Critical thinking versus indoctrination

I feel compelled to say something about an article published by American Thinker yesterday -- an article strangely critical of critical thinking, titled "The Great Critical Thinking Dodge." The article describes critical thinking as the means by which liberals "shut out and shout down" the scientific method but in my opinion, nothing could be further from the truth. Liberal academics absolutely love the scientific method, and actually use it as a weapon to discourage critical thinking skills.  Liberal teachers don't want to teach their students to think for themselves -- they want students to simply believe what they have been taught. In July of 1925 the Scopes Monkey Trial was held because critical thinking in schools was literally illegal -- students could only be taught creationism in science class, not Darwin's theory of evolution via natural selection. From September to November of 2005, the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial was held because critical thinking is still illegal -- students can only be taught the theory of evolution in science (not philosophy) class, and teaching intelligent design is illegal. Apparently the goal of education isn't really to teach young people how to think, but what to believe. Indoctrination is not optional. Most people believe that Darwin's theory of evolution is true, well supported by copious amounts of scientific evidence. Biologist Jerry Coyne even wrote a book titled Why Evolution is True. An overwhelming consensus of biologists agree that the evidence is overwhelming. "Critical thinking" about the theory of evolution … [Read more...]

Why evolution is probably false

I've never wanted nor pretended to be a biologist. I prefer to blame this possible character flaw on the fact I never liked dissecting animals, or the smell of formaldehyde. My approach to science has always been "need to know" -- meaning if I decide that I need to know something, I'll put a little effort into figuring out how it works. In the years since graduating from college I have certainly learned how to make children and grandchildren. For the longest time, I felt like that was enough knowledge of biology to satisfy my curiosity; I knew how to do my part to perpetuate of the species, and that was all I thought I needed to know. When these evangelists for atheism like Richard Dawkins began using their belief in evolution as justification for attacking belief in the existence of a creator God, I decided it was probably time for me to learn a bit more about this theory used to justify their claims of having eliminated the possibility that a supernatural God could exist. The Business Dictionary provides an excellent definition that I like which describes information as "Data that is (1) accurate and timely, (2) specific and organized for a purpose, (3) presented within a context that gives it meaning and relevance, and (4) can lead to an increase in understanding and decrease in uncertainty." As a former professional software developer, that definition seems both useful and apropos. Computers accept raw data as input. Software applications inside the computer process that raw data to convert it into useful information. The key phrase in the definition … [Read more...]

The problem with speciation theory

Speciation is the scientific theory attempting to identify the biological mechanisms by which a single ancestral species of organism differentiates, or "evolves", into more than one descendant species. The term "macro evolution" is often substituted inappropriately for speciation theory, creating the false impression that speciation is nothing more than a logical extrapolation of Darwin's theory of natural selection. But it isn't. As I wrote in my book Counterargument for God, either two members of the same ancestor species eventually spawn offspring of a new species, or members of two different species produce a fertile hybrid species. There doesn't really seem to be a viable third alternative, at least not one that doesn't involve creation by some form of supernatural intelligence. In an effort to clarify my understanding of how speciation theory supposedly worked, I wrote an open letter to biologist Dr. Jerry Coyne, author of the book Why Evolution is True. Apparently, Dr. Coyne couldn't find time to respond. However, his fellow biologist, Dr. Benoit LeBlanc, was kind enough to answer my questions. Dr. LeBlanc confirmed that my "basic understanding of the [speciation] process was sound", but suggested the reason my conclusions were all wrong because I simply don't know enough about biology. No offense intended, he said. None taken, Dr. LeBlanc. But I am still confused. In my analysis of Dr. Coyne's work previously deemed sound, I noted he speculated that speciation only seemed possible when a small breeding population comprised of members of a … [Read more...]