Mike the Mad Biologist

…and that wasn’t the worst part. From Moue Magazine–who deserves much credit for the brilliant description of ID advocates as “self-hating scientists”:

In 2003, the school district told him to stop teaching ID in the classroom and he refused- but kept his job. He did remove most of the visible religious materials in his classroom but then gave his students the assignment of watching the movie Expelled with directions to “explain why it is important to examine this objectively and not let bias affect your observations.”

But the teacher is even nuttier than your typical ID advocate (hard as that is to believe):

…the BD-10A High Frequency Generator… is used in science classrooms to ionize contained gases to make them an identifiable color (a really fun lab in normal situations). The tip of this device can put out up to 50,000 volts. There is a warning on the product that says “Never touch or come in contact with the high voltage output of this device”. Which would seem like obvious advice.

Mr. Freshwater, however, decided to apply the device to the skin of several of his eighth grade students. He asked for classroom volunteers who wanted to see how the device worked. Without warning the children that it was going to be used on them and be painful, he pressed it to their skin and left a painful welt behind. A mother complained to the school after her son’s welt kept him awake all night in pain. Another parent complained about their child’s injury.

….I’ve taken dozens of science classes in my life and no teacher ever taught how an electric device worked by using it on the students… you shouldn’t run any voltage through a 13 year old. It is rather disturbing that such a thing needs to be said.

Intelligent Design isn’t a ‘theory’, it’s a pathology.

Comments

#1 Eric
June 23, 2008

To be fair, a single story of a guy who happens to be crazy enough to do something like this and also happens to believe in Intelligent Design says no more about Intelligent Design itself than a story about a crazy guy who believes in the Theory of Evolution would say about the ToE. You would complain if a creationist (or ID advocate – same thing) pulled up a news story about a guy who accepts evolution and also happened to kill a guy then concluded that because of this incident, evolution is a pathology.
#2 Guitar Eddie
June 23, 2008

“Intelligent Design isn’t a ‘theory’, it’s a pathology.”

As is religious fundamentalism. It is a social pathology.

GE
#3 C. David Parsons
June 23, 2008

THE BIGGER PICTURE IN THE DEBATE ON DARWINISM IS NOT INTELLIGENT DESIGN.

The reason is elementary: the Discovery Institute and other ID proponents leave out the Triune God, Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Hence, Richard Dawkins can make the case for �aliens� seeding the earth.

The Quest for Right, a series of 7 textbooks created for the public schools, represents the ultimate marriage between an in-depth knowledge of biblical phenomena and natural and physical sciences. The several volumes have accomplished that which, heretofore, was deemed impossible: to level the playing field between those who desire a return to physical science in the classroom and those who embrace the theory of evolution. The Quest for Right turns the tide by providing an authoritative and enlightening scientific explanation of natural phenomena which will ultimately dethrone the unprofitable Darwinian view.

“I am amazed at the breadth of the investigation – scientific history, biblical studies, geology, biology, geography, astronomy, chemistry, paleontology, and so forth – and find the style of writing to be quite lucid and aimed clearly at a general, lay audience.” ? Mark Roberts, former Editor of Biblical Reference Books, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

The Quest for Right series of books, based on physical science, the old science of cause and effect, has effectively dismantled the quantum additions to the true architecture of the atom. Gone are the nonexistent particles once thought to be complementary to the electron and proton (examples: neutrons, neutrinos, photons, mesons, quarks, Z’s, bosons, etc.) and a host of other pseudo particles.

To the curious, scientists sought to explain Atomic theory by introducing fantastic particles that supposedly came tumbling out of the impact between two particles, when in fact, the supposed finds were simply particulate debris. There are only two elementary particles which make up the whole of the universe: the proton and electron. All other particles were added via quantum magic and mathematical elucidation in an attempt to explain earthly phenomena without God.

Introducing the scheme of coincidence, which by definition, “is the systematic ploy of obstructionists who, in lieu of any divine intervention, state that any coincidental grouping or chance union of electrons and protons (and neutrons), regardless of the configuration, always produces a chemical element. This is the mischievous tenet of electron interpretation which states that all physical, chemical, and biological processes result from a change in the electron structure of the atom which, in turn, may be deciphered through the orderly application of mathematics, as outlined in quantum mechanics. A few of the supporting theories are: degrading stars, neutron stars, black holes, extraterrestrial water, antimatter, the absolute dating systems, and the big bang, the explosion of a singularity infinitely smaller than the dot of an �i� from which space, time, and the massive stellar bodies supposedly sprang into being.

The Quest for Right is not only better at explaining natural phenomena, but also may be verified through testing. As a consequence, the material in the several volumes will not violate the so-called constitutional separation of church and state. Physical science, the old science of cause and effect, will have a long-term sustainability, replacing irresponsible doctrines based on whim. Teachers and students will rejoice in the simplicity of earthly phenomena when entertained by the new discipline.

The Quest for Right. http://questforright.com
#4 Felstatsu
June 23, 2008

True enough Eric, but only cause 99% of real scientists would never do things like force their students to watch Expelled and examine it objectively while 100% of ID would want that to happen. Burning crosses into the students (from what I heard of the story anyways) is more extreme than most ID people would go, but they’ve already made a point of having fools in important positions, and one more fool making the news isn’t too far from what ID normally does.

His other issue, preaching in his science class, falls exactly under what ID wants to have happen. About the only bad thing from the ID point of view is that he kept his job and can’t be used as one of their martyrs.

2/3 points are representative of what ID has already shown us they want to have happen, and the remaining point is just another example of their general stupidity when it comes to conducting themselves in the world.
#5 Felstatsu
June 23, 2008

This is all about money for you C. David Parsons?

“The Quest for Right turns the tide by providing an authoritative and enlightening scientific explanation of natural phenomena which will ultimately dethrone the unprofitable Darwinian view.”

It’s also so very “impressive” that you got a Bibical magazine editor to write support for your very unscientific drivel that’s based around taking random information and twisting it till it supports the Bible.

Thanks though for providing more proof that ID people are just media whores looking for money and to subjugate humanity under them even though it costs us so much in actual learning. Better to go back to the dark ages and be happy slaves to a church than to actually learn the truths of this world, eh?

Sorry for the double post, but responding to Mr. Quest for Right was irresistible.
#6 sng
June 23, 2008

Felstatsu,

To be fair I think he meant “unprofitable” as in “unproductive”.

Not that he isn’t wrong on every possible level and that the post didn’t make my head hurt. And not that you’re wrong about his motives. But it’s even more fun to answer that phrase the way he meant it.
#7 pough
June 23, 2008

The Quest for Truth and a bag of nuts would make an awesome gift.
#8 Bob Calder
June 23, 2008

My doctor told me I could get rid of a sebaceous cyst by whacking it with Quest for Right.
#9 Brandy
June 23, 2008

From Moue Magazine–who deserves much credit for the brilliant description of ID advocates as “self-hating scientists”

Thanks! Glad you liked it.
#10 Evan
June 23, 2008

I think the point here is that he’s such an incompetent science teacher, he doesn’t know better than to poke a 13-year-old with a searing hot prod to “show them” how it works.

And… Yes. Mesons are an elaborate hoax. Sweet mother of potatoes.

“Think about how stupid the average person is. Now realize that half of us are even stupider than that.”
~George Carlin, May Pesci Rest His Soul (Or lack thereof).
#11 Immunologist
June 26, 2008

Quest for Truth: The idea that life may have been seeded on earth by intelligent life from another plant has been attributed to Dawkins via Expelled. ID proponents love the fact that he mentioned this idea on the film (See, not only is he a arrogant Darwinist, he also believes in little green men!). However, the ID guys themselves, in trying to distance themselves from their obvious creationist origins, offer that as one of the options for an “intelligent designer (doesn’t HAVE to be the Judeo-Christian god, you see (nudge nudge…)).” The concept was proposed, I believe, by Fred Hoyle some decades ago (panspermia?). Anyway, regardless of what you may think of Dawkins position on evolution, it is not accurate to say that Dawkins intends to make a case for this position. I doubt he credits it at all, based upon the books of his that I’ve read. Rather, it is another bit of weirdness arising from the questions asked, and the editing of the reponses that make up much of Expelled.