| |
The Skeptics' Guide To The Universe - Podcast 245 - 3/25/2010
|
|
|
|
|
<<< Back to Podcast Archive
|
|
The Skeptics' Guide To The Universe
The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe is produced by SGU Productions, LLC - dedicated to promoting critical thinking, reason, and the public understanding of science through online and other media. The first episode of the SGU podcast went online on May 4th, 2005. It soon became a popular science/skeptical podcast, and remains one of the most popular science podcasts on iTunes.
SGU Podcasting Awards: SGU on XM: You can listen to the SGU on America's Talk XM 166 every Saturday night from 8-9pm Eastern.
|
Podcast
245
-
March 25, 2010
|
Interview with George Hrab
News Items: Rise of the Dinosaurs, Woman X, Starchild Update
Who's That Noisy
Your Questions and E-mails: Evangelical Listeners
Name That Logical Fallacy
Science or Fiction
|
|
|
|
Segment: News Items
|
|
|
Segment: Who's That Noisy
|
|
Who's That Noisy
|
Answer to last week - Alpheid shrimp
|
|
Segment: Questions and E-mails
|
|
Question # 1 - Evangelical Listeners
|
Guys, I'm an avid listener and wanted to weigh in on the homeschool topic.
The USA Today article you were discussing said that 83% of homeschoolers wanted to provide religious or moral instruction. But it also said that 88% had concerns about the school environment (including safety, drugs, peer pressure).
We homeschool our kids because the public system does a lousy job with education in general and safety in particular, and partly because we can't afford a private school. I believe that's the primary reason most do it. Yes, religious instruction is important for some, but most homeschoolers we know are more concerned about the school environment (safety), not the content of what is being taught. Also, there is plenty of opportunity to supplement traditional schooling with religious content if that's desired, you know, "sunday school", without taking the kids out of school. So I don't really get "religious instruction" as a reason.
You discarded out of hand the strong evidence that homeschooled children test better than kids who have been in public schools, why? If selection bias is a concern, just filter by college freshmen first, SAT takers second, and then divide into homeschooled and non-homeschooled at that point, yes?
The wiki is good, and I belive, balanced too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooling
It is difficult to grasp the many different state requirements for testing. Here is a good resource for state-by-state standards if you're interested:
http://www.hslda.org/laws/default.asp
I realize that homeschooling isn't for everyone. It depends on the child, the parents, finances, etc. I can tell you one thing, it would be much easier for us to just send them off to public school and not worry about it. We take it very seriously and try to do it right. I think most do, probably a few do not.
Now, for something critical I've been wanting to write you about for a while. Sometimes I wish you guys at the podcast would realize that many of your listeners are not scientists, probably many are curious evangelical christians like myself, who enjoy the debate and the topical content of the podcast but don't like being called names or ridiculed. I've learned a lot from you guys but I've also had to learn to filter out some of the attitude, the generalizations and judgments you dish out, to get the good stuff from the podcast.
We are evangelical christians, but we're people too. And that was not factor in the (very difficult) decision we made to homeschool. We can't wait to take our kids to see the Spitzer Human Origins exhibit in DC this year. Please don't assume that most homeschoolers are ignorant of the truth of evolution or other science topics. We can't control what the book publishers put out (except with our wallets).
So what do you say guys, open up the tent just a little bit? We're listening too.
Bill Ellis
Greensboro, NC
|
|
Segment: Name That Logical Fallacy
|
|
Name That Logical Fallacy
|
Howdy Rogues!
As I've listened to all your programs I've noticed that whenever the Roman Catholic Church expresses its doctrine regarding the sanctity of human life, usually in the context of embryonic stem cell research, one or more rogues frequently makes some comment about the Church's sorry history of child sexual abuse, related cover ups, and subsequent legal cases, as if the Church's horrible failure in one area robs it of all credibility on other issues. This strikes me as some sort of fallacy, but is it an ad hominem, poisoning the well, a red herring, or the genetic fallacy?
On a related note, is there a correct skeptical or scientific answer to ethical issues arising out of IVF, embryonic stell cell research, or cloning? We might agree that there are naturalistic evolutionary sources for our ethics and moral sensibilities, but that does not automatically mean that non-religious persons cannot be ambivalent or even opposed to abortion, IVF, embryonic stell cell research, or cloning. Your thoughts?
Love your shows. Keep up the great work.
Giles Corey
Salem, MA
|
|
Segment: Interview
|
|
|
Segment: Science or Fiction [ Click Here to Show the Answers ]
|
Item # 1  Science
|
Benjamin Franklin published Poor Richard's Almanac under the alter ego of a poor man named Richard Saunders.
|
|
Item # 2 Science
|
Susan Jocelyn Bell Burnell is credited with the discovery of pulsars (rotating neutron stars) but her advisor, Anthony Hewish, was awarded the Nobel Prize for the discovery.
|
Item # 3  Fiction
|
Galileo Galilei became blind later in life as a consequence of studying sunspots through his telescope.
|
|
Item # 4 Science
|
Louis Pasteur refused to shake anyone's hand for fear of catching germs.
|
|
Segment: Quote of the Week
|
|
Quote of the Week
|
“My brain is the key that sets my mind free.”
- Harry Houdini
|
|
|
|
|
|