Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a qualified evolutionary anthropologist
On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:35:31?PM UTC-7, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a
qualified evolutionary anthropologist
Support that.
On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:35:31?PM UTC-7, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a
qualified evolutionary anthropologist
Support that.
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use
of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
The cited video can be divided into two parts. In the first part,
Erika dissects in OCD detail an interview of Jason Lisle by Eli Ayala
on Revealed Apologetics channel:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUhpISXuq1w>
In the second part, Erika shows her participation on a call-in show to
Jason Lisle on StrivingForEternity.Org, which starts @1:12:20.
As a reminder, Jason Lisle is the creator of the Anisotropic Synchrony Convention, which presumes light travels infinitely fast in one
direction, and half the conventional speed of light in the opposite direction:
<https://answersresearchjournal.org/anisotropic-synchrony-distant-starlight/>
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use
of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
The cited video can be divided into two parts. In the first part,
Erika dissects in OCD detail an interview of Jason Lisle by Eli Ayala
on Revealed Apologetics channel:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUhpISXuq1w>
In the second part, Erika shows her participation on a call-in show to
Jason Lisle on StrivingForEternity.Org, which starts @1:12:20.
As a reminder, Jason Lisle is the creator of the Anisotropic Synchrony Convention, which presumes light travels infinitely fast in one
direction, and half the conventional speed of light in the opposite direction:
<https://answersresearchjournal.org/anisotropic-synchrony-distant-starlight/>
On 3/17/2023 8:32 PM, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a
qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use
of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her
Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those
suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
The cited video can be divided into two parts. In the first part,
Erika dissects in OCD detail an interview of Jason Lisle by Eli Ayala
on Revealed Apologetics channel:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUhpISXuq1w>
In the second part, Erika shows her participation on a call-in show to
Jason Lisle on StrivingForEternity.Org, which starts @1:12:20.
As a reminder, Jason Lisle is the creator of the Anisotropic Synchrony
Convention, which presumes light travels infinitely fast in one
direction, and half the conventional speed of light in the opposite
direction:
<https://answersresearchjournal.org/anisotropic-synchrony-distant-starlight/>
The Discovery Institute is asleep at the switch. They used to have a
person responsible for running the bait and switch, but the last that I recall that person moved on after the Utah bait and switch back in 2017
and it looks like they either didn't replace her or her replacement
isn't doing their job. It has been over 5 years since they had to run
the bait and switch on any rubes, and it looks like they screwed up
again. If the Bill does pass the House the ID perps have to convince
the Governor not to sign it. The Switch scam is supposed to have
nothing to do with intelligent design and the Louisiana Switch scam bill never mentions intelligent design, nor does the Switch scam junk
produced by the Texas State board of Education. Both Louisiana and
Texas have tried to teach intelligent design using their switch scam
junk, but every time the Discovery Institute has run the bait and switch again.
From Bill 619 that passed the WV Senate.
QUOTE:
(c) Teachers in public schools, including public charter schools, that include any one or more of grades kindergarten through 12, may teach intelligent design as a theory of how the universe and/or humanity came
to exist.
END QUOTE:
https://ncse.ngo/intelligent-design-bill-passes-west-virginia-senate Something for the NCSE to do. They have a link to Bill 619.
QUOTE:
Before the bill passed, Dale Lee, President of the West Virginia
Education Association, described it as a "solution in search of a
problem," according to the Bluefield Daily Telegraph (February 25,
2023). He added, "We teach WV College and Career readiness standards" — which, like all state science standards across the country, include
evolution but not creationism (including "intelligent design").
END QUOTE:
The issue is that the Discovery Institute ID perps have never developed
an intelligent design public school lesson plan, nor (since the exposure
of Of Pandas and People) have they produced any recommended material
that could be taught in the public schools.
They used to claim that they did not want intelligent design to be
"required" to be taught, but after Louisiana and Texas both wanted to
use the switch scam to add intelligent design and creationism textbook supplements (they had them written and ready to insert into the
textbooks). They claimed that they were not requiring ID to be taught,
just giving the teachers the means to teach it if they wanted to. The
ID perps had to stop them and remind them that the switch scam had
nothing to do with intelligent design. The paragraph that included the
not "required" to be taught that included the claim that they had a scientific theory of intelligent design was removed from the Discovery Institute's education policy, but remained in their education policy in
their teach ID propaganda pamphlet that they put out after their failure
in Dover and that they have updated around ever 3 years since.
Paragraph deleted by the ID perps:
QUOTE:
Although Discovery Institute does not advocate requiring
the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, it
does believe there is nothing unconstitutional about
voluntarily discussing the scientific theory of design in
the classroom. In addition, the Institute opposes efforts
to persecute individual teachers who may wish to discuss
the scientific debate over design in an objective and
pedagogically appropriate manner.
END QUOTE:
The education policy with this paragraph deleted was up on the ID perp's
web site for probably nearly a decade, but I don't know when they
changed it (It was still their policy when they ran the bait and switch
on the Utah creationist rubes in 2017). They do have a new policy up
that they seem to have added last year (just in time to fool the West Virginia Rubes).
https://www.discovery.org/a/3164/
They have it as updated 4/7/2022.
They seem to be back to "not requiring" ID to be taught and this bill
only says that teachers "may teach" the ID scam junk.
This is what the ID perps now claim about teaching the ID scam junk.
QUOTE:
As a matter of public policy, Discovery Institute opposes any effort to require the teaching of intelligent design by school districts or state boards of education. Attempts to require teaching about intelligent
design only politicize the theory and will hinder fair and open
discussion of the merits of the theory among scholars and within the scientific community. Furthermore, most teachers at the present time do
not know enough about intelligent design to teach about it accurately
and objectively.
Instead of recommending teaching about intelligent design in public K-12 schools, Discovery Institute seeks to increase the coverage of evolution
in curriculum. It believes that evolution should be fully and completely presented to students, and they should learn more about evolutionary
theory, including its unresolved issues. In other words, evolution
should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to critical
scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can’t be questioned.
QUOTE:
So they, again, do not want ID to be required, and they claim that most teachers do not know what to teach. The main reason why no one knows
what to teach about the ID creationist scam is that the ID perps have
never produced a lesson plan, nor since Of Pandas and People, produced a textbook with the ID scam junk in it. The ID perps used to recommend
using Of Pandas and People, and Dembski was editing the last edition
when Dover hit the fan. Pandas was shown to be just a name change from creationism to intelligent design, and Dembski's effort got a new title
and was never heard from again. Who even remembers what that book's new title was?
The second paragraph of the current education policy shows why Texas and Louisiana have never implemented the real switch scam state wide. All
they use the switch scam for was to try to get ID/creationism taught,
they do not want to teach enough science for the kids to understand what
they have to deny.
Bill 619 seems to be a really stupid attempt to get creationism taught
in the public schools. What they are trying to do is to amend an
existing regulation where a teacher is not required to change the grade
of a student with respect to promotion to the next grade. It seems to
have been first enacted in 1931, so that teachers could recommend
promoting a student without changing their grade. What this has to do
with allowing teachers to teach intelligent design is anyone's guess.
As the Discovery Institute notes in their current education policy, no
one knows what to teach about intelligent design. There never was a scientific theory of intelligent design to teach in the public schools.
This bill does not claim that intelligent design is a scientific theory,
nor does it claim that the teacher would be teaching it as a science topic.
We will see how long it takes the ID perps to wake up and take notice.
It has been over 5 years since they had to run the last bait and switch
on creationist rubes.
Ron Okimoto
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use
of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
On 3/17/2023 8:32 PM, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a
qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use
of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her
Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those
suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
The cited video can be divided into two parts. In the first part,
Erika dissects in OCD detail an interview of Jason Lisle by Eli Ayala
on Revealed Apologetics channel:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUhpISXuq1w>
In the second part, Erika shows her participation on a call-in show to
Jason Lisle on StrivingForEternity.Org, which starts @1:12:20.
As a reminder, Jason Lisle is the creator of the Anisotropic Synchrony
Convention, which presumes light travels infinitely fast in one
direction, and half the conventional speed of light in the opposite
direction:
<https://answersresearchjournal.org/anisotropic-synchrony-distant-starlight/>
The Discovery Institute is asleep at the switch. They used to have a
person responsible for running the bait and switch, but the last that I >recall that person moved on after the Utah bait and switch back in 2017
and it looks like they either didn't replace her or her replacement
isn't doing their job. It has been over 5 years since they had to run
the bait and switch on any rubes, and it looks like they screwed up
again. If the Bill does pass the House the ID perps have to convince
the Governor not to sign it. The Switch scam is supposed to have
nothing to do with intelligent design and the Louisiana Switch scam bill >never mentions intelligent design, nor does the Switch scam junk
produced by the Texas State board of Education. Both Louisiana and
Texas have tried to teach intelligent design using their switch scam
junk, but every time the Discovery Institute has run the bait and switch >again.
From Bill 619 that passed the WV Senate.
QUOTE:
(c) Teachers in public schools, including public charter schools, that >include any one or more of grades kindergarten through 12, may teach >intelligent design as a theory of how the universe and/or humanity came
to exist.
END QUOTE:
https://ncse.ngo/intelligent-design-bill-passes-west-virginia-senate >Something for the NCSE to do. They have a link to Bill 619.
QUOTE:
Before the bill passed, Dale Lee, President of the West Virginia
Education Association, described it as a "solution in search of a
problem," according to the Bluefield Daily Telegraph (February 25,
2023). He added, "We teach WV College and Career readiness standards" — >which, like all state science standards across the country, include >evolution but not creationism (including "intelligent design").
END QUOTE:
The issue is that the Discovery Institute ID perps have never developed
an intelligent design public school lesson plan, nor (since the exposure
of Of Pandas and People) have they produced any recommended material
that could be taught in the public schools.
They used to claim that they did not want intelligent design to be >"required" to be taught, but after Louisiana and Texas both wanted to
use the switch scam to add intelligent design and creationism textbook >supplements (they had them written and ready to insert into the
textbooks). They claimed that they were not requiring ID to be taught,
just giving the teachers the means to teach it if they wanted to. The
ID perps had to stop them and remind them that the switch scam had
nothing to do with intelligent design. The paragraph that included the
not "required" to be taught that included the claim that they had a >scientific theory of intelligent design was removed from the Discovery >Institute's education policy, but remained in their education policy in >their teach ID propaganda pamphlet that they put out after their failure
in Dover and that they have updated around ever 3 years since.
Paragraph deleted by the ID perps:
QUOTE:
Although Discovery Institute does not advocate requiring
the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, it
does believe there is nothing unconstitutional about
voluntarily discussing the scientific theory of design in
the classroom. In addition, the Institute opposes efforts
to persecute individual teachers who may wish to discuss
the scientific debate over design in an objective and
pedagogically appropriate manner.
END QUOTE:
The education policy with this paragraph deleted was up on the ID perp's
web site for probably nearly a decade, but I don't know when they
changed it (It was still their policy when they ran the bait and switch
on the Utah creationist rubes in 2017). They do have a new policy up
that they seem to have added last year (just in time to fool the West >Virginia Rubes).
https://www.discovery.org/a/3164/
They have it as updated 4/7/2022.
They seem to be back to "not requiring" ID to be taught and this bill
only says that teachers "may teach" the ID scam junk.
This is what the ID perps now claim about teaching the ID scam junk.
QUOTE:
As a matter of public policy, Discovery Institute opposes any effort to >require the teaching of intelligent design by school districts or state >boards of education. Attempts to require teaching about intelligent
design only politicize the theory and will hinder fair and open
discussion of the merits of the theory among scholars and within the >scientific community. Furthermore, most teachers at the present time do
not know enough about intelligent design to teach about it accurately
and objectively.
Instead of recommending teaching about intelligent design in public K-12 >schools, Discovery Institute seeks to increase the coverage of evolution
in curriculum. It believes that evolution should be fully and completely >presented to students, and they should learn more about evolutionary
theory, including its unresolved issues. In other words, evolution
should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to critical
scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can’t be questioned.
QUOTE:
So they, again, do not want ID to be required, and they claim that most >teachers do not know what to teach. The main reason why no one knows
what to teach about the ID creationist scam is that the ID perps have
never produced a lesson plan, nor since Of Pandas and People, produced a >textbook with the ID scam junk in it. The ID perps used to recommend
using Of Pandas and People, and Dembski was editing the last edition
when Dover hit the fan. Pandas was shown to be just a name change from >creationism to intelligent design, and Dembski's effort got a new title
and was never heard from again. Who even remembers what that book's new >title was?
The second paragraph of the current education policy shows why Texas and >Louisiana have never implemented the real switch scam state wide. All
they use the switch scam for was to try to get ID/creationism taught,
they do not want to teach enough science for the kids to understand what >they have to deny.
Bill 619 seems to be a really stupid attempt to get creationism taught
in the public schools. What they are trying to do is to amend an
existing regulation where a teacher is not required to change the grade
of a student with respect to promotion to the next grade. It seems to
have been first enacted in 1931, so that teachers could recommend
promoting a student without changing their grade. What this has to do
with allowing teachers to teach intelligent design is anyone's guess.
As the Discovery Institute notes in their current education policy, no
one knows what to teach about intelligent design. There never was a >scientific theory of intelligent design to teach in the public schools.
This bill does not claim that intelligent design is a scientific theory,
nor does it claim that the teacher would be teaching it as a science topic.
We will see how long it takes the ID perps to wake up and take notice.
It has been over 5 years since they had to run the last bait and switch
on creationist rubes.
Ron Okimoto
On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 9:35:31 PM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use
of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian" alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.My complaint is that she's reinforcing a corruption of the
term cognitive dissonance. She's not alone but that doesn't
make it better.
Cognitive dissonance isn't the presence of an inconsistency
or conflict of concepts. It isn't the stupidity.
Cognitive dissonance, as originally coined, is the feeling
one has when one discovers an inconsistency or conflict
in ones beliefs. Far too many conflate this with the existence
of an apparent conflict. And that completely misses the
point.
It is cognitive dissonance that is supposed to work as negative reinforcement, the stick part of carrot and stick, to motivate
people to resolve conflicts or errors in their beliefs. Cognitive dissonance, when actually felt, motivates somebody to resolve
the errors in their thinking.
Sadly, some seem immune to the pain they should feel
when they believe contradictory things. Apparently, they
don't feel any cognitive dissonance, they don't feel any
pain at holding beliefs that are in conflict and thus are
not motivated to resolve the conflict.
The confusion over the usage of cognitive dissonance then
leads to a strange problem. A person who promotes ideas
in conflict each other would properly be diagnosed as lacking
in the feeling of cognitive dissonance as they seem to be
undisturbed by the conflict. Yet the abused usage of the
term has people claiming that they show cognitive dissonance.
The conflict gives me cognitive dissonance. It pains me.
A perfectly good concept gets abused and used in a way
that twists back upon itself in a manner that can only be
said to mockingly laugh at itself. It's almost enough to make
one believe in a god with a very twisted sense of humor.
I do wonder if it was designed to be that way.
On Sun, 19 Mar 2023 08:15:28 -0500, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
On 3/17/2023 8:32 PM, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a
qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use
of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her
Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those
suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
The cited video can be divided into two parts. In the first part,
Erika dissects in OCD detail an interview of Jason Lisle by Eli Ayala
on Revealed Apologetics channel:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUhpISXuq1w>
In the second part, Erika shows her participation on a call-in show to
Jason Lisle on StrivingForEternity.Org, which starts @1:12:20.
As a reminder, Jason Lisle is the creator of the Anisotropic Synchrony
Convention, which presumes light travels infinitely fast in one
direction, and half the conventional speed of light in the opposite
direction:
<https://answersresearchjournal.org/anisotropic-synchrony-distant-starlight/>
The Discovery Institute is asleep at the switch. They used to have a
person responsible for running the bait and switch, but the last that I
recall that person moved on after the Utah bait and switch back in 2017
and it looks like they either didn't replace her or her replacement
isn't doing their job. It has been over 5 years since they had to run
the bait and switch on any rubes, and it looks like they screwed up
again. If the Bill does pass the House the ID perps have to convince
the Governor not to sign it. The Switch scam is supposed to have
nothing to do with intelligent design and the Louisiana Switch scam bill
never mentions intelligent design, nor does the Switch scam junk
produced by the Texas State board of Education. Both Louisiana and
Texas have tried to teach intelligent design using their switch scam
junk, but every time the Discovery Institute has run the bait and switch
again.
From Bill 619 that passed the WV Senate.
QUOTE:
(c) Teachers in public schools, including public charter schools, that
include any one or more of grades kindergarten through 12, may teach
intelligent design as a theory of how the universe and/or humanity came
to exist.
END QUOTE:
https://ncse.ngo/intelligent-design-bill-passes-west-virginia-senate
Something for the NCSE to do. They have a link to Bill 619.
QUOTE:
Before the bill passed, Dale Lee, President of the West Virginia
Education Association, described it as a "solution in search of a
problem," according to the Bluefield Daily Telegraph (February 25,
2023). He added, "We teach WV College and Career readiness standards" —
which, like all state science standards across the country, include
evolution but not creationism (including "intelligent design").
END QUOTE:
The issue is that the Discovery Institute ID perps have never developed
an intelligent design public school lesson plan, nor (since the exposure
of Of Pandas and People) have they produced any recommended material
that could be taught in the public schools.
They used to claim that they did not want intelligent design to be
"required" to be taught, but after Louisiana and Texas both wanted to
use the switch scam to add intelligent design and creationism textbook
supplements (they had them written and ready to insert into the
textbooks). They claimed that they were not requiring ID to be taught,
just giving the teachers the means to teach it if they wanted to. The
ID perps had to stop them and remind them that the switch scam had
nothing to do with intelligent design. The paragraph that included the
not "required" to be taught that included the claim that they had a
scientific theory of intelligent design was removed from the Discovery
Institute's education policy, but remained in their education policy in
their teach ID propaganda pamphlet that they put out after their failure
in Dover and that they have updated around ever 3 years since.
Paragraph deleted by the ID perps:
QUOTE:
Although Discovery Institute does not advocate requiring
the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, it
does believe there is nothing unconstitutional about
voluntarily discussing the scientific theory of design in
the classroom. In addition, the Institute opposes efforts
to persecute individual teachers who may wish to discuss
the scientific debate over design in an objective and
pedagogically appropriate manner.
END QUOTE:
The education policy with this paragraph deleted was up on the ID perp's
web site for probably nearly a decade, but I don't know when they
changed it (It was still their policy when they ran the bait and switch
on the Utah creationist rubes in 2017). They do have a new policy up
that they seem to have added last year (just in time to fool the West
Virginia Rubes).
https://www.discovery.org/a/3164/
They have it as updated 4/7/2022.
They seem to be back to "not requiring" ID to be taught and this bill
only says that teachers "may teach" the ID scam junk.
This is what the ID perps now claim about teaching the ID scam junk.
QUOTE:
As a matter of public policy, Discovery Institute opposes any effort to
require the teaching of intelligent design by school districts or state
boards of education. Attempts to require teaching about intelligent
design only politicize the theory and will hinder fair and open
discussion of the merits of the theory among scholars and within the
scientific community. Furthermore, most teachers at the present time do
not know enough about intelligent design to teach about it accurately
and objectively.
Instead of recommending teaching about intelligent design in public K-12
schools, Discovery Institute seeks to increase the coverage of evolution
in curriculum. It believes that evolution should be fully and completely
presented to students, and they should learn more about evolutionary
theory, including its unresolved issues. In other words, evolution
should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to critical
scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can’t be questioned.
QUOTE:
So they, again, do not want ID to be required, and they claim that most
teachers do not know what to teach. The main reason why no one knows
what to teach about the ID creationist scam is that the ID perps have
never produced a lesson plan, nor since Of Pandas and People, produced a
textbook with the ID scam junk in it. The ID perps used to recommend
using Of Pandas and People, and Dembski was editing the last edition
when Dover hit the fan. Pandas was shown to be just a name change from
creationism to intelligent design, and Dembski's effort got a new title
and was never heard from again. Who even remembers what that book's new
title was?
The second paragraph of the current education policy shows why Texas and
Louisiana have never implemented the real switch scam state wide. All
they use the switch scam for was to try to get ID/creationism taught,
they do not want to teach enough science for the kids to understand what
they have to deny.
Bill 619 seems to be a really stupid attempt to get creationism taught
in the public schools. What they are trying to do is to amend an
existing regulation where a teacher is not required to change the grade
of a student with respect to promotion to the next grade. It seems to
have been first enacted in 1931, so that teachers could recommend
promoting a student without changing their grade. What this has to do
with allowing teachers to teach intelligent design is anyone's guess.
As the Discovery Institute notes in their current education policy, no
one knows what to teach about intelligent design. There never was a
scientific theory of intelligent design to teach in the public schools.
This bill does not claim that intelligent design is a scientific theory,
nor does it claim that the teacher would be teaching it as a science topic. >>
We will see how long it takes the ID perps to wake up and take notice.
It has been over 5 years since they had to run the last bait and switch
on creationist rubes.
Ron Okimoto
A point relevant to the OP is that the Discovery Institute isn't the
only source of ID perps, nor is it the only institution NCSE et al
need to target. The Discovery Institute gets credit only for seeding
far and wide their brand of pseudoskepticism. Those seeds sprouted
long ago and are now firmly rooted in the well-fertilized minds of
religious conservative fundamentalists. The Discovery Institute perps
might publicly proclaim ID isn't based on religion, but that's just a
legal tactic. The real rubes are those who believe such
proclamations.
On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 6:25:33 AM UTC, Lawyer Daggett wrote:transcript the video is a candidate, but its not a slam dunk either I'd say. Yes, CD is not just the presence of conflicting beliefs, and yes, the typical strategy should be to resolve the conflict by reviewing the evidence and discarding the false
On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 9:35:31 PM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, aMy complaint is that she's reinforcing a corruption of the
qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use
of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her
Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those
suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
term cognitive dissonance. She's not alone but that doesn't
make it better.
Cognitive dissonance isn't the presence of an inconsistency
or conflict of concepts. It isn't the stupidity.
Cognitive dissonance, as originally coined, is the feeling
one has when one discovers an inconsistency or conflict
in ones beliefs. Far too many conflate this with the existence
of an apparent conflict. And that completely misses the
point.
It is cognitive dissonance that is supposed to work as negative
reinforcement, the stick part of carrot and stick, to motivate
people to resolve conflicts or errors in their beliefs. Cognitive
dissonance, when actually felt, motivates somebody to resolve
the errors in their thinking.
Sadly, some seem immune to the pain they should feel
when they believe contradictory things. Apparently, they
don't feel any cognitive dissonance, they don't feel any
pain at holding beliefs that are in conflict and thus are
not motivated to resolve the conflict.
The confusion over the usage of cognitive dissonance then
leads to a strange problem. A person who promotes ideas
in conflict each other would properly be diagnosed as lacking
in the feeling of cognitive dissonance as they seem to be
undisturbed by the conflict. Yet the abused usage of the
term has people claiming that they show cognitive dissonance.
The conflict gives me cognitive dissonance. It pains me.
A perfectly good concept gets abused and used in a way
that twists back upon itself in a manner that can only be
said to mockingly laugh at itself. It's almost enough to make
one believe in a god with a very twisted sense of humor.
I do wonder if it was designed to be that way.
Do you feel the urge to have a shower, or to listen to Bach because of this? :o) I'd say you are half-right only (which may help with the self-reflective CD attack...) You are right that the term is misused a lot, and just from scrolling through the
But even in the original studies, that was only one possible way to cope with CD. Festinger also mentions "selective exposure" as a coping strategy - just don't expose yourself to situations where you have to face the dissonance head one, or blank outany information that supports one of the prongs. Or by however badly supported refutation of the contradiction - or support by the crowd, looking for moral support from like minded people. I would add open hostility to anyone pushing the nose into the
After all, in Festinger's original studies too, the people who had predicted the end of the earth did not radically revise their beliefs whe that prediction, failed, and neither did the people in Berger's "The Rebbe, the Messiah, and the Scandal ofOrthodox Indifference" - rather, they all ostracised waverers (selective exposure), denied counter-evidence ("it's a conspiracy" ) etc
On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 6:25:33?AM UTC, Lawyer Daggett wrote:transcript the video is a candidate, but its not a slam dunk either I'd say. Yes, CD is not just the presence of conflicting beliefs, and yes, the typical strategy should be to resolve the conflict by reviewing the evidence and discarding the false
On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 9:35:31?PM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, aMy complaint is that she's reinforcing a corruption of the
qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use
of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her
Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those
suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
term cognitive dissonance. She's not alone but that doesn't
make it better.
Cognitive dissonance isn't the presence of an inconsistency
or conflict of concepts. It isn't the stupidity.
Cognitive dissonance, as originally coined, is the feeling
one has when one discovers an inconsistency or conflict
in ones beliefs. Far too many conflate this with the existence
of an apparent conflict. And that completely misses the
point.
It is cognitive dissonance that is supposed to work as negative
reinforcement, the stick part of carrot and stick, to motivate
people to resolve conflicts or errors in their beliefs. Cognitive
dissonance, when actually felt, motivates somebody to resolve
the errors in their thinking.
Sadly, some seem immune to the pain they should feel
when they believe contradictory things. Apparently, they
don't feel any cognitive dissonance, they don't feel any
pain at holding beliefs that are in conflict and thus are
not motivated to resolve the conflict.
The confusion over the usage of cognitive dissonance then
leads to a strange problem. A person who promotes ideas
in conflict each other would properly be diagnosed as lacking
in the feeling of cognitive dissonance as they seem to be
undisturbed by the conflict. Yet the abused usage of the
term has people claiming that they show cognitive dissonance.
The conflict gives me cognitive dissonance. It pains me.
A perfectly good concept gets abused and used in a way
that twists back upon itself in a manner that can only be
said to mockingly laugh at itself. It's almost enough to make
one believe in a god with a very twisted sense of humor.
I do wonder if it was designed to be that way.
Do you feel the urge to have a shower, or to listen to Bach because of this? :o) I'd say you are half-right only (which may help with the self-reflective CD attack...) You are right that the term is misused a lot, and just from scrolling through the
But even in the original studies, that was only one possible way to cope with CD. Festinger also mentions "selective exposure" as a coping strategy - just don't expose yourself to situations where you have to face the dissonance head one, or blank outany information that supports one of the prongs. Or by however badly supported refutation of the contradiction - or support by the crowd, looking for moral support from like minded people. I would add open hostility to anyone pushing the nose into the
After all, in Festinger's original studies too, the people who had predicted the end of the earth did not radically revise their beliefs whe that prediction, failed, and neither did the people in Berger's "The Rebbe, the Messiah, and the Scandal ofOrthodox Indifference" - rather, they all ostracised waverers (selective exposure), denied counter-evidence ("it's a conspiracy" ) etc
So one could argue that at least some of the discussion behaviour she identifies in Lisle are indicative of strong CD - for instance when he tries to depict the mainstream as the "odd fringe".
On 3/20/2023 3:30 AM, jillery wrote:
On Sun, 19 Mar 2023 08:15:28 -0500, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
On 3/17/2023 8:32 PM, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a
qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use >>>> of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her >>>> Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those
suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
The cited video can be divided into two parts. In the first part,
Erika dissects in OCD detail an interview of Jason Lisle by Eli Ayala
on Revealed Apologetics channel:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUhpISXuq1w>
In the second part, Erika shows her participation on a call-in show to >>>> Jason Lisle on StrivingForEternity.Org, which starts @1:12:20.
As a reminder, Jason Lisle is the creator of the Anisotropic Synchrony >>>> Convention, which presumes light travels infinitely fast in one
direction, and half the conventional speed of light in the opposite
direction:
<https://answersresearchjournal.org/anisotropic-synchrony-distant-starlight/>
The Discovery Institute is asleep at the switch. They used to have a
person responsible for running the bait and switch, but the last that I
recall that person moved on after the Utah bait and switch back in 2017
and it looks like they either didn't replace her or her replacement
isn't doing their job. It has been over 5 years since they had to run
the bait and switch on any rubes, and it looks like they screwed up
again. If the Bill does pass the House the ID perps have to convince
the Governor not to sign it. The Switch scam is supposed to have
nothing to do with intelligent design and the Louisiana Switch scam bill >>> never mentions intelligent design, nor does the Switch scam junk
produced by the Texas State board of Education. Both Louisiana and
Texas have tried to teach intelligent design using their switch scam
junk, but every time the Discovery Institute has run the bait and switch >>> again.
From Bill 619 that passed the WV Senate.
QUOTE:
(c) Teachers in public schools, including public charter schools, that
include any one or more of grades kindergarten through 12, may teach
intelligent design as a theory of how the universe and/or humanity came
to exist.
END QUOTE:
https://ncse.ngo/intelligent-design-bill-passes-west-virginia-senate
Something for the NCSE to do. They have a link to Bill 619.
QUOTE:
Before the bill passed, Dale Lee, President of the West Virginia
Education Association, described it as a "solution in search of a
problem," according to the Bluefield Daily Telegraph (February 25,
2023). He added, "We teach WV College and Career readiness standards" — >>> which, like all state science standards across the country, include
evolution but not creationism (including "intelligent design").
END QUOTE:
The issue is that the Discovery Institute ID perps have never developed
an intelligent design public school lesson plan, nor (since the exposure >>> of Of Pandas and People) have they produced any recommended material
that could be taught in the public schools.
They used to claim that they did not want intelligent design to be
"required" to be taught, but after Louisiana and Texas both wanted to
use the switch scam to add intelligent design and creationism textbook
supplements (they had them written and ready to insert into the
textbooks). They claimed that they were not requiring ID to be taught,
just giving the teachers the means to teach it if they wanted to. The
ID perps had to stop them and remind them that the switch scam had
nothing to do with intelligent design. The paragraph that included the
not "required" to be taught that included the claim that they had a
scientific theory of intelligent design was removed from the Discovery
Institute's education policy, but remained in their education policy in
their teach ID propaganda pamphlet that they put out after their failure >>> in Dover and that they have updated around ever 3 years since.
Paragraph deleted by the ID perps:
QUOTE:
Although Discovery Institute does not advocate requiring
the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, it
does believe there is nothing unconstitutional about
voluntarily discussing the scientific theory of design in
the classroom. In addition, the Institute opposes efforts
to persecute individual teachers who may wish to discuss
the scientific debate over design in an objective and
pedagogically appropriate manner.
END QUOTE:
The education policy with this paragraph deleted was up on the ID perp's >>> web site for probably nearly a decade, but I don't know when they
changed it (It was still their policy when they ran the bait and switch
on the Utah creationist rubes in 2017). They do have a new policy up
that they seem to have added last year (just in time to fool the West
Virginia Rubes).
https://www.discovery.org/a/3164/
They have it as updated 4/7/2022.
They seem to be back to "not requiring" ID to be taught and this bill
only says that teachers "may teach" the ID scam junk.
This is what the ID perps now claim about teaching the ID scam junk.
QUOTE:
As a matter of public policy, Discovery Institute opposes any effort to
require the teaching of intelligent design by school districts or state
boards of education. Attempts to require teaching about intelligent
design only politicize the theory and will hinder fair and open
discussion of the merits of the theory among scholars and within the
scientific community. Furthermore, most teachers at the present time do
not know enough about intelligent design to teach about it accurately
and objectively.
Instead of recommending teaching about intelligent design in public K-12 >>> schools, Discovery Institute seeks to increase the coverage of evolution >>> in curriculum. It believes that evolution should be fully and completely >>> presented to students, and they should learn more about evolutionary
theory, including its unresolved issues. In other words, evolution
should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to critical
scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can’t be questioned.
QUOTE:
So they, again, do not want ID to be required, and they claim that most
teachers do not know what to teach. The main reason why no one knows
what to teach about the ID creationist scam is that the ID perps have
never produced a lesson plan, nor since Of Pandas and People, produced a >>> textbook with the ID scam junk in it. The ID perps used to recommend
using Of Pandas and People, and Dembski was editing the last edition
when Dover hit the fan. Pandas was shown to be just a name change from
creationism to intelligent design, and Dembski's effort got a new title
and was never heard from again. Who even remembers what that book's new >>> title was?
The second paragraph of the current education policy shows why Texas and >>> Louisiana have never implemented the real switch scam state wide. All
they use the switch scam for was to try to get ID/creationism taught,
they do not want to teach enough science for the kids to understand what >>> they have to deny.
Bill 619 seems to be a really stupid attempt to get creationism taught
in the public schools. What they are trying to do is to amend an
existing regulation where a teacher is not required to change the grade
of a student with respect to promotion to the next grade. It seems to
have been first enacted in 1931, so that teachers could recommend
promoting a student without changing their grade. What this has to do
with allowing teachers to teach intelligent design is anyone's guess.
As the Discovery Institute notes in their current education policy, no
one knows what to teach about intelligent design. There never was a
scientific theory of intelligent design to teach in the public schools.
This bill does not claim that intelligent design is a scientific theory, >>> nor does it claim that the teacher would be teaching it as a science topic. >>>
We will see how long it takes the ID perps to wake up and take notice.
It has been over 5 years since they had to run the last bait and switch
on creationist rubes.
Ron Okimoto
A point relevant to the OP is that the Discovery Institute isn't the
only source of ID perps, nor is it the only institution NCSE et al
need to target. The Discovery Institute gets credit only for seeding
far and wide their brand of pseudoskepticism. Those seeds sprouted
long ago and are now firmly rooted in the well-fertilized minds of
religious conservative fundamentalists. The Discovery Institute perps
might publicly proclaim ID isn't based on religion, but that's just a
legal tactic. The real rubes are those who believe such
proclamations.
There are no other intelligent design groups wanting to teach the junk.
The Reason to Believe creationists claim to be IDiots, but they also
claim that they do not support the ID perps teach ID creationist scam.
The ID network may have risen from the ashes, but they are only selling
the switch scam at this time as something to teach in the public
schools. I don't know why they returned to their ID Network name since
they admit that they change to CARE in order to sell the switch scam.
It was difficult for them to sell the switch scam that was supposed to
have nothing to do with ID, when ID was in the name of their creationist >group. No one hears about CARE anymore because creationists do not want
to teach the switch scam. It doesn't matter what they call themselves >anymore because they don't want to support anything that they are >supporting. They are Biblical creationists that want to remove the
science that they don't want taught in the public schools. They know
that they don't have any creation science that they can or want to teach.
Look at the Top Six. Creationist rubes are only interested in the
denial, they don't want their kids to understand the science.
Ron Okimoto
On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 05:42:04 -0500, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
On 3/20/2023 3:30 AM, jillery wrote:
On Sun, 19 Mar 2023 08:15:28 -0500, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
On 3/17/2023 8:32 PM, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a >>>>> qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use >>>>> of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her >>>>> Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories" >>>>>
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those >>>>> suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
The cited video can be divided into two parts. In the first part,
Erika dissects in OCD detail an interview of Jason Lisle by Eli Ayala >>>>> on Revealed Apologetics channel:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUhpISXuq1w>
In the second part, Erika shows her participation on a call-in show to >>>>> Jason Lisle on StrivingForEternity.Org, which starts @1:12:20.
As a reminder, Jason Lisle is the creator of the Anisotropic Synchrony >>>>> Convention, which presumes light travels infinitely fast in one
direction, and half the conventional speed of light in the opposite
direction:
<https://answersresearchjournal.org/anisotropic-synchrony-distant-starlight/>
The Discovery Institute is asleep at the switch. They used to have a
person responsible for running the bait and switch, but the last that I >>>> recall that person moved on after the Utah bait and switch back in 2017 >>>> and it looks like they either didn't replace her or her replacement
isn't doing their job. It has been over 5 years since they had to run >>>> the bait and switch on any rubes, and it looks like they screwed up
again. If the Bill does pass the House the ID perps have to convince
the Governor not to sign it. The Switch scam is supposed to have
nothing to do with intelligent design and the Louisiana Switch scam bill >>>> never mentions intelligent design, nor does the Switch scam junk
produced by the Texas State board of Education. Both Louisiana and
Texas have tried to teach intelligent design using their switch scam
junk, but every time the Discovery Institute has run the bait and switch >>>> again.
From Bill 619 that passed the WV Senate.
QUOTE:
(c) Teachers in public schools, including public charter schools, that >>>> include any one or more of grades kindergarten through 12, may teach
intelligent design as a theory of how the universe and/or humanity came >>>> to exist.
END QUOTE:
https://ncse.ngo/intelligent-design-bill-passes-west-virginia-senate
Something for the NCSE to do. They have a link to Bill 619.
QUOTE:
Before the bill passed, Dale Lee, President of the West Virginia
Education Association, described it as a "solution in search of a
problem," according to the Bluefield Daily Telegraph (February 25,
2023). He added, "We teach WV College and Career readiness standards" — >>>> which, like all state science standards across the country, include
evolution but not creationism (including "intelligent design").
END QUOTE:
The issue is that the Discovery Institute ID perps have never developed >>>> an intelligent design public school lesson plan, nor (since the exposure >>>> of Of Pandas and People) have they produced any recommended material
that could be taught in the public schools.
They used to claim that they did not want intelligent design to be
"required" to be taught, but after Louisiana and Texas both wanted to
use the switch scam to add intelligent design and creationism textbook >>>> supplements (they had them written and ready to insert into the
textbooks). They claimed that they were not requiring ID to be taught, >>>> just giving the teachers the means to teach it if they wanted to. The >>>> ID perps had to stop them and remind them that the switch scam had
nothing to do with intelligent design. The paragraph that included the >>>> not "required" to be taught that included the claim that they had a
scientific theory of intelligent design was removed from the Discovery >>>> Institute's education policy, but remained in their education policy in >>>> their teach ID propaganda pamphlet that they put out after their failure >>>> in Dover and that they have updated around ever 3 years since.
Paragraph deleted by the ID perps:
QUOTE:
Although Discovery Institute does not advocate requiring
the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, it
does believe there is nothing unconstitutional about
voluntarily discussing the scientific theory of design in
the classroom. In addition, the Institute opposes efforts
to persecute individual teachers who may wish to discuss
the scientific debate over design in an objective and
pedagogically appropriate manner.
END QUOTE:
The education policy with this paragraph deleted was up on the ID perp's >>>> web site for probably nearly a decade, but I don't know when they
changed it (It was still their policy when they ran the bait and switch >>>> on the Utah creationist rubes in 2017). They do have a new policy up
that they seem to have added last year (just in time to fool the West
Virginia Rubes).
https://www.discovery.org/a/3164/
They have it as updated 4/7/2022.
They seem to be back to "not requiring" ID to be taught and this bill
only says that teachers "may teach" the ID scam junk.
This is what the ID perps now claim about teaching the ID scam junk.
QUOTE:
As a matter of public policy, Discovery Institute opposes any effort to >>>> require the teaching of intelligent design by school districts or state >>>> boards of education. Attempts to require teaching about intelligent
design only politicize the theory and will hinder fair and open
discussion of the merits of the theory among scholars and within the
scientific community. Furthermore, most teachers at the present time do >>>> not know enough about intelligent design to teach about it accurately
and objectively.
Instead of recommending teaching about intelligent design in public K-12 >>>> schools, Discovery Institute seeks to increase the coverage of evolution >>>> in curriculum. It believes that evolution should be fully and completely >>>> presented to students, and they should learn more about evolutionary
theory, including its unresolved issues. In other words, evolution
should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to critical
scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can’t be questioned.
QUOTE:
So they, again, do not want ID to be required, and they claim that most >>>> teachers do not know what to teach. The main reason why no one knows
what to teach about the ID creationist scam is that the ID perps have
never produced a lesson plan, nor since Of Pandas and People, produced a >>>> textbook with the ID scam junk in it. The ID perps used to recommend
using Of Pandas and People, and Dembski was editing the last edition
when Dover hit the fan. Pandas was shown to be just a name change from >>>> creationism to intelligent design, and Dembski's effort got a new title >>>> and was never heard from again. Who even remembers what that book's new >>>> title was?
The second paragraph of the current education policy shows why Texas and >>>> Louisiana have never implemented the real switch scam state wide. All >>>> they use the switch scam for was to try to get ID/creationism taught,
they do not want to teach enough science for the kids to understand what >>>> they have to deny.
Bill 619 seems to be a really stupid attempt to get creationism taught >>>> in the public schools. What they are trying to do is to amend an
existing regulation where a teacher is not required to change the grade >>>> of a student with respect to promotion to the next grade. It seems to >>>> have been first enacted in 1931, so that teachers could recommend
promoting a student without changing their grade. What this has to do >>>> with allowing teachers to teach intelligent design is anyone's guess.
As the Discovery Institute notes in their current education policy, no >>>> one knows what to teach about intelligent design. There never was a
scientific theory of intelligent design to teach in the public schools. >>>> This bill does not claim that intelligent design is a scientific theory, >>>> nor does it claim that the teacher would be teaching it as a science topic.
We will see how long it takes the ID perps to wake up and take notice. >>>> It has been over 5 years since they had to run the last bait and switch >>>> on creationist rubes.
Ron Okimoto
A point relevant to the OP is that the Discovery Institute isn't the
only source of ID perps, nor is it the only institution NCSE et al
need to target. The Discovery Institute gets credit only for seeding
far and wide their brand of pseudoskepticism. Those seeds sprouted
long ago and are now firmly rooted in the well-fertilized minds of
religious conservative fundamentalists. The Discovery Institute perps
might publicly proclaim ID isn't based on religion, but that's just a
legal tactic. The real rubes are those who believe such
proclamations.
There are no other intelligent design groups wanting to teach the junk.
I cited above and elsewhere groups actively teaching the junk.
The Reason to Believe creationists claim to be IDiots, but they also
claim that they do not support the ID perps teach ID creationist scam.
The ID network may have risen from the ashes, but they are only selling
the switch scam at this time as something to teach in the public
schools. I don't know why they returned to their ID Network name since
they admit that they change to CARE in order to sell the switch scam.
It was difficult for them to sell the switch scam that was supposed to
have nothing to do with ID, when ID was in the name of their creationist
group. No one hears about CARE anymore because creationists do not want
to teach the switch scam. It doesn't matter what they call themselves
anymore because they don't want to support anything that they are
supporting. They are Biblical creationists that want to remove the
science that they don't want taught in the public schools. They know
that they don't have any creation science that they can or want to teach.
Look at the Top Six. Creationist rubes are only interested in the
denial, they don't want their kids to understand the science.
Ron Okimoto
On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 6:25:33 AM UTC, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 9:35:31 PM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, aMy complaint is that she's reinforcing a corruption of the
qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use
of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her
Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those
suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
term cognitive dissonance. She's not alone but that doesn't
make it better.
Cognitive dissonance isn't the presence of an inconsistency
or conflict of concepts. It isn't the stupidity.
Cognitive dissonance, as originally coined, is the feeling
one has when one discovers an inconsistency or conflict
in ones beliefs. Far too many conflate this with the existence
of an apparent conflict. And that completely misses the
point.
It is cognitive dissonance that is supposed to work as negative
reinforcement, the stick part of carrot and stick, to motivate
people to resolve conflicts or errors in their beliefs. Cognitive
dissonance, when actually felt, motivates somebody to resolve
the errors in their thinking.
Sadly, some seem immune to the pain they should feel
when they believe contradictory things. Apparently, they
don't feel any cognitive dissonance, they don't feel any
pain at holding beliefs that are in conflict and thus are
not motivated to resolve the conflict.
The confusion over the usage of cognitive dissonance then
leads to a strange problem. A person who promotes ideas
in conflict each other would properly be diagnosed as lacking
in the feeling of cognitive dissonance as they seem to be
undisturbed by the conflict. Yet the abused usage of the
term has people claiming that they show cognitive dissonance.
The conflict gives me cognitive dissonance. It pains me.
A perfectly good concept gets abused and used in a way
that twists back upon itself in a manner that can only be
said to mockingly laugh at itself. It's almost enough to make
one believe in a god with a very twisted sense of humor.
I do wonder if it was designed to be that way.
Do you feel the urge to have a shower, or to listen to Bach because of
this? :o) I'd say you are half-right only (which may help with the self-reflective CD attack...) You are right that the term is misused a
lot, and just from scrolling through the transcript the video is a
candidate, but its not a slam dunk either I'd say. Yes, CD is not just
the presence of conflicting beliefs, and yes, the typical strategy should
be to resolve the conflict by reviewing the evidence and discarding the
false belief - and if one believes in evolutionary psychology, that would
be the fitness enhancing one.
But even in the original studies, that was only one possible way to cope
with CD. Festinger also mentions "selective exposure" as a coping
strategy - just don't expose yourself to situations where you have to
face the dissonance head one, or blank out any information that supports
one of the prongs. Or by however badly supported refutation of the contradiction - or support by the crowd, looking for moral support from like minded people. I would add open hostility to anyone pushing the nose into the inconsistency. And then there are strategies that are even less "cognitive", like washing one's hands or having music in the backgrounds etc,
After all, in Festinger's original studies too, the people who had
predicted the end of the earth did not radically revise their beliefs
whe that prediction, failed, and neither did the people in Berger's "The Rebbe, the Messiah, and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference" - rather,
they all ostracised waverers (selective exposure), denied
counter-evidence ("it's a conspiracy" ) etc
So one could argue that at least some of the discussion behaviour she identifies in Lisle are indicative of strong CD - for instance when he
tries to depict the mainstream as the "odd fringe".
Burkhard <b.sc...@ed.ac.uk> wrote:....................
On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 6:25:33 AM UTC, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 9:35:31 PM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, aMy complaint is that she's reinforcing a corruption of the
qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use >>> of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her >>> Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories" >>>
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those
suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
term cognitive dissonance. She's not alone but that doesn't
make it better.
Cognitive dissonance isn't the presence of an inconsistency
or conflict of concepts. It isn't the stupidity.
Cognitive dissonance, as originally coined, is the feeling
one has when one discovers an inconsistency or conflict
in ones beliefs. Far too many conflate this with the existence
of an apparent conflict. And that completely misses the
point.
It is cognitive dissonance that is supposed to work as negative
reinforcement, the stick part of carrot and stick, to motivate
people to resolve conflicts or errors in their beliefs. Cognitive
dissonance, when actually felt, motivates somebody to resolve
the errors in their thinking.
Sadly, some seem immune to the pain they should feel
when they believe contradictory things. Apparently, they
don't feel any cognitive dissonance, they don't feel any
pain at holding beliefs that are in conflict and thus are
not motivated to resolve the conflict.
The confusion over the usage of cognitive dissonance then
leads to a strange problem. A person who promotes ideas
in conflict each other would properly be diagnosed as lacking
in the feeling of cognitive dissonance as they seem to be
undisturbed by the conflict. Yet the abused usage of the
term has people claiming that they show cognitive dissonance.
The conflict gives me cognitive dissonance. It pains me.
A perfectly good concept gets abused and used in a way
that twists back upon itself in a manner that can only be
said to mockingly laugh at itself. It's almost enough to make
one believe in a god with a very twisted sense of humor.
I do wonder if it was designed to be that way.
Do you feel the urge to have a shower, or to listen to Bach because of this? :o) I'd say you are half-right only (which may help with the self-reflective CD attack...) You are right that the term is misused a lot, and just from scrolling through the transcript the video is a candidate, but its not a slam dunk either I'd say. Yes, CD is not just
the presence of conflicting beliefs, and yes, the typical strategy should be to resolve the conflict by reviewing the evidence and discarding the false belief - and if one believes in evolutionary psychology, that would be the fitness enhancing one.
Does fitness track truth?
But even in the original studies, that was only one possible way to cope with CD. Festinger also mentions "selective exposure" as a coping
strategy - just don't expose yourself to situations where you have to
face the dissonance head one, or blank out any information that supports one of the prongs. Or by however badly supported refutation of the contradiction - or support by the crowd, looking for moral support from like minded people. I would add open hostility to anyone pushing the nose into the inconsistency. And then there are strategies that are even less "cognitive", like washing one's hands or having music in the backgrounds etc,
After all, in Festinger's original studies too, the people who had predicted the end of the earth did not radically revise their beliefs
whe that prediction, failed, and neither did the people in Berger's "The Rebbe, the Messiah, and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference" - rather, they all ostracised waverers (selective exposure), denied
counter-evidence ("it's a conspiracy" ) etc
So one could argue that at least some of the discussion behaviour she identifies in Lisle are indicative of strong CD - for instance when he tries to depict the mainstream as the "odd fringe".
What’s wrong with holding multiple contradictory beliefs (alternative hypotheses) at once? The reduction of dissonance thing sounds like aI'd say that in cognitive dissonance the question is not about keeping an open mind but about affirmatively accepting contradictory beliefs.
dislike of uncertainty or need for closure. Such a need might lead one to foreclose on an alternative prematurely.
On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 7:10:36 AM UTC-4, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
Burkhard <b.sc...@ed.ac.uk> wrote:....................
On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 6:25:33 AM UTC, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 9:35:31 PM UTC-4, jillery wrote:
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a >>>>> qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, aMy complaint is that she's reinforcing a corruption of the
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use >>>>> of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her >>>>> Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories" >>>>>
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those >>>>> suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
term cognitive dissonance. She's not alone but that doesn't
make it better.
Cognitive dissonance isn't the presence of an inconsistency
or conflict of concepts. It isn't the stupidity.
Cognitive dissonance, as originally coined, is the feeling
one has when one discovers an inconsistency or conflict
in ones beliefs. Far too many conflate this with the existence
of an apparent conflict. And that completely misses the
point.
It is cognitive dissonance that is supposed to work as negative
reinforcement, the stick part of carrot and stick, to motivate
people to resolve conflicts or errors in their beliefs. Cognitive
dissonance, when actually felt, motivates somebody to resolve
the errors in their thinking.
Sadly, some seem immune to the pain they should feel
when they believe contradictory things. Apparently, they
don't feel any cognitive dissonance, they don't feel any
pain at holding beliefs that are in conflict and thus are
not motivated to resolve the conflict.
The confusion over the usage of cognitive dissonance then
leads to a strange problem. A person who promotes ideas
in conflict each other would properly be diagnosed as lacking
in the feeling of cognitive dissonance as they seem to be
undisturbed by the conflict. Yet the abused usage of the
term has people claiming that they show cognitive dissonance.
The conflict gives me cognitive dissonance. It pains me.
A perfectly good concept gets abused and used in a way
that twists back upon itself in a manner that can only be
said to mockingly laugh at itself. It's almost enough to make
one believe in a god with a very twisted sense of humor.
I do wonder if it was designed to be that way.
Do you feel the urge to have a shower, or to listen to Bach because of
this? :o) I'd say you are half-right only (which may help with the
self-reflective CD attack...) You are right that the term is misused a
lot, and just from scrolling through the transcript the video is a
candidate, but its not a slam dunk either I'd say. Yes, CD is not just
the presence of conflicting beliefs, and yes, the typical strategy should >>> be to resolve the conflict by reviewing the evidence and discarding the
false belief - and if one believes in evolutionary psychology, that would >>> be the fitness enhancing one.
Does fitness track truth?
I'd say that having false beliefs about the world and acting on those
false beliefs, on average and depending on the degree of falsity of those beliefs, will negatively impact your fitness.
If the particular false beliefs in question have no impact on your
behavior, they won't change your fitness. A category that would include
many religious beliefs of many religious people.
What’s wrong with holding multiple contradictory beliefs (alternative
But even in the original studies, that was only one possible way to cope >>> with CD. Festinger also mentions "selective exposure" as a coping
strategy - just don't expose yourself to situations where you have to
face the dissonance head one, or blank out any information that supports >>> one of the prongs. Or by however badly supported refutation of the
contradiction - or support by the crowd, looking for moral support from
like minded people. I would add open hostility to anyone pushing the nose >>> into the inconsistency. And then there are strategies that are even less >>> "cognitive", like washing one's hands or having music in the backgrounds etc,
After all, in Festinger's original studies too, the people who had
predicted the end of the earth did not radically revise their beliefs
whe that prediction, failed, and neither did the people in Berger's "The >>> Rebbe, the Messiah, and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference" - rather,
they all ostracised waverers (selective exposure), denied
counter-evidence ("it's a conspiracy" ) etc
So one could argue that at least some of the discussion behaviour she
identifies in Lisle are indicative of strong CD - for instance when he
tries to depict the mainstream as the "odd fringe".
hypotheses) at once? The reduction of dissonance thing sounds like a
dislike of uncertainty or need for closure. Such a need might lead one to
foreclose on an alternative prematurely.
I'd say that in cognitive dissonance the question is not about keeping an open mind but about affirmatively accepting contradictory beliefs.
Sometimes serendipity. In the following, Erica aka Gutsick Gibbon, a qualified evolutionary anthropologist, confronts Jason Lisle, a
qualified astrophysicist who is also a self-identified YEC, on his use
of anthropological PRATTs to rationalize his religious beliefs:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQJw0nStX5k>
Erica starts out by noting she was criticized for spending time on her Youtube channel to counter YEC nonsense. In direct reply, she
provides three headlines:
New Montana Bill Would Prevent Schools Teaching "Scientific Theories"
"Intelligent Design" Bill Passes West Virginia Senate
Florida state officials are weighing "classical and Christian"
alternatives to the SAT
ISTM she shares my opinion on the how and why of responding to those suffering cognitive dissonance and/or willful stupidity.
The cited video can be divided into two parts. In the first part,
Erika dissects in OCD detail an interview of Jason Lisle by Eli Ayala
on Revealed Apologetics channel:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUhpISXuq1w>
In the second part, Erika shows her participation on a call-in show to
Jason Lisle on StrivingForEternity.Org, which starts @1:12:20.
As a reminder, Jason Lisle is the creator of the Anisotropic Synchrony Convention, which presumes light travels infinitely fast in one
direction, and half the conventional speed of light in the opposite direction:
<https://answersresearchjournal.org/anisotropic-synchrony-distant-starlight/>
--
You're entitled to your own opinions.
You're not entitled to your own facts.
On 3/22/2023 12:05 PM, jillery wrote:
On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 05:42:04 -0500, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
On 3/20/2023 3:30 AM, jillery wrote:
On Sun, 19 Mar 2023 08:15:28 -0500, RonO <rokimoto@cox.net> wrote:
There are no other intelligent design groups wanting to teach the junk.
I cited above and elsewhere groups actively teaching the junk.
You will have to cite them again, because you have not done it in this >thread. There is no state where teaching ID is legal. The West
Virginia bill wanted teachers to be able to teach it, but it never got
to the House for a vote.
Ron Okimoto
Lest anybody imagine Jason Lisle limits his evangelical "expertise" to >anthropology:
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpD8KghXPT8>
Starting @5:38, Lisle asserts the Creationist PRATT that the current >population of the Earth is evidence for YEC and against evolution.
From the transcript:
**************************************
@8:38
Granted people say, "yes but the birth rate was less [in] the past." I >understand that, but unless it's pretty much exactly zero, exponential
growth gets very big very fast. And so that really limits the age of
the earth to much less than the secularists would like to believe. You >certainly can't get millions of years out of humanity let alone thirty >thousand. We go back a few thousand years and that's all. >*************************************
The above is a variation of a PRATT from Henry Morris in 1975, refuted
in the T.O. archive:
<http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB620.html>
Short version: Assuming the current population rate existed from the
time of Noah's Flood, there wouldn't have been enough Hebrew slaves or >Egyptian slaveholders to build the pyramids.
I leave as an exercise to distinguish between cognitive dissonance,
willful stupidity and mythomania.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 493 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 195:16:09 |
| Calls: | 9,707 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 13,740 |
| Messages: | 6,180,446 |