Considering that I fit within the ‘6-12’ grade range I would be insulted by this post if it didn’t give such a wide range. Unless the American education system is truly terrible, this activity cannot possibly be considered applicable for the 12 end of that range. But I digress.
The particular post is What’s in a Number? Secondary Activities (6-12), and it continues on from the K-5 grade range in attempting to instil a contempt for large periods of time in the children that are to do the tasks. Continue reading
I decided in the end to call Rhonda Forlow’s alledgedly educational Science Education Essentials blog Ideological Education Essentials, as it rather fits.
The most recent posts on the site continue the “What’s in a Number” theme we saw in Shirley Ujeste?, with the two pieces (one for K-5, the other for 6-12) attempting to instil in the children on which these activities are to be subjected a fundi-mental distrust in any length of time longer than 6000 years. This post will focus on the K-5 post, What’s in a Number? Elementary Activities (K-5). Here’s the text of the first activity: Continue reading
One of the more amusingly wrong creationist arguments is that, if the world is really so old, why aren’t there trillions of us? I mean, evolutionists have to propose millions of years without any population growth at all! How could this be true, if population grows in the geometric pattern P(t) = P0ert?
This is the question asked by the latest B.T. DpSU, Earth Hit the 7-Billion Mark Too Late. Mr Thomas is objecting to a paragraph in a paper called When the World’s Population Took Off: The Springboard of the Neolithic Demographic Transition from a three-month old edition of Science which said:
After the members of the genus Homo had been living as foragers for at least 2.4 million years, agriculture began to emerge in seven or eight regions across the world, almost simultaneously at the beginning of the Holocene.
This must clearly be wrong, as “according to the Bible and historical records, there was never a time when humans weren’t engaged in agriculture.”*
The journal Science apparently ran a whole series on Mercury and the data sent back from the MESSENGER spacecraft. A few days ago I posted MESSENGER Is Back, on the subject of a DpSU arguing on the basis of one of those papers that “Mercury’s Surface Looks young.” MESSENGER and Mercury have turned up once before during the short time this blog has been running, so that made that post effectively Mercury II, and this III.
Wednesday’s DpSU is based on the very next paper in Science, and is called Mercury’s Fading Magnetic Field Fits Creation Model. Surprisingly, they do actually have a model – it’s just rather questionable that it fits the data.
Today’s DpSU from Mr Thomas of the ICR is on the subject of the 100,000 year old South African paint lab, and is called Ancient Paint Workshop Challenges Human Evolutionary Story. Now, whatever makes him think that?
Right on time, Rhonda Forlow has come out with a post on her new Science Education Essentials blog.
However, it’s nothing new: the post – What’s in a Number? – is just a repost of the video I commented on in That’s a Video! Interestingly, like on the video, comments are open (though presumably moderated – I haven’t tried myself). They’re pretty funny, and the most so is the first one, a screenshot of which is below:
Shirley Ujeste? While I understand that there is no reason why that couldn’t be a real name, it still looks too much of a perfect pun for it that to be the case… Continue reading
Due perhaps to the fact that the spacecraft MESSENGER – which Mr Thomas refuses to capitalise – is currently orbiting the planet, something that has never happened before, the folk at the, ah, Icr, are very keen on Mercury. They – mostly the ICR’s “science writer,” Brian Thomas – seem to believe that the MESSENGER data shows that Mercury is not billions of years old, and is in fact merely thousands as the bible tells them. I last posted on this subject in Creationist Misinformation: Mercury, so this post is effectively Mercury II.
I don’t usually comment on the ICR’s Days of Praise articles – that is to say, my drafts folder is filled with unfinished posts on this or that DoP edition. The Days are a series of articles, even more daily than the Daily (pseudo)Science Updates, which “seek to strengthen and encourage the Christian witness.” The articles seem to repeat over a several year cycle – a search through the archives reveals that a given article is likely to have been repeated several times.
This article – being written by the original Henry Morris, who has been dead for five years – is clearly such a repeat. It is called simply Global Warming, and, being in itself around five years old is even more out of date than it was at the time. Nevertheless, the ICR still agrees with what he wrote then. Here’s an excerpt:
On the other hand, many more conservative scientists keep insisting that this is a cyclic phenomenon, reminding us that it was not long ago that we were being warned of an imminent ice age. Who can say for sure?
That is to say, according to some studies that a recent paper in Nature cites, an enzyme used in mitochondrial DNA transcription is “distantly related” to that of Bacteriophage T7 (a virus which infects E. coli), a similar enzyme that does the same thing in chloroplasts, and Pol I polymerases generally (whatever they are). This paper itself adds to the table the 3D structure of the human version of the enzyme.