If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Survey of American public's scientific knowledge reveals improved familiarity with basic science, and declining belief in alien abduction, astrology, Bigfoot, and evolution   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 534
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

7978 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Feb 2007 at 7:03 PM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



534 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
mike_d85
2007-02-17 07:44:14 PM
tbn0.google.com
 
nmrsnr [TotalFark]
2007-02-17 07:44:22 PM
mreuther
I suggest you reread your history. The Ptolemaic version of epicycles was around since the time of (duh) Ptolemy a thousand years before Copernicus or Kepler. The system of epicycles is a correction of a perfect circular orbit that makes it more elliptical, so if you added an infinite number of epicycles you eventually get an ellipse. The Ptolemeic system was well on it's way to just that when Copernicus said that it would woork with far fewer epicylces if we put the Sun in the middle. He did not espouse the truth of his own statement explicitly (and I don't believe anyone knows what he actually thought). Still, he was afraid of the Church and only published his work on his death bed. Kepler never had any real problems with the Church at all, and was a very religious man himself. As for Galileo, his famous confrontation with the Church was more political infighting than it was an actual aversion to the truth of his statements. Remeber, nothing got published in Italy without the Church's OK, and the Dialogue did get published, meaning the Pope saw it and OKed it (he actually liked it) it wasn't until he was convinced that the character of Simplicio (the dumb one who believed in the geocentric model) was a mockery of him that he got Galileo in trouble.

/the more you know
 
airdish2
2007-02-17 07:45:20 PM
boot20:

I think Bevets gave up. Haven't seen him in an evolution thread for a while. We're just incorrigible.
 
proteus_b
2007-02-17 07:45:39 PM
nmrsmr

because, if everyone only learned what they absolutely needed to survive, there wouldn't be an internet, tv, electrical generator, or even a wooden spoon in the world.
 
mreuther
2007-02-17 07:46:05 PM
I am amused by the terms that come up, like "scientism". WTF is that?

I want to what is exactly the difference between "microevolution" and "macroevolution". Explain precisely the mechanism that prevents one (without the intervention of Jaysus) but permits the other.
 
HeHeHe
2007-02-17 07:46:19 PM
I'm bored.

Summon Bevets
 
Xaxor [TotalFark]
2007-02-17 07:47:58 PM
dstaggs

Firstly, I was not completely serious. This is Fark after all. Secondly, it was not an urban/rural distinction in my mind. It was more related to the subsets of America. You can have fundamentalist Christians in the heart of Houston for example. Of course, the fundies are the most visible of such groups, but it still has nothing to do with rural/urban. It's more a matter of ubringing and schooling, one provided by parents and family, the other by the state.

I'm a horrid troll if I really am one.
 
no pants
2007-02-17 07:48:00 PM
from this thread i can tell that what we gain in scientific knowledge, we loose in grammar and spelling.

i hate it when people mistake the there's, the its, the here's and spell lose as loose.

Alright, call me an idiot, but I don't get it. Was the first part of this post where you said "loose" supposed to be ironic?
 
kidkeno
2007-02-17 07:48:40 PM
zolividor


kidkeno:
/ The science facts that we're true in the 1700's are not the same true science facts today in 2007.

You're saying that the volt, measuring temperature in Celsius, lightening as an electrical discharge, hot-air ballooning, the chemical battery, the inverse square model of gravity, light waves, gas pressure, and finite speed of light are not factual any longer?
........................................
Nope, simply things we take for granted now..We have bigger scientific fish to fry these days which will be old school within 3 to 5 short yrs. instead of waiting every 40 of 60 yrs for something new and revolutionary to come along. Everything is speeding up at a very high rate of speed...get it sparky ??
 
Sybian_Ride
2007-02-17 07:49:21 PM
Scientology has all of the answers. Just go take yourself to your local Scientology center and get audited. Bring some cash too, you'll need it.

/Take two of these Vitamins and make a deposit to account #xxx-xxx-xxx in the morning.
///Love, LRH
 
etymxris
2007-02-17 07:49:28 PM
co-conspirator: We are heading towards a bimodal distribution...

That explains all the flamewars online.
 
Bad_Seed
2007-02-17 07:50:38 PM
kidkeno

I think you might be a bit confused as to the meaning of the word "fact", sparky.
 
further
2007-02-17 07:50:45 PM
Drasancas: Corrent spelling

Corrent spelling and cromulent grammar are the hallmarks of an embiggened mind.
 
Sybian_Ride
2007-02-17 07:51:04 PM
Poor little clams, snap snap snap.
 
nmrsnr [TotalFark]
2007-02-17 07:51:15 PM
proteus_B
That's not what I was advocating. I sort of hid it in a short line "I am all for people having access to all the information they want to learn." If you like science (and I am one of those people) go and learn science to your heart's content, but if you really have no desire for such learning, why be forced to take classes in it? Those who wish to learn should have no obstacles, but those who wish to forego knowledge that is inapplicable to them get my sympathies too.
 
no pants
2007-02-17 07:51:50 PM
Scientology has all of the answers.

That much is obvious. After all, by the definition of its suffix, it is "the study of science."

As far as I know that should make it the most scientific and factual, errr, stuff... ever.
 
zolividor
2007-02-17 07:53:06 PM
kidkeno:
get it sparky ??

No, that is rather different from your first statement. The fallacious logic you are employing is called "moving the goalposts".
 
mreuther
2007-02-17 07:53:41 PM
So, Father Tommaso Caccini never denouced Galileo's theories as dangerous and close to heresy? And Cardinal Roberto Bellarmino never told Galileo to never teach nor advocate the Copernican theory of heliocentrism?

The more you know, indeed.
 
qqqq
2007-02-17 07:54:44 PM
Wake up EUroweenies and leftists, I repeat.

Chavez is your dog. Like it or not BushHitler is smarter than many.

True but not convenient.
 
kidkeno
2007-02-17 07:55:03 PM
Bad_Seed - Location: United Kingdom
kidkeno
I think you might be a bit confused as to the meaning of the word "fact", sparky.
...............................................
This coming from a guy who lives in a toothless country where the Muslims will be running the show there within 5 more yrs..
/How that for "fact"

// You should go get fitted for your Burka before the rush..
 
entropic_existence
2007-02-17 07:58:07 PM
mreuther: I am amused by the terms that come up, like "scientism". WTF is that?

I want to what is exactly the difference between "microevolution" and "macroevolution". Explain precisely the mechanism that prevents one (without the intervention of Jaysus) but permits the other.

Depends on the context. While some will come in and say they aren't used in science they are. But not in the same way that the anti-evolution people use them. The anti-evolution people can't even decide where the divider lies. Probably around whatever they define as "created kinds" at the moment. In evolution we simplify it to macroevolution being microevolution + much more time. There is research and debate as to what, if anything, else is needed. (That is where theories about speciation such as punctuated equilibrium come in to play)
 
Bad_Seed
2007-02-17 07:58:11 PM
kidkeno

Oh, it's nothing personal. You just don't know what the word "fact" means. There are several other people in the thread who've tried to point that out. No need to go off on a lame troll.
 
Damnhippyfreak
2007-02-17 07:58:55 PM
2007-02-17 07:54:44 PM qqqq

Whoh. Either I need to put the bong down, or qqqq does. I'm really not understanding :D
 
nmrsnr [TotalFark]
2007-02-17 07:59:14 PM
mreuther
Indeed, those events did occur, and after the injunction Galileo went on teaching because the original injunction did not have the words "do not teach" in them (or so Galileo calimed). That contention is what got him the house arrest, after all. Rather the impetus for getting Galileo into trouble was not the subversion and heresy of his words, but rather the political whims of the man who currently happened to be the Pope. And (since it's been a while since I read up on my history) I believe it was Cardinal Bellarmino who convinced the Pope that the Pope was simplicio. So if Bellarmino had been some lesser official the whole episode might have been avoided.
 
jordan_lund
2007-02-17 07:59:33 PM
I think what kidkeno is talking about are more health related science facts. For example, in the 1700's the idea of the "four humours" was still in common practice, doctors didn't know to wash their hands between patients, etc.

This kind of evolution of scientific opinion hasn't stopped either. I remember when I was a kid they had us brush our teeth in class. One year they said the best way to brush was "in little circles". The next year they said "oops, we were wrong, you're supposed to brush up and down now."

Or when they said margarine was better for you than butter. Then they said, oops, turns out margarine is worse for you.

Or moving from the 4-4-3-2 dietary guideline to the food pyramid, to the new revised food pyramid.
 
AlanSmithee [TotalFark]
2007-02-17 08:00:52 PM
I've always found bimodal distributions very nice to look at.
 
elchip
2007-02-17 08:01:00 PM
I heard someone tying "Bigfoot" and "aliens" together. He believed that Bigfoot was an alien... a semi-intelligent creature from another planet that was endangered, so aliens took some of them and deposited them on Earth... using Earth as basically some sort of animal sanctuary. And Bigfoot wasn't quite clear about the fact that he was on another planet... so the noises and drumming they make are them calling out to other Bigfoots, hoping they hear the proper response to indicate the presence of another one.

/This was on the radio
//This guy seems to believe in every single conspiracy theory out there
///http://www.michael-lynch.com/
 
thisispete [TotalFark]
2007-02-17 08:02:08 PM
So what exactly constitutes basic science for the purposes of this study?
 
odinsposse
2007-02-17 08:03:38 PM
nmrsnr

Why do people need to be literate in science?

Because America is a republic. Citizens vote for officials and laws. These can have a dramatic effect of science. For example, if the country voted in a large majority of creationist idiots there would be incentive for politicians to stop funding research that relies on evolutionary theory. Which means most of modern biology would die. Citizens have to make decisions that effect science so it would be nice if they made informed decisions.
 
captainktainer
2007-02-17 08:04:51 PM
kidkeno: This coming from a guy who lives in a toothless country where the Muslims will be running the show there within 5 more yrs..
/How that for "fact"

// You should go get fitted for your Burka before the rush..

Wow... qqqq has won the prize for most accumulated stupid in a thread, but you really are your own kind of moron, aren't you?
 
cthu1hu
2007-02-17 08:05:04 PM
mdalli: ...except that evolution isn't science. It's an even bigger scam than anthropogenic global warming.

Except that all these sciences rely on evolution is some way:
biology
geology
geophysics
genetics
hydrology
vulcanism
astrophysics
astronomy
atmospherics
climatology
physics
radiometry
cosmology
chemistry
 
Mnementh2230
2007-02-17 08:08:44 PM
Good stuff except the decline in belief in evolution - that's just wrong... "Lets get all the facts straighter... except when it comes into a supposed conflict with our religion"
 
kidkeno
2007-02-17 08:09:15 PM
jordan_lund

I think what kidkeno is talking about are more health related science facts. For example, in the 1700's the idea of the "four humours" was still in common practice, doctors didn't know to wash their hands between patients, etc.
.....................................
Yes Jordan, thats part of it. Remember when drinking & smoking in the late 40's and 50's during pregnancy was a common thing. Spraying all our food with poisons back then was the norm. Our knowledge base doubles every 18 months now. What I'm saying is we've come further in the last 70 yrs then the last 2000, and now we're in hyper drive as far as science & Technology are concerned..
Now we know better. and the beat will keep going on until the Nukes fall on all our heads.
 
nmrsnr [TotalFark]
2007-02-17 08:09:48 PM
odinsposse
I was expecting someone to raise that argument. I think it fails because to what level of literacy do you expect people to really achieve? I think the scientific method is really all they need, so that when asked a question of whether they should trust the opinions of religious leaders versus scientists on matters of evolution they have the presence of mind to ask "what tests have been done to demonstrate the claims?" or "is there a way to even test the hypothesis?" and then they will be presented with the fact that evoultion has 100+ years of observation and falsification behind it while there can be no test to creationism. But that is a far cry from requiring students to remeber the DNA stays in the nucleus while RNA is the one running around getting DNA duplicated.
 
Salieri_82
2007-02-17 08:10:00 PM
i6.photobucket.com
 
Drasancas
2007-02-17 08:10:09 PM
further

Drasancas: Corrent spelling

Corrent spelling and cromulent grammar are the hallmarks of an embiggened mind.

That error was intentional.

Really.
 
Emerson999
2007-02-17 08:10:38 PM
Science, from a newspaper? I'm sorry, it's almost never possible to understand a study based on popular reporting. The fact that people think it is speaks even more strongly about the horrid state of scientific understanding among the public. They may be getting better at spitting out memorized facts, but that's a far cry from actually understanding the scientific method. Someone who can only read his own name isn't literate, and a person who doesn't have a basic grasp of scientific methodology, something never reported in popular presentations of scientific and technological findings within papers, isn't scientifically literate.
 
nmrsnr [TotalFark]
2007-02-17 08:10:46 PM
P.S.-- I really didn't mean to open this up to a creationism/flamewar debate, it was just the most appropriate example I could come up with.
 
Damnhippyfreak
2007-02-17 08:11:42 PM
2007-02-17 08:02:08 PM thisispete [TotalFark]

So what exactly constitutes basic science for the purposes of this study?

That's a damn good question. Maybe not in the context of this particular study, but the wider question "what is basic science literacy?". I've always thought that sometimes what is taught is too many facts without the much more important skill of critical thought which is the basis of science. Science is a *methodology*, not just the accumulated knowledge.

Food for thought.
 
towatchoverme
2007-02-17 08:12:23 PM
You're saying that the volt, measuring temperature in Celsius, lightening as an electrical discharge, hot-air ballooning, the chemical battery, the inverse square model of gravity, light waves, gas pressure, and finite speed of light are not factual any longer? Sweet.

"In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"
 
reillan
2007-02-17 08:13:48 PM
mreuther
Creationists remind of the folks back in Galileo's day, who could not bear the thought that the earth orbited the sun.

Can I scare you a bit?

I have a couple of books (merely because when I saw them, I just about died laughing) that were written in the late 90s where a guy offered proofs that the Earth is the center of the universe and everything rotates around it. He proclaimed that the Bible says everything rotates around the Earth, so he was going to set out and prove it.

A website with information about the book

So unfortunately, there are still creationists out there who even believe, and are led to believe by people with PhDs, that modern astronomy is total bunk!

/I'm a Christian... but I think people who write this tripe make baby Jesus cry...
 
towatchoverme
2007-02-17 08:20:21 PM
Everyone always pisses and moans about the fact that China is producing all our cheap crap and manufacturing jobs have gone there.

You want to be scared?

They produce 500,000 engineering grads each year and are closing on 1 million per year. India has 350,000 per year. The US produces 75,000.

They don't want to produce our cheap crap and knockoffs. They want to design the next big thing that you and i will want to buy ... build it ... and sell it to us.

That's what a decline in scientific literacy buys you -- economic ruin. Unless the US can innovate and produce first, it's going to fall behind.

A 28% scientific literacy rate isn't the way to get ahead. And a passionate belief in Jehovah and Son won't save the economy.
 
cthu1hu
2007-02-17 08:24:53 PM
reillan: So unfortunately, there are still creationists out there who even believe, and are led to believe by people with PhDs, that modern astronomy is total bunk!

There's a certian farkette around here who believes that.
I'm not going to name namers though.

/Alexandra
 
Bevets [TotalFark]
2007-02-17 08:25:48 PM
But there also has been a drop in the number of people who believe evolution correctly explains the development of life on Earth and an increase in those who believe mankind was created about 10,000 years ago.

Rules of atheism "Science":

Rule #1 God is IRRELEVANT
Rule #2 If God is relevant, see Rule #1
Rule #3 If God might be relevant, see Rule #1

Evolutionism is the tinfoil hat atheists wear to keep God out of their brainwaves.
 
swiftheart
2007-02-17 08:26:49 PM
The thing this article doesn't address is how the issue of people believing more in pseduscience topics (such as astrology) is a problem.

I understand the issues with the creationism v. evolution debate. Children raised believing in creationism are missing out on some very basic biological sciences. That affects society's ability to train future scientists, engineers, and keep the general populace on a good track of development.

On the other hand, what's the big deal about someone believing that an Aquarius is their best choice for lifelong partner? Or that they should date a Scorpio because people of that sign are notoriously good in the sack?

Since a lot of pseudoscience stuff deals with things like love and relationships (as noted in the article) it's hard for me to see the connection that it affects the development of society as a whole.

After all, the Chinese still retain strong beliefs in their astrology system (this year is the Year of the Pig and people are going mad to have children this year) and India has a well developed astrology system.

Neither country seems to have issues churning out scientists and engineers.
 
Sybian_Ride
2007-02-17 08:26:49 PM
no pants:

Uhh.. dude I was joking about $cientology having all of the answers... I think they're a brainwashing cult.
 
zolividor
2007-02-17 08:28:16 PM
towatchoverme

Good point. To expand on your comment, one can foresee a widening income gap between the scientific "haves" and the anti-science "have-nots". I am sure future preachers will decry the dwindling tithes as their flocks are economically "left behind".
 
reillan
2007-02-17 08:30:00 PM
Crud... I was going to try to cast a counterspell before he could get summoned...
 
Sybian_Ride
2007-02-17 08:31:01 PM
Anybody have Howard101 on right now listening to all the good music recorded live in the past 20 years?
 
Abagadro
2007-02-17 08:31:15 PM
The bot has spoken. Thus endeth the thread.
 
Displayed 50 of 534 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all


Redisplay/refresh comments

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Report
Report
From the Fark Shop:
More from the Fark Shop » 
Report