One. Essentially, "[s]tudies of schoolchildren who read in varying alphabets and characters suggest that those who are dyslexic in one language, say Chinese or English, may not be in another, such as Italian." Why? The answer may lie partly in the extent of letter-sound correspondence. My guess is that close to zero literate Romans were dyslexic, since Latin is probably the most regular language in existence - one letter has at most two or three sounds. Also, according to Chinese researchers, "Arabic numerals of standard arithmetic -- used by readers of Chinese and English alike -- activate different brain regions depending on which of the two languages people had first learned to read" - likely due to the nature of the Chinese written language, with pictures versus letters.
Author Robert Lee Hotz helpfully provides links to several abstracts of journal articles etc. for further reading:
- Dyslexia is different in readers whose writing systems are different.
- A description of how literacy influences brain organization.
- Not technically an abstract, but rather an exploration of the neurobiology of reading.
- Another non-abstract, on how we use words.
- Finally, a report from the U. S. National Research Council.
Tactics: Introduce bills to allow/encourage teachers to critique, attack, or question evolution. The gist of the new bills: "Embrace lessons on evolution. In fact, insist students deserve to learn more -- including classes that probe the theory for weakness. They believe -- and their opponents agree -- that this approach will prove more acceptable to the public and harder to challenge in court." Evolutionists are predictably worried; see also this sampling of critiques and defenses of evolution.. "[A member] of the science-education group, regards the academic-freedom bills as a more serious threat to evolution education because they give teachers so much latitude." Yes. Sure. If evolution is really unassailable, why is it afraid to defend itself?
Three. In the style of Book-a-Minute:
Farmers try to KILL bacteria, and it is HARD. They may well FAIL, in addition to DESTROYING the wildlife.
2 comments:
Evolution isn't afraid to defend itself. It does so constantly. What opponents to academic freedom bills are worried about is that they will introduce non-scientific theories into a science classroom: creationism, intelligent design, etc.
We got pretty far on creationism. And don't lump creationism with ID and/or any of {flat earth, stork carrying baby, leeches, total reliance on prayer cures, ...}. That's misrepresentation and a bad move on your part.
Post a Comment