As my first grade daughter’s science book says, science is the pursuit of knowledge about the world (including outer space) around us using our 5 senses to make observations, devise and conduct experiments, then observe the results and record them. That is a nice simple and totally accurate description. It would work if the curriculum didn’t try to insert the opposite into science and still call it science.

Adult version of it is nearly the same. Science is the cold hard methodical study of the world around us combined with experimentation to validate or disprove an observational opinion. If it cannot be tested to prove or disprove the asserted opinion hopefully based on observation, then it remains just that – an opinion. You can call it a hypothesis. If it is complex and well thought out, you can call it a model. But to call it a Theory using a little known definition of the word is disingenuous.

Sometimes, the terms inferring and Inferential Science will be used to justify a stance. Looking up the definition of infer gets you to realize inferring is merely inserting your opinion into a set of facts or statements. So inferring grants nothing to science but it is done A LOT and put in the textbooks.

So what is my main thrust for the future curriculum articles concerning Science? Correcting the inferences placed into the curriculum because a group of select individuals are inserting their opinions over facts and attempting to sway the population under the guise of “science.” I would call it what it is. It is a series of lies used to misguide children with a byproduct of degrading the science curriculum.

Science is about facts, study, and measurements. Science is not about untested opinions no matter what wording a person tries to use.

-MatureKid

• 0 comments »

Now you may be wondering if you are inclined towards mathematics, how is it possible for there to be problems in mathematics? Where are the omissions, the falsehoods, and distortions?

That would be a good and rationale line of questioning. To answer that, let me give you a bit of my background. I was a Math major in college. I know my Trigonometry, Algebra, Calculus, Math Logic, and Abstract Math. I’ve had Geometry at all the levels as well as Statistics and many of the other forms involved. All of them boil down to the answers you generate must be the same on both sides of the equals sign. The procedures you use to calculate answers must be done correctly to generate correct results. It is easy to tell of you did the math right or wrong.

With the exclusion of T-Proofs in Geometry, there is no room or measure for assumptions in math. It is guaranteed to throw off your calculations. Math doesn’t lie, right?

Well, correct. If properly executed, the procedures in math do not lie as math is neutral. Math is rather cold hard and logical. There isn’t any give in it. So how does it land on my topics of problems in math?

The problems in math stem from the strength of math. Math is cold, hard, and logical. There is no give in it. Either you did the math right, or you did the math wrong. So to the multitudes, math evidence can be called on as a solid argument in a topic. That is the problem. The multitudes are indirectly fed information and bravado to not question mathematical evidence. They give in to the assumption that math doesn’t lie.

They are right and wrong. The answers generated are likely executed correctly mathematically. Where most fail to see the flaw is the people using the math may not be honest. The procedures of math are the same. But those using mathematics can insert selective numbers to fabricate misleading computations. Math doesn’t lie. People do. So those with a reason to distort the results do so by distorting the data so the answer is what they want it to be – not what it truly is.

-MatureKid

• 0 comments »

History is quite simply the recorded past. To the extent that we can piece it together is another thing. Events closer to the current day are easier to verify as more recording mediums were used and are being used so information can be verified. However, the further back you go in time; the harder it is to retain accuracy.

Why? Quite simply is we weren’t there and insufficient recorded data. Why do these two reasons matter so much? In order to understand history and any recorded media found, we have to understand the cultural settings of the time, the main driving influences of the time, the languages used with their numerous inflections and regional meanings, in addition to how the media was recorded and by whom. Simply put, providing an accurate rendition of historical events is not an easy task.

The best one can hope for is different media found in different locations and cultures confirming the existence of an event or an individual in history. With the multitude of cross referencing, then greater certainty can be had on what the documents or media has in common. The challenge is how one conveys what is known about history and what is not known about history accurately enough so that the reader or student has sufficient enough information.

Therein lays the opportunity for individuals and groups to omit, purposefully distort or blatantly fabricate information to fit the desire of the group or author. What is not known can radically alter how the reader or student views the world. One example that I will be diving into (amongst many) are the Founding Fathers of the USA in particular the signers of the Declaration of Independence that history books ignore.

-MatureKid

• 0 comments »