MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100147995

“VITAL ARTICLES ON SCIENCE/CREATION” *Dr. Helder is a botanist and President of Creation Science Association of Alberta. Impact #351 EVOLUTION The Secret Behind the Propaganda

2002· article· en· W7100147995 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEvolution and Science Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssociation (psychology)CreationismNatural (archaeology)Sociology of scientific knowledgeNatural law
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“Everybody ” knows, one might suppose, that evolution is about facts and the creation model is about belief. Certainly this was the message of the PBS TV series entitled “Evolution. ” An internal memo sent to PBS stations stated concerning evolution, “All known scientific evidence supports evolution.... New discoveries over the past 150 years have all supported the validity of the theory of evolution. ” (PBS Internal Memo. 2001. The Evolution Controversy: Use it or Lose it. Evolution Project/WGBH Boston. June 15, p. 5). The memo further defined a scientific theory as a “higher level of understanding that ties ‘facts ’ together ” (p. 5). As to the creation model, the memo dismissed it as “not science. It is part of a religious belief system... ” (p. 6). Such statements and other similar ones over the years have convinced many that science in general and evolution in particular are based on observations from the natural world and thus they are empirically or factually based. The interesting thing is that this is not the modern understanding of science among scientists them-selves. They have long since abandoned much concern for actual data.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1730.039

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvolution and Science EducationFrench-language works237,207