Has anyone had a chance to read this book yet? Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? by Jonathan Wells It discusses the current common laymen arguments of evolutionary theory, as presented in school textbooks, and how they are supposedly fakes or misconceptions. It's a stab at evolution, but not the typical ID/creation science arguments. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...f=sr_1_1/002-5778209-4832862?v=glance&s=books I quote one of the reviews on Amazon: I only skimmed through the text at the bookstore, but what I read gave me a similar reaction as the reviewer above. Why doctor evidence if there's no competition in theory? What's wrong with teaching children that we DON'T have all the answers, and science isn't a perfect procedure? Isn't it better to teach how science works, moreso than to provide canned "facts"? While I'm not convinced yet that what this book says is true, I am sure of the overlying premise that students are taught just enough to get by, glazing over the details and procedures of how and why we learn things. In fact, at this point I'd welcome ID and any other theories alongside evolution, and have the lesson be to show what is and isn't valid science, which in my mind is more important than the facts of the theory themselves. The old give a fish vs. teach fishing thing... (BTW, I didn't know if this should fall under human science or science ethics, since really both are in question)
Icons of evolution: all those who do stupid things and get themselves removed from the genepool (ie: darwin awards)
Looking through it seems like a good book to me. Easy to read, flows well (unlike a lot of books) and is from a standpoint which Neville likes very much Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
That's one of the critic's points, Evilpoet, that he was hired by a church to write the book. While suspicious, if what he writes is correct, it really doesn't matter who he is. Again, I only skimmed through it, but I didn't really see any push towards ID or creation science. It seemed to be for the most part a critique on evolution as taught in schools. If valid, it's yet more proof that U.S. schools are sadly lacking. A side question: I homeschool, and while I've a few years before I have to even consider touching biology, I'm thinking that it might be a better approach to teach science methodology before facts, just as you teach math. Learn the tools first.
Jaxom, I have never read the book so I don't feel I can comment as far as that goes. I would like to read more of what the critics have to say - any suggestions of where I can do that?
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/stores/detail/-/books/0895262762/customer-reviews/ref=cm_cr_dp_2_1/002-5778209-4832862 has all the Amazon reviews. There's no denying that the attack on school textbooks is probably a legitimate one. But whether or not the hard science behind the simpler explanations is faulty, I can't say at this point. I guess I'll have to buy the book and follow up on the references to figure it out myself. It's quite possible this is just the next stage of creationist attacks, steering the questionable parts of the science or the harder to understand parts, and making them seem invalid. I certainly hope so, because the alternative is bad science, or a least bad presentation of science.
