Science+in+the+Courts

Ms. Campbell


 * TASK**:


 * Students will work in small groups to produce a collaborative wiki space that illustrate an understanding of topics discussed in the unit, how to research court cases, and explain how science applies to the American justice system in the past and present. The wiki space should incorporate the use of at least three technology strategies that you have learned during the technology program. **

= = = Day 1 Objectives 7/19/2010: = 1. Define Evolution in our own words 2. Evaluate social, cultural, and political events of the early 1900s
 * // Students will be Able to //** :

Opener Video Questions: 1. The objective of the video is to outline the evolutionary process that led up to modern day humans. 2. Why does Moe devolve into an lizard? How does a squid turn into a fish? 3. Find a similar image.

Three most important words - Adaptation (those who change/evolve via adapting to their tough environments are the ones who survive. The basis of evolution is changing in order to continue to survive), Survival (Surviving is the pinnacle of evolution, and the reason it occurs), Traits (the traits of a species are what changes when evolution occurs, and they are what allow an animal to survive)



3 Minute Pause

1. We now know that evolution involves the passing of genes from generation to generation within a species. These drastic changes are the results of mutations, random changes, as well as natural selection, changes out of necesity. When environments become hostile, evolution comes into play in order to allow species to fare better in their newly changed habitats. Evolution occurs as a result. 2. Evolution poses some interesting concepts. The possibility that all animals and creatures originate from one common ancestor is not one to be taken lightly. If true, this original creature could be easily called a God...one whose existence is actually proven. By science. 3. There are some people that think evolution is untrue. How can that be when there is so much evidence being shoved into their face? Are they merely in denial?



Words we added include: HABITAT. Habitats are a major part of evolution because depending on how harsh they are from the perspective of a species living there, evolution may occur within that species. Their newly gained traits will help them survive the habitat. GENES. Genes are a major part of evolution, because changes within genes are what spur evolution to occur. Genes decide what changes will become prevalent in a species from birth. EXTINCTION. This word was added because this is the result of species that fail to evolve to sufficiently meet new challenges in their environment. For example, the do-do bird, that became extinct because it could not adapt to being hunted by humans.




 * Do you think that scientific research and discovery might be in conflict with some values and ideals of the 1920's? Why or why not? Provide evidence from today's activities to support your response.**

Yes. In the 1920's, things were certainly changing. But scientific discoveries were changes that, at the time, were too farfetched, or too extraordinary, to convincingly accept. For example, the Ku Klux Klan, a group determined to keep things the way they are, was very oppossed to evolution. Evolution threatened to change everything by proving traditional religious values as absolutely wrong and cause a major revolution in how Americans would start thinking.

1. Identify parallels between this topic and conflicts/events that are going on today. 2. Make an argument for or against the theory of Evolution supporting your argument.

1. Parallels between this topic and events going on today are the overlying topic of science vs religion. In the 1920s, it was Evolution vs God's Creations. In modern times, it is Science as a whole vs Religion as a whole. The argument over who is correct is still evergoing...and equally never ending. 2. I would support Evolution. Because...what does its opponents have as proof //against// it's authenticity? That God created everything and creatures did not evolve by themselves? Not a convincing argument. Evolution on the other hand has scientific speculation and sound logic backing it. It makes sense for animals to evolve, develop new traits and abilities, in order to acclimatize to harsher growing environments. And that is the basis of science - for sense to be made. What does religion say? That God did this, did that, did everything? Cooked your dinner? Gave you a shower? Absolutely unconvincing.

= = = Day 2 Objectives 7/20/10: = 1. Explain the controversy of teaching evolution in schools 2. Identify the different views about teaching evolution in schools 3. Evaluate the impact of the Scopes trial in America
 * // Students will be Able to //** :



Summary: The way that humans are arguing over evolution is pathetic. They are killing and hanging each other over such a trivial matter. The author believes that it is so pathetic that, infact, even monkeys would ironically look down upon humans for their immature behavior. The man being hung is equivalent to a black man being lynched - thew argument over evolution is a travesty and people think they can get away with anything.

Simpson's Clip Questions

1. The message of this clip was to send the message that creationism is a bunch of garbage and evolution is what should be taught in school. Also, law enforcement is wasting its time dealing with persecuting people teaching evolution...instead using that time to stop murderers and save lives. 2. Could something like this probably happen? No, probably not. The principal in The Simpsons is a moron and was threatened to teach creationism by being threatened by the church. Hopefully most principals in actuality wouldn't succumb to something like that.

A PiratePad done as a group discussing our comments on the Butler Act

=Players in the Scopes Trial=

Clarence Darrow: Clarence Darrow's role in the trial was as the most famous lawyer who ( m defended John Scopes. He argued for the side of science, and pressed on the prosecuting attorney, Bryan, to admit that the Genesis and bible was a bunch of garbage. His main goal was to prove that the Butler Law was unconstitutional. However, h e only ended up creating a furious debate over the issue of religion vs science. Like his father, Darrow was an atheist, and thus argued for the side of science with a firm belief in the truth of evolution. Scopes was found guilty, but Darrow later appealed the case to the Tennesee supreme court. Scopes was released on a technicality but the Butler Act remained.

William Jennings Bryan: William Jennings Bryan was the prosecuter of the Scopes Trial up against John Scopes defenseea team, lawyer Clarence Darrow with the help and support of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).This person was significant to the case because he fought against the question of whether or not the Theory of Evolution should be taught in classrooms. It gave him the opportunity to rep resent the people who also did not believe/support the Theory of Evolution and it gave government and people an opportunity to make their opinions on the matter known as well as to ultimately come up with a desicion.

ACLU: The ACLU is organization in which they defend anyone being accused of teaching evolution. In Tennessee V Scopes the ACLU defended John Scopes for he had been accused of teaching evolution. The ACLU told John Scopes to teach evolution on purpose; for teaching out the text book is requirement in Tennessee he had no choice but to break the law. John Scopes was found guilty of teaching evolution but he made a point the law was pointless. Basically, these guys were the masterminds and set up the whole shenanigan in an effort to attract more people and money to the poor town of Dayton.

John Scopes: 1900-1970 He was a physical education teacher. However, he was also a substitute biology teacher, and was asked by businessmen to be indicted teaching evolution. At 24, he was a defendant and he claimed he was innocent because he did nothing wrong. Basically, he didn't teach evolution, he was just there to be used.

Judge John T. Raulston: John T. Raulston, the judge in the Scopes trial, was "a popular local attorney of no special competence." Although his rulings more often favored the prosecution and his deference to Bryan was especially obvious, Raulston was credited with "acting according to his lights as well as his prejudices." The attention that came with the Scopes trial pleased Raulston, and he seemed to have a near obsession with having his picture taken. Raulston was a deeply religious man. During the trial he quoted scripture. It was also his practice to open proceedings with a prayer whenever a clergyman was present. He did not like evolution since it challenged his belief in the bible and creationism.

= = =Conclusion= Clarence Darrow was the defense attorney, on John Scopes side for the case. He was atheist and approved of evolution. William Jennings Bryan was the prosecutor, trying to convict Scopes. He was religious and was skeptical of the evolutionary theory. The ACLU was a pro evolution organization that publically defended John Scopes and were the ones that actually told Scopes to teach evolution straight out of the book. Following the book was a Tennessee law so this created a loophole in the system. John Scopes is the man in the spotlight. He was sued for teaching evolution in classrooms and breaking the Butler law. However, he claims his innocence based on how he was only doing his job and he was set up by the ACLU anyway. Judge John T. Raulston was the residing judge for the case, but he was biased. He liked Jennings and was incredibly religious, thus he was dubious of the evolution theory. He condemned Scopes as guilty. I do not agree with this decision. Despite the whole loophole, Scopes did obey the law...technically. I do not agree with the Butler act in the first place.

As for the real outcome, I'm glad that Scopes was released and not fined. He was merely a pawn shuffled between the hands of the ACLU and the government in order to gain publicity for the city.

=Glogster on the Scopes Monkey Trial=



Link: []

My background is of a book cover titled evolution vs creationism. Quite fitting if I do say so myself. Images on the bottom give a basic, surface summary of the case. Tennessee, with Prosecutor Bryan at the forefront, sues John Scopes, defended by Defense Attorney Darrow. Above all that, is the important behind the scenes info. It all starts with the Butler Act, so I put an image of a butler...clever huh. Next to it is a quote explaining what it did and a little more info on it. To the right is an image of a shadowy person, used to symbolize my thoughts on how the ACLU was a shady group and ran things from the backroom. Below, more walls of text an explanation. As well as two nice pictures. One comedic one of monkeys evolving into men...whom devolve into slaves to computers. Above that, an image of a pokemon evolutionary line. Because whenever I think evolution I think pokemon. The same might hold true for many kids.

=CSI interactive games=

On the CSI website, I explored forensic biology, human toxicology, and firearms comparisons. I found toxicology interesting because it involves some very disturbing things that the average person would not want to do for a living. This includes sticking needles into dead people's eyes to extract vitruous humor, and taking the maggots off a corpse and throwing them into a bladder to create some incredibly appetizing maggot milkshakes. Comparing firearms is more difficult than I thought. Guns have both class characteristics as well as individual characteristics - making the matching of a bullet to the gun that fired it more difficult that it should be.

=Science in the courts project=

http://courtroomscience.wikispaces.com/1957+double+murder+cold+case

Our focus on this project was the connection between modern courts and science. We centered on a case that involved a criminal getting away with sexual assault, robbery, and double murder. The case remained unsolved for decades, but thanks to science, the man in question was finally found and captured in the name of justice.