center of it.
- darpa_escapee 10y agoSome scientists think the complexity of life might be evidence of intelligent design. Scientists believe the Grand Canyon could be evidence of a global flood 4000 years ago.
- fractallyte 10y agoThese people are not scientists. They conveniently forget that real scientists study independently what these people's own 'God' created. Rather than confront the truth, they retreat to insane (literally: non-sane) ideas about the universe. Disclaimer: I teach computing in a creationist school in London, UK. I refrain from expressing my utter disgust that such places exist.
- fractallyte 10y agoHmm... I'd be very interested in talking to the person(s) who downvoted this. Do you think creationists are scientists? Have you had any extended interactions with them? Have I written something that is - to this audience - inflammatory?
- darpa_escapee 10y agoIt's almost as if climate change denialists ignore actual science in the face of a conveniently profitable ideology, as well.