You've discovered a title that's missing from our library. Can you help donate a copy? When you buy books using these links the Internet Archive may earn a small commission. Open Library is a project of the Internet Archive , a c 3 non-profit. This edition doesn't have a description yet. Can you add one?
Previews available in: English. Add another edition? Copy and paste this code into your Wikipedia page.
Need help? Evolution Peter J. Donate this book to the Internet Archive library. If you own this book, you can mail it to our address below. Therefore, it is not merely the fossils that are a part of geologic column, and the support they lend to evolutionary theory, that raise the ire of young-Earth creationists but geology itself. In the pantheon of sciences producing evidence contrary to their beliefs, geology is historically and scientifically central to what they see as materialistic attacks on their beliefs.
It is no surprise, then, that they devote considerable effort to discrediting the logic and science behind geology. Since these quotes are not from a single source, as was the case in the original Quote Mine Project , there are some differences in how they are organized.
Before each quote there appears in brackets a brief description of the Editor's impression of the proposition that the quotes are cited for by creationists.
That is followed by at least one link to a creationist site using the quote mine. Naturally, these descriptions cannot be exhaustive and are only as accurate as any impression. By all means, you are encouraged to check for yourself as to creationist usage of the quotes. The easiest way to do so is to go to the Google Advanced Search page and, in the "Find results" box designated "with the exact phrase," enter a short, but distinctive, phrase from the quote mine and click on the "Search" button.
Of course, if you are here researching a particular use of a quote, you will already have an idea of how it is being used. The numbering of the quotes is different as well. While the original set of quote mines was numbered simply 1 - 86, these are numbered 5.
Finally, there are links at the bottom of the page to responses in the previous Quote Mine Projects concerning the geologic column. Bowler, Peter J. Johnston, Ian C. Internet History of Science Sourcebook. The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks.
The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply. O'Rourke, "Pragmatism vs. The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists on using only temporal concepts, because circularity is inherent in the derivation of time scales. To begin with, the first quote from this article has a false period that hurts the case of the quote miners.
The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply , feeling that explanations are not worth the trouble as long as the work brings results. This is supposed to be hard-headed pragmatism.
Emphasis added. The original pragmatism of Peirce, James, Dewey, and other turn-of-the-century American philosophers drew many of its best illustrations from geology, but geologists have not used the pragmatic method to improve their basic argument Notice that O'Rourke certainly has methods used by geologists as working.
That something works is certainly a justification for using it. O'Rourke continued:. In fact, the majority of the world's geologists, those in the communist nations, believe in dialectic materialism, which has often attacked pragmatism, and most geologists in western countries use a kind of pop materialism based on the same "matter-in-motion" mechanics. Materialism gives primacy to matter and slights mind.
It minimizes the role of the observer and his cognition. Consequently, it is ill-prepared to answer queries about how we obtain or verify a certain kind of knowledge.
Yet that is the prime concern of stratigraphy, which has to evaluate an enormous mass of particular facts that cannot be summarized in equations nor repeated in experiments.
Pragmatism, however, was designed to test concepts, to find out if they really do organize experience. It recommends that the definition be written like instructions, so that they many be verified directly.
The more abstract ideas may have to pass through intermediate terms before reaching objects, but any concept, regardless of how rarefied or esoteric, must be verifiable eventually through sense perception in space and time Kant, , p.
The pragmatic test for stratigraphic terms many be applied by two questions: 1 out of what observations was the concept formulated; 2 how is it to be confirmed in the field?
The article goes down hill from there. It was rambling, confused, extremely poorly written, more about bad philosophy than about geology, and filled with extreme left-wing vocabulary.
I am surprised that it got published in a science journal. Lets skip to the conclusions. I will ask the reader to read carefully. Note that he is clear well about as clear as his rambling article gets that circularity can be avoided. The charge of circular reasoning in stratigraphy can be handled in several ways. It can be denied , by calling down the Law of Evolution. Fossil dates rocks, not vice-versa, and that's that. It can be admitted , as a common practice.
The time scales of physics and astronomy are obtained by comparing one process with another. They can be compared with the geologic processes of sedimentation, organic evolution, and radioactivity. Or it can be avoided , by pragmatic reasoning. The first step is to explain what is done in the field in simple terms that can be tested directly. The field man records his sense perceptions on isomorphic maps and sections, abstracts the more diagnostic rock features, and arranges them according to their vertical order.
He compares this local sequence to the global column obtained from a great many man-years of work against his predecessors. As long as this cognitive process is acknowledged as the pragmatic basis of stratigraphy, both local and global sections can be treated as chronologies without reproach. Thus the quotes are out-of-context though in this case the creationists can be pardoned a bit due to O'Rourke's horrid writing. What is less pardonable is that the creationists think that quoting a confused and badly written article proves anything.
The mapper and the stratigrapher use similar work methods. The mapper does not ordinarily walk out every contact but travereses the strike, plotting and comparing sections. The stratigrapher also compares sections and in the early days was basically a mapper. Decades of collective experience have taught him which lithic and organic features can be expected to persist laterally and which cannot.
Index fossils are those known to have a wide horizontal and narrow vertical range and recur consistently above certain taxa and below others Is that last sentence saying exactly what the creationists are trying "refute" by quoting him?
If fossils in the field have a certain consistent order then it is certainly not circular reasoning to conclude that they have a stratigraphic order. They are regarded as the features most reliable for accurate, long-distance correlations. Stratigraphic work differs from mapping chiefly in the selection of data and the greater distance between sections.
The actual method of both is a comparison of rock features lithic, origanic, and radiometric in above-below relationship of the vertical order. Material bodies are finite, and no rock unit is global in extent, yet stratigraphy aims at global classification.
The particulars have to be stretched into universals somehow. Here ordinary materialism leaves off building up a system recognized by physical properties, to follow dialectic materialism, which starts with time units and regards the material bodies as their incomplete representatives. This is where the suspicion of circular reasoning crept in, because it seemed to the layman that the time units were abstracted from the geologic column, which had been put together from rock units.
The first radiometric dates had to be calibrated by comparison with some other standard, however crude. The best previous time scales had been obtained by estimating the average rate of sedimentation and applying it to the total thicknesses of the sedimentary rocks in the geologic column. The total cannot be measured at any one place; it had to be added up from empirical correlations.
Plotting the radiometric values against the maximum thicknesses of the geologic systems made a reassuring test Holmes, , p. Pitman M. In the s and s, the federal government, with the strong support and advocacy of family associations, began to develop and validate practices for children with disabilities and their families. These practices laid the foundation for implementing effective programs and services of early intervention and special education in states and localities across the country.
Landmark court decisions further advanced increased educational opportunities for children with disabilities. For example, the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens v. Commonwealth and Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia established the responsibility of states and localities to educate children with disabilities.
The EHA guaranteed a free, appropriate public education, or FAPE, to each child with a disability in every state and locality across the country. The EHA was a response to Congressional concern for two groups of children: the more than 1 million children with disabilities excluded entirely from the education system and the children with disabilities who had only limited access to the education system and were therefore denied an appropriate education.
This latter group comprised more than half of all children with disabilities who were living in the U. To achieve the national goals for access to education for all children with disabilities, several special issues and special populations required federal attention. Key amendments to the law in the s and s reflected these national concerns. The s saw a national concern for young children with disabilities and their families.
While the EHA mandated programs and services for children 3 to 21 years that were consistent with state law, the amendments to the EHA mandated that states provide programs and services from birth. These early intervention and preschool programs prepared young children with disabilities to meet the academic and social challenges that lie ahead of them, both while in school and in later life. In the school year, 4,, students aged 3 through 21 were served under EHA.
By the school year, 4,, infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities from birth through age 21 were served under IDEA. The s and s saw a push to expand the opportunities for educating children with disabilities in the least restrictive environment.
Additionally, in , the U. Supreme Court addressed for the first time, what is meant by a free appropriate public education under EHA. In Hendrick Hudson Dist. Of Ed. Rowley , the Supreme Court concluded that to meet its obligation to provide FAPE, the school district must provide access to specialized instruction and related services which are individually designed to provide educational benefit to the child with a disability.
In , the Court revisited the question of what level of educational benefit the school district must confer on children with disabilities to provide FAPE, as noted in Endrew F. Douglas County School District Re-1 below. The law has also supported the preparation of students for vocational success through new and improved transition programs.
Of student with disabilities ages 14 through 21 who were known to have left school in the school year:. The s and s saw revised regulations to the IDEA.
0コメント