Re: [asa] Teaching ID and teaching that Gobal Warming is not real

From: Randy Isaac <>
Date: Wed Jan 02 2008 - 19:34:44 EST

Independent of the topic, the controversies that should be taught in a science class are those that are ongoing in the scientific literature. In active research fields where one or more theories are still competing for acceptance by those working in that field, then the controversy should be taught. When "evidences" in any field have not been vetted through the peer-review process and published in the technical literature, then it can be mentioned as such in order to help put those controveries in perspective. But in that case, it should not be "taught" as science.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: j burg
  Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 3:56 PM
  Subject: [asa] Teaching ID and teaching that Gobal Warming is not real

  There seems to be some similarities betweeen these two very different science teaching issues.

  If one opposes teaching the "evidences" of ID in a science class, should he also oppose teaching the "evidences " against global warming?

  What differentiates the two?


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Jan 2 19:35:59 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jan 02 2008 - 19:35:59 EST