Evolution’s Evolution

Posted in Politics, Religion, Society on March 31st, 2014

1871 editorial cartoon depicting Charles Darwin as an apeMore and more of late Evolution and Creationism are making the news once again in America. What both amazes and amuses me is that the current crop of arguers seem to think this is a new thing. It isn’t. The only thing that has changed is which side currently has the legal upper hand in the argument over Evolution vs. Creationism.

What’s most amazing to me is that the Evolutionists act like evolution is accepted fact and that it’s only fringe, “extremist” Christians who believe in- or accept the possibility of Creationism.

Much like the fallacy that the Evolution vs. Creationism is new, the belief that in America evolution is accepted fact and that it’s only fringe, “extremist” Christians who are Creationists is a self-serving fantasy of the Evolutionists. In point of replicable, scientific fact, as of 2012: 46% of Americans believe in the Creationist view that God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years; 32% believe that humans evolved, but with God’s guidance, i.e., Intelligent Design; and only 15% say humans evolved, but that God had no part in the process. These figures have been largely unchanging over the last 30 years of polling.

Gallup Evolution vs. Creationism Poll - 1982-2012Creationism – Intelligent Design – Evolution from 1982 – 2012

As one can see, within America, the Godless view of Evolution is itself something of a non-survival trait and, hence, an evolutionary dead end. ;-)

It must also be noted that Evolution wasn’t even close to the de facto science curriculum in American high schools until the beginning parts of the mid-20th century. Indeed, by 1925 a number of states had passed, and more had introduced, laws outlawing the teaching of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and these laws, by and large, weren’t overturned until 1960s. Additionally, since the 1960s and through today, various states have enacted laws, with admittedly mixed results, to bring the teaching of Evolution more in line with the normative viewpoints and beliefs of the American people.

So it’s both amazing and amusing to me the the Evolutionist think this is a new argument and/or that they hold the majority opinion on the matter. If anything, they should be damned glad that they’re allowed to teach it all instead of complaining whenever it sought to teach alternatives to Evolution alongside of it.

~*~

NOTE: For the record, my personal views fall in an odd place between Intelligent Design and Evolution. In other words, I am a soul who has a body and I’m not sold on the idea that the God(s) took any more hand in designing that body other than to ensure that it would evolve into a form that could make the soul’s desires tangible, material, and enactable. Then, I believe that all science is theology.

Related Reading:

Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science & Theology
The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion (Vintage)
The Flat World and Education: How America's Commitment to Equity Will Determine Our Future (Multicultural Education)
America Is...
The New Intelligent Design, Turning The Scientific World Upside Down

An Inconvenient Bias

Posted in Politics on February 27th, 2014

Eye of the ObserverBias is natural and inherent in just about anything and everything. It’s natural; as natural of a law as the General Law of Relativity and quite related to it in point of odd fact. In anything approaching science, however, it is inconvenient at best…if one actually wants accurate results. This is because observer bias can color and cloud the results.

It needs to be noted and remembered, however, that those who conduct such research or contract others to conduct it on their behalf are only inconvenienced by such bias if and when they desire truthful, accurate, and objective results. This is far from the norm, especially when the government with its many and diverse perceived vested interests is performing or paying for the research in question.

A Case In Point

The FCC’s recently suspended – not cancelled – hunt for “station bias” and for television news teams not meeting the “Critical Information Needs” of specially protected demographics was based upon methodology and metrics developed for them under contract by Social Solutions International, which is a “minority owned” firm enjoying the pecuniary advantages of their 8(a) status.

In and of itself, SSi’s 8(a) status is just barely the appearance of bias. What is telling is their self-identification and mission statement.

About Us

Social Solutions is a research and evaluation firm dedicated to the creation of positive change for underserved populations. Our work touches those in our community and in countries worldwide. We are a mission-driven organization that believes that superior science can improve the world.

Company Overview

Social Solutions International, Inc. (Social Solutions) is a Hispanic and woman owned 8(a) and Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB). Social Solutions emphasis is on quality research and evaluation, development of evidence-based education materials, and cultural adaptation and translation.

Mission Statement

Social Solutions International, Inc. is a research and evaluation firm dedicated to the creation of social and health solutions to improve the welfare of underserved populations worldwide.

It is ludicrous at best to even entertain the thought that a company describing itself as a “Small Disadvantaged Business” which is “mission-driven” to “improve the welfare of underserved populations” is capable of- much less willing to deliver objective testing methodologies in any context involving what they consider underserved populations.

The only plausible reason why the FCC would have awarded them the contract was that the FCC didn’t want to be inconvenienced by objectivity. No, instead they were seeking agenda-driven junk science because there was a specific result that they wanted from the study.

And that, my fellow Americans, could be a very inconvenient bias for we, the People.

Related Reading:

The Bias of Temperament in American Politics, Second Edition
FCC Commercial Radio License Exam ELEMENT 1 Study Aid
CK-12 Life Science for Middle School
Tests - Answers for FCC General Radiotelephone Operator License Updated Multiple-Choice Tests from the actual FCC exam Plus Radar Endorsements Tests
Social Solutions to Poverty: America's Struggle to Build a Just Society (Great Barrington Books)

All Science Is Theology

Posted in Musings, Philosophy, Religion, Society on February 7th, 2014

From Within CreationAll science is theology or, said in another way, theology is the only science, with each otherwise-named path of research merely being a sub-discipline of the greater course of study. The whole of we call the “sciences” is nothing more or less than Man’s attempt to discern the Divine’s will and how it was enacted upon Creation.

There’s no intrinsic conflict between between Science and Religion. Sir Isaac Newton, arguably the father of modern Western science knew that as did even the Muslim World’s Abū ʿAlī al-Ḥasan ibn al-Ḥasan ibn al-Haytham. The conflict between Science and Religion is a purely modern invention and a poor one at that.

Related Reading:

Done.: What most religions don't tell you about the Bible
Jesus > Religion: Why He Is So Much Better Than Trying Harder, Doing More, and Being Good Enough
An Introduction to Covenant Theology
Theology for Beginners
World Religions: The Great Faiths Explored & Explained