Critical Thinking Revisited

In the comments, Matt Smith provides a link to some of the teaching materials used in the Oregon creationism schoolroom case. I can expand on it a little bit:

1. Here is the associated news article: http://www.bendweekly.com/index.php?news=3900.
2. Here’s the “Eugenics” presentation: http://www.bendweekly.com/ppt/Eugenics-WEBPAGE_files/frame.htm (requires MSIE)
3. Here’s the “Human” presentation: http://www.bendweekly.com/ppt2/Human-WEBPAGE_files/frame.htm (requires MSIE)

The material is filled with propaganda and half-truths just as all of us anticipated. We’ll talk about just one slide after the jump:

In a slide of the “Human” presentation titled “Chimpanzees and Humans,” the following information is presented:

1. An estimated 90-98% DNA similarity (depending on the methods used)
   1. Consider: Humans have +/- 3 billion base pairs.
      1. 10% of 3 billion is 300 million base pairs.
      2. 2% of 3 billion is 60 million base pairs.
   2. Consider: Pig heart valves are used to replace human heart valves. Chimpanzee valves are not used.

[ Outline converted from bullets to numbers for ease of reference. ]

This is the kind of material presented as a lesson in “critical thinking.” It is not followed — as you might expect if you were reading a lesson on critical thinking — with a slide explaining specious logic.

Point 1.1 would benefit from some citations. I don’t know any studies suggesting a figure as low as “90%” similarity. The study that showed greater difference than commonly described did not do so by finding different base-pairs (as this slide suggests) but by looking at the order in which the base pairs occur — something that wasn’t possible until recently. [ See Wired. ]

Point 1.2 is typical of creationist argument — it encourages people to draw an assumption based on “common sense” while withholding vital pieces of information that might change someone’s conclusion. For example, this presentation doesn’t point out that, ethical questions about intelligence aside,

1. Pig anatomy is still quite similar, even if the genome is more different.
2. Chimps are endangered species
3. Chimps are much harder to care for
4. Chimps are much more difficult to breed
   1. That means there’s less supply
   2. That means they’re more difficult to genetically engineer

If this is a lesson on critical thinking, it’s missing the slides on how to spot bullshit when someone’s feeding it to you.