Israel gets one right!

karma_

Chief scientist who questioned evolution theory fired:

The Education Ministry's chief scientist, Dr. Gavriel Avital, was dismissed on Monday following a scandal-filled trial period of less than a year.

Sources familiar with the affair said Avital was fired over past statements he had made, in which he questioned evolution and the global warming theory.

Avital, who was named chief scientist in December 2009, said Darwinism should be analyzed critically along with biblical creationism.

"If textbooks state explicitly that human beings' origins are to be found with monkeys, I would want students to pursue and grapple with other opinions. There are many people who don't believe the evolutionary account is correct," he said.

"There are those for whom evolution is a religion and are unwilling to hear about anything else. Part of my responsibility, in light of my position with the Education Ministry, is to examine textbooks and curricula,"

Avital added, "If they keep writing in textbooks that the Earth is growing warmer because of carbon dioxide emissions, I'll insist that isn't the case."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3964117,00.html


So, for once, well done Israel.

MagicMarker

One down...

raah!

Hahahahahah, ridiculous. He's saying we should look at it critically, examine the evidence, in accordance with scientific methodology, and you say this is bad? And good riddance he's gone?

Stop pretending to care about biology.

Sykk

People will always be morons, just because he's from Israel doesn't make any difference.

MagicMarker

raah! wrote: »

Hahahahahah, ridiculous. He's saying we should look at it critically, examine the evidence, in accordance with scientific methodology, and you say this is bad? And good riddance he's gone?

Stop pretending to care about biology.

Erm, we already do this. I think the main problem was with the ''analyze it critically along with biblical creationism'' part. What with biblical creationism being complete bull**** and all.

karma_

raah! wrote: »

Hahahahahah, ridiculous. He's saying we should look at it critically, examine the evidence, in accordance with scientific methodology, and you say this is bad? And good riddance he's gone?

Stop pretending to care about biology.

How can you analyse biblical creationism scientifically?

curlzy

Wow, so disappointed, after reading the title I thought "oh great they're going to stop being bastards" but no; it's about science and religion, colour me very disappointed .

There are those for whom evolution is a religion and are unwilling to hear about anything else.

Firing him wasn't exactly doing much to change his opinion there, was it?

FreudianSlippers

Pfft. Everyone knows the earth was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster.

raah!

I'm sure they'd be able to come to that conclusion after analysing it critically. If they hadn't analysed the evolution critically, then they would have no standard with which to compare creationism and declare it is not true. His comments were very mild, and he doesn't deserve to have been kicked out for making a proposal. Israel certainly haven't gotten anything right here.


Anyway, I do regret posting in this thread, and will proceed to unfollow it.

RedXIV

Just thinking, wouldn't it be encouraged for all these things to be constantly scrutinized? After all, many other scientific "facts" were disproved once technology was capable of sufficient aid. Nothing wrong with critically analyzing something. Failure to do so will leave you in the same camp that has said for centuries that God made the world.

raah!

raah! wrote: »

I'm sure they'd be able to come to that conclusion after analysing it critically. If they hadn't analysed the evolution critically, then they would have no standard with which to compare creationism and declare it is not true. His comments were very mild, and he doesn't deserve to have been kicked out for making a proposal. Israel certainly haven't gotten anything right here.


Anyway, I do regret posting in this thread, and will proceed to unfollow it.

Well this part didn't help him

Avital added, "If they keep writing in textbooks that the Earth is growing warmer because of carbon dioxide emissions, I'll insist that isn't the case."

raah!

karma_ wrote: »

How can you analyse biblical creationism scientifically?

I was referencing his comments about evolution and creationism, he phrased it in such a way that evolution should be examined. You could analyse that in the same way you analyse anything.

Well this part didn't help him

Yeah, it's not exaclty connected with evolution though. And perhaps he has some strong arguments to the contrary, they do exist.

seamus

raah! wrote: »

Hahahahahah, ridiculous. He's saying we should look at it critically, examine the evidence, in accordance with scientific methodology, and you say this is bad? And good riddance he's gone?

What he effectively said was that we should examine evolutionary theory scientifically, but also compare it to unicorns for good measure.

losthorizon

BTW Darwin never said man developed from Apes. We just have a common ancestor. BIG difference.

FreudianSlippers

losthorizon wrote: »

BTW Darwin never said man developed from Apes. We just have a common ancestor. BIG difference.

This is the one thing that really bothers me. It's like opponents of evolution haven't even googled it once!

PeterIanStaker

OisinT wrote: »

This is the one thing that really bothers me. It's like opponents of evolution haven't even googled it once!

Well with religious search engines they dont need to google

http://seekfind.org/

(Ironically, I googled that!)

TwoShedsJackson

curlzy wrote: »

Wow, so disappointed, after reading the title I thought "oh great they're going to stop being bastards" but no; it's about science and religion, colour me very disappointed .

Everything about the Middle East **** storm is about religion.

Einhard

OisinT wrote: »

This is the one thing that really bothers me. It's like opponents of evolution haven't even googled it once!

Why would you bother educate yourself about it, when God has already told you how things came about?

strobe

Einhard wrote: »

Why would you bother educate yourself about it, when God has already told you how things came about?

bnt

Whenever you see evolution theory referred to as "Darwinism", that's a clue to where the speaker / writer is going: gearing up to try an old disinformation strategy. Associate the theory with the person, then try and discredit that person, as the theory depends on that person's every utterance. This kind of thing is justified when the theory really is consistently associated with one person - e.g. Lamarckism, Stalinism - but that's not the case when it comes to evolution, which has only grown from the solid start given by Darwin. What's next - Dawkinsism? Pharyngulism? :rolleyes:

raah!

raah! wrote: »

Yeah, it's not exaclty connected with evolution though.

It isn't, but it doesn't appear he was fired just for his evolution thoughts, it was GW as well.

And perhaps he has some strong arguments to the contrary, they do exist.

They may exist but "I would insist it's not true" is not "well there are strong arguments against it".

sensibleken

OisinT wrote: »

Pfft. Everyone knows the earth was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster.

That's just stupid. The earth was made a few thursdays ago by Robert

sensibleken

bnt wrote: »

Whenever you see evolution theory referred to as "Darwinism", that's a clue to where the speaker / writer is going: gearing up to try an old disinformation strategy. Associate the theory with the person, then try and discredit that person, as the theory depends on that person's every utterance. This kind of thing is justified when the theory really is consistently associated with one person - e.g. Lamarckism, Stalinism - but that's not the case when it comes to evolution, which has only grown from the solid start given by Darwin. What's next - Dawkinsism? Pharyngulism? :rolleyes:

I know, evolution was around ages before Darwin.

MagicMarker

RedXIV wrote: »

Just thinking, wouldn't it be encouraged for all these things to be constantly scrutinized? After all, many other scientific "facts" were disproved once technology was capable of sufficient aid.

Can you name any of these scientific facts that were disproved?

faceman

The guy got dismissed for expressing his opinion outside of the classroom. His ability to teach the curriculum was not called into question. Is that appropriate? Should people be fired for having an opinion?

I dont really care what his views are on evolution, people will argue about religion till the end of the earth. But his question of a global warming theory (outside of the classroom) is hardly a disciplionary offence

So on review, it looks likes it a terrible decision by the Educational Minister.

karma_

faceman wrote: »

The guy got dismissed for expressing his opinion outside of the classroom. His ability to teach the curriculum was not called into question. Is that appropriate? Should people be fired for having an opinion?

I dont really care what his views are on evolution, people will argue about religion till the end of the earth. But his question of a global warming theory (outside of the classroom) is hardly a disciplionary offence

So on review, it looks likes it a terrible decision by the Educational Minister.

Is it appropriate than someone with those views should not be in his position? Yes, yes it is very appropriate!

MagicMarker

In fairness...

The Education Ministry's chief scientist, Dr. Gavriel Avital, was dismissed on Monday following a scandal-filled trial period of less than a year.

It seems there's more to it than these comments alone.

RedXIV

MagicMarker wrote: »

Can you name any of these scientific facts that were disproved?

People for countless years believed the "fact" that the earth was flat, or the "fact" that if you sailed west from Spain, you'd hit India or even as recent as the "fact" that smoking was harmless

"Facts" should be constantly under scrutiny as if our experience on this planet has thought us anything, is that we have made alot of mistakes in the past.

faceman

karma_ wrote: »

Is it appropriate than someone with those views should not be in his position? Yes, yes it is very appropriate!

Well we havent seen the full content of those views so none of us can make that decision. But again its his personal views. His personal opinion hasnt broken any law. As long as it doesnt interfere with him doing his job, there shouldnt be an issue with it. However as magicmarker has pointed out, there seems to be more to this than meets than eye.

If Catholic run school sacked a teacher because he/she didnt believe in God, would that be appropriate?

karma_

faceman wrote: »

If Catholic run school sacked a teacher because he/she didnt believe in God, would that be appropriate?

Religion has no place in education so no that would not be appropriate.

Cookie_Monster

RedXIV wrote: »

or the "fact" that if you sailed west from Spain, you'd hit India
.

but you will... you can sail right through the canal and get to india

MagicMarker

RedXIV wrote: »

People for countless years believed the "fact" that the earth was flat, or the "fact" that if you sailed west from Spain, you'd hit India or even as recent as the "fact" that smoking was harmless

"Facts" should be constantly under scrutiny as if our experience on this planet has thought us anything, is that we have made alot of mistakes in the past.

The Myth of the Flat Earth

No reputable scientist believed the Earth was flat. The greeks determined that the Earth was round a couple of thousand years ago.

curlzy

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

Everything about the Middle East **** storm is about religion.

True that! But I also think racism and greed play a big part in the Israel/Palestine mess.

I read this (I'm not quoting directly but this is the gist) from a Palestian poster on another forum recently:
"It's like someone coming into your house and declaring that the sittingroom is theirs. Then they invite all their friends and relatives to join them, then they take over the kitchen and the hall, then the upstairs bedroom and so on until the only place you have is the boxroom, then they come in and take parts of that, then they make it so that you need to bring ID when you want to use the bathroom."

I mean wow, that really sums it up doesn't it?

sensibleken

RedXIV wrote: »

People for countless years believed the "fact" that the earth was flat, or the "fact" that if you sailed west from Spain, you'd hit India or even as recent as the "fact" that smoking was harmless

"Facts" should be constantly under scrutiny as if our experience on this planet has thought us anything, is that we have made alot of mistakes in the past.

This one comes up a lot. No, people didn't think the world was flat, if anyone did it wasnt a majority view.

And scientific facts are constantly scrutinised. If a new piece of information comes to light and doesnt fit the established view of things then a new theory is put forward. Almost every paper published and peer reviewed tests theories, assumptions and facts.

It becomes a problem when someone in a position of power and influence denies all available and over whelming evidence and instead goes for some arcane creation myth outlined in a religious book and backed up by nothing.

pickarooney

A guy gets fired for encouraging students to think critically and not accept everything at face value - the very kind of thinking that brought about the theory of evolution - and this is a good thing?

I shall call upon my descendants who have evolved a palm covering their faces to express my feelings on this.

seamus

pickarooney wrote: »

A guy gets fired for encouraging students to think critically and not accept everything at face value - the very kind of thinking that brought about the theory of evolution - and this is a good thing?

Actually he was proposing that every theory on a particular subject has equal value, which is clearly not the case and is counterproductive when it comes to critical thinking because you waste time examining unfeasible concepts.

RedXIV

MagicMarker wrote: »

The Myth of the Flat Earth

No reputable scientist believed the Earth was flat. The greeks determined that the Earth was round a couple of thousand years ago.

Tell that to them

They still debate the issue.

sensibleken wrote: »

This one comes up a lot. No, people didn't think the world was flat, if anyone did it wasnt a majority view.

And scientific facts are constantly scrutinised. If a new piece of information comes to light and doesnt fit the established view of things then a new theory is put forward. Almost every paper published and peer reviewed tests theories, assumptions and facts.

It becomes a problem when someone in a position of power and influence denies all available and over whelming evidence and instead goes for some arcane creation myth outlined in a religious book and backed up by nothing.

Well this is point I was originially making. He's been kicked out for saying that he would actually research the idea of evolution before he accepted it. And he's being reprimanded for it. Surely as a scientist he should be allowed to try and debunk the theory as it will only make it stronger or provide new evidence

Wibbs

seamus wrote: »

Actually he was proposing that every theory on a particular subject has equal value, which is clearly not the case and is counterproductive when it comes to critical thinking because you waste time examining unfeasible concepts.

I would disagree. Unfeasible concepts have often, nay regularly have led to feasible ones. In order to critically think one has to be exposed to all theories. Thoughts and concepts should be unrestricted, otherwise we end up in stasis. Like pickarooney suggests it was the unfeasible nature of previous theories when exposed to evidence that gave us evolution. Any tweaking of the mechanism of evolution will come from someone pushing questions of its feasibility.

Einhard

RedXIV wrote: »

Tell that to them

Jesus, I actually think they're serious.

karma_

Wibbs wrote: »

I would disagree. Unfeasible concepts have often, nay regularly have led to feasible ones. In order to critically think one has to be exposed to all theories. Thoughts and concepts should be unrestricted, otherwise we end up in stasis. Like pickarooney suggests it was the unfeasible nature of previous theories when exposed to evidence that gave us evolution. Any tweaking of the mechanism of evolution will come from someone pushing questions of its feasibility.

Possibly, but I really fail to see how creationism should be in any way, an acceptable theory to be considered alongside evolution. Creationism is anathema to evolution.

sensibleken

RedXIV wrote: »

Tell that to them

They still debate the issue.




Well this is point I was originially making. He's been kicked out for saying that he would actually research the idea of evolution before he accepted it. And he's being reprimanded for it. Surely as a scientist he should be allowed to try and debunk the theory as it will only make it stronger or provide new evidence

Thats not the whole story. He said he dismisses evolution because it leaves god out. That shows both bias and an unsuitability for a job as a government scientist

http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/creationism-in-israel-the-fury-increases/

If someone comes up with credible evidence that evolution is wrong it will ruffle feathers but will become accepted. Its happened before (see bohr vs einstein).

But he is clearly dismissing it in favour of a completely lunatic idea that has no proof

vibe666

i think it's more to do with him thinking that creationism deserves any more serious study than anything else.

yet again it comes down to people not understanding the basics of what a scientific "theory" or a "law" actually is and comparing scientific theory to some drunken bloke down a pub having a "theory" about where his pint went.

a "theory" in science isn't just an idea, it's an explanation of known phenomena, which in this case is evolution. as far as mainstream science is concerned, after 150 years of studying testing & re-testing the available data, biological evolution is just about as much of a fact as its possible to get.

the "theory" of evolution as a whole is currently the best explanation we have of how evolution works.

i read somewhere that there are currently over 200,000 peer reviewed articles on the subject of evolution. that's 200,000 articles written by respected scientists based on their observations, experiments and studies that have been submitted to other respected scientists who have re-observed, re-experimented and re-studied the data and found it to be accurate.

based on that, the guy in Israel is an assclown who has no place being in charge of anything science related anywhere.

RedXIV

sensibleken wrote: »

Thats not the whole story. He said he dismisses evolution because it leaves god out. That shows both bias and an unsuitability for a job as a government scientist

http://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/creationism-in-israel-the-fury-increases/

If someone comes up with credible evidence that evolution is wrong it will ruffle feathers but will become accepted. Its happened before (see bohr vs einstein).

But he is clearly dismissing it in favour of a completely lunatic idea that has no proof

Ah my bad. I misread that

speedboatchase

What has his nationality got to do with anything? Latent anti-semitism?

Calibos

I think the Israeli guy should have been put in a sack and beaten with a big stick

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIaV8swc-fo

This BS about 'Teaching the Controversy' which is basically what this Israeli guy was proposing always reminds me of the, 'In the interests of balance' monologue from Dara O'Brians standup routine.

Sure you can teach the controversy between competing Hypothesis like say String Theory and Dark Matter theory but there is no controversy between Evolutionary theory which has more proof behind it than pretty much any other theory in science and the 'competing' theory of, "And holy god created man out of the dust and woman from his rib........"

sensibleken

speedboatchase wrote: »

What has his nationality got to do with anything? Latent anti-semitism?

No...just no.

RichieC

The bible doesnt have a chapter dedicated to the holes in the theory like otoos does.

It's not biologists who are cock sure yet its a main complaint against them by the religious right.

its the old rovian strategy of "attack their strengts"

44leto

There was a series on BBC4 the last few weeks called Jerusalem. The city is 5000 years old it is the holy site of 3 faiths. From its onset to present the present it has being in wars and suffered genocide after genocide.

I have come to the conclusion it is an unholy kip which needs to be abandoned then nuked. Its the one place on Earth were everybody is wrong.

Israel are just following the tradition of that region.

brimal

A bit odd that his nationality has to be mentioned.

Nice try OP, praising Israel for this decision, but not quiet praising. Have two get a dig in somewhere don't you.

And BTW, Israel has done more proportionally for science and the tech industry than most countries in the world, so this 'for once well done Israel' is complete nonsense.

Nodin

brimal wrote: »

A bit odd that his nationality has to be mentioned.

Nice try OP, praising Israel for this decision, but not quiet praising. Have two get a dig in somewhere don't you.

And BTW, Israel has done more proportionally for science and the tech industry than most countries in the world, so this 'for once well done Israel' is complete nonsense.

The contributions of Germany and Germans is similarily vast. Let us therefore never mention anything bad about them ever again.