How experiments work in Kansas

  • Thread starter Rach3
  • Start date
  • #1
Rach3
I caught this gem in an article in today's New York Times - it was inconspicious and the writer didn't seem to notice it. It's a quote from Dr. Steve E. Abrams, the anti-evolution chairman of the Kansas state school board. See if you notice it. (You may need to read it twice!)

Steve Abrams said:
He said that the new science curriculum in no way opened the door to intelligent design or creationism and that any claim to the contrary “is an absolute falsehood.”

“We have explicitly stated that the standards must be based on scientific evidence,” Dr. Abrams said, “what is observable, measurable, testable, repeatable and unfalsifiable.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/01/us/01evolution.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

edit: see rach's post below, the NY Times made an error, the original statement was "falsifiable".
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Rach3
If you really give up, highlight to read:



"Unfalsifiable"
 
  • #3
Bystander
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
5,191
1,212
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
 
  • #4
Rach3
Does he even know what those words mean?
 
  • #5
JamesU
Gold Member
750
3
I'm confused
 
  • #6
DaveC426913
Gold Member
18,895
2,400
yomamma said:
I'm confused
For a theory to be valid, it must be falsifiable. If there's no way that a theory can be proven wrong, it is not a theory. He should have said 'falsifiable'.



eg. Since there's no way to prove God does not exist, God is not a theory.
 
  • #7
JamesU
Gold Member
750
3
oh, okay....

:rofl:
 
  • #8
Rach3
See, even yomamma thinks it's funny! That means yomamma is smarter than the doctorate-holding chair of the Kansas school board. Was that a compliment? Barely... :tongue2:
 
  • #9
JamesU
Gold Member
750
3
\/\/007! I got a compliment
 
  • #10
Pengwuino
Gold Member
4,989
15
yomamma said:
I'm confused
Figures....
 
  • #11
453
0
DaveC426913 said:
For a theory to be valid, it must be falsifiable. If there's no way that a theory can be proven wrong, it is not a theory. He should have said 'falsifiable'.



eg. Since there's no way to prove God does not exist, God is not a theory.
Popper is not the last word on the subject you know...
 
  • #12
Rach3
DeadWolfe said:
Popper is not the last word on the subject you know...
Does anyone advocate unfalsifiability as a requirement for a proper theory? I thought not.
 
  • #13
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,051
18
I'm wondering if it's not the reporter that got it wrong - trying to correct what he thought was a slip of the tongue, perhaps?
 
Last edited:
  • #14
Evo
Mentor
23,146
2,742
You've got to love how he's back tracking to try to save his butt.

I think we'll see all the pro ID people on the Kansas school board voted out. A lot of large companies that had planned to move to Kansas backed out citing the school board ruling would make it unlikely for them to lure any competant employees to move to Kansas. The ID lovers on the school board aren't popular here.
 
  • #15
Rach3
what do you know

Corrections: For the Record
Published: August 3, 2006

...

A front-page article on Tuesday about the reemergence of the teaching of evolution as an issue in the primary election for the Kansas Board of Education misstated a word in a quotation from the board chairman, Dr. Steve E. Abrams, who defended the conservative majority’s science curriculum. He said, “We have explicitly stated that the standards must be based on scientific evidence, what is observable, measurable, testable, repeatable and falsifiable’’ — not unfalsifiable. (Go to Article)
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/pageoneplus/corrections.html

Gokul figured it out!

Apologies to Dr. Abrams. I didn't want him to be misquoted, no matter how much of a loon he is.
 
  • #16
Rach3
Though I will say - shame on the NYT editors for not catching such an obvious error in time. Their job is to find errors before the readers starting posting about them on online forums. They should be very embarrased about this, and deservedly.
 
  • #17
Rach3
(moderators - I can't edit my original post, if any of you would put in a brief disclaimer about the NYT's error it would be much appreciated.)
 
  • #18
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,051
18
Last edited:
  • #19
Mk
1,984
3
DaveC426913 said:
eg. Since there's no way to prove God does not exist, God is not a theory.
Well, that's not what they think.
 

Related Threads on How experiments work in Kansas

Replies
213
Views
14K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K
Top