The Tangled Bank

Tuesday, November 08, 2005

PZ Myers's avatar

Goodbye, Kansas

It's a sad day for American science. We've lost Kansas.

Risking the kind of nationwide ridicule it faced six years ago, the Kansas Board of Education approved new public-school science standards Tuesday that cast doubt on the theory of evolution.

The 6-4 vote was a victory for "intelligent design" advocates who helped draft the standards. Intelligent design holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by a higher power.

Critics of the new language charged that it was an attempt to inject God and creationism into public schools, in violation of the constitutional ban on state establishment of religion.

All six of those who voted for the new standards were Republicans. Two Republicans and two Democrats voted no.

For the next few years, a lot of schoolkids are going to get taught slippery twaddle—instead of learning what scientists actually say about biology, they're going to get the phony pseudoscience of ideologues and dishonest hucksters. And that means the next generation of Kansans are going to be a little less well informed, even more prone to believing the prattlings of liars, and the cycle will keep on going, keep on getting worse.

This, for instance, is baloney.

The new standards say high school students must understand major evolutionary concepts. But they also declare that the basic Darwinian theory that all life had a common origin and that natural chemical processes created the building blocks of life have been challenged in recent years by fossil evidence and molecular biology.

The proponents of these changes don't have any idea what the fossil and molecular evidence says, and they are misrepresenting it. There is no credible evidence against common descent and chemical evolution; those concepts are being strengthened, year by year. What does this school board think to gain by teaching students lies?

In addition, the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.

Rewriting the definition of science seems a rather presumptuous thing for a school board to do, I think, especially when their new definition is something contrary to what working scientists and major scientific organizations say is science. As for removing the limitation to natural phenomena, what do they propose to add? Ghosts, intuition, divine revelation, telepathic communications from Venusians? It's simply insane.

The clowns of Kansas don't think so, of course.

"This is a great day for education. This is one of the best things that we can do," said board chairman Steve Abrams. Another board member who voted in favor of the standards, John Bacon, said the move "gets rid of a lot of dogma that's being taught in the classroom today."

John Calvert, a retired attorney who helped found the Intelligent Design Network, said changes probably would come to classrooms gradually, with some teachers feeling freer to discuss criticisms of evolution. "These changes are not targeted at changing the hearts and minds of the Darwin fundamentalists," Calvert said.

The Seattle-based Discovery Institute, which supports challenges to Darwinian evolutionary theory, praised the Kansas effort. "Students will learn more about evolution, not less as some Darwinists have falsely claimed," institute spokesman Casey Luskin said in a written statement.

Casey Luskin is a toady for the DI, so what does he know? There is a straightforward body of evidence for evolution to which students should be introduced—evidence that high school curricula barely touch on as it is. Adding a collection of false and confusing claims about what scientists say is only going to diminish the legitimate science that can be taught. And teaching absurdities, such as that science deals with the supernatural, represents a load of garbage that instructors at the college level are going to have to scoop out of the brains of these poor students. At least, that is, out of the diminishing number of students who will pursue genuine science, rather than the dead-end vapor of Intelligent Design creationism.

Goodbye, Kansas. I don't expect to see many of your sons and daughters at my university in coming years, unless the teachers of your state refuse to support the outrageous crapola their school board has foisted on them. I hope the rest of the country moves on, refusing to join you in your stagnant backwater of 18th century hokum.


Since I got a useful list of the pro and con members of the board in the comments, I thought it would be a good idea to bring it up top and spread the word.

Here are the Kansas good guys. When they come up for re-election, vote for them.

Pro-evolution, the heirs of the Enlightenment:
Janet Waugh
Sue Gamble
Carol Rupe
Bill Wagnon

Here are the Kansas bad guys. Vote against them whenever you can.

Pro-intelligent-design, the wretched sucktards of Ignorance:
Kathy Martin
Kenneth Willard
John W. Bacon
Iris Van Meter
Connie Morris
Steve Abrams


Trackback url: http://tangledbank.net/index/trackback/3329/fzQAcXeX/

Comments:
#47828: — 11/08  at  09:57 PM
I checked this place every 10 minutes, knowing you'd say something about it. It is unfortunate, we'll have to see how dover turns out.

-----
"As with all of ID, the important thing is first to have the concept. Production can then follow as a matter of course.” -Dembski



#47830: — 11/08  at  09:59 PM
We have NOT lost Kansas.

This happened there six years ago, and the IDiots were voted out at the next election. They went back in with stealth candidates once the voters stopped paying attention. The people of Kansas will bounce the clowns off their school board this time, too.

-jcr



#47831: — 11/08  at  10:02 PM
One wonders if the national mockery will result in a flip next election cycle. I have my doubts Kansans will be so fortunate a second time.



's avatar #47834: PZ Myers — 11/08  at  10:16 PM
And bounce 'em right back in again. Meanwhile, it's the kids who are turned into shuttlecocks in the middle.

PZ Myers
Division of Science and Math
University of Minnesota, Morris



#47838: — 11/08  at  10:50 PM
I know that on the KSBE, four members voted for rationality. Three of them are Janet Waugh, Sue Gamble, and Carol Rupe. Does anyone have the fourth? These four should be thanked and congratulated, emailed kudos and encouraged to keep up the good fight.

Their opponents, of course, should be pilloried as the dark ages goons they are.



#47839: J — 11/08  at  11:01 PM
Hopefully Kansas will bounce back. But the fact that there is still a debate is kind of disheartening, and that the real victims are children's minds. I'm entering science as a physiology major so this evolutionary/IDiotic debate has caught me by the neck-- and the more it goes on, the more I admire the way science pursues knowledge.



#47842: Shinka — 11/08  at  11:24 PM
I have to say, though I find this decision appaling, as I've wrote about in my blog, I can't seem to find the evidence in the new science standards that supports this particular part of the article:
"In addition, the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena."
I'm sure I'm just missing it, but I would like to see exactly the language in the document that supports this.



#47843: Kristine Harley — 11/08  at  11:34 PM
The standards probably won't go into effect until 2007. There is a lot to do before then. We have to find ways to hold the IDiots feet to the fire. They win at blabbing, but actions speak louder than words.

Here's an idea that I've been tossing around: what if all medicines and treatments were labeled with the sticker, "This product was brought to you by the theory of evolution." After all, won't all those homeschoolers want to know the "ideology" behind the manufacture of their children's medicine? Naturally, in the name of "balance" they would clamor for labels for ID medicines, but of course there aren't any ID medicines.

Maybe that would drive the point home. I don't know. Wacky idea?



#47844: — 11/08  at  11:35 PM
I say let them go. We'll run a grand experiment in the vein of the old-timey not-all-that-moral work done in the 1920s. We let them teach their kids absolute bunk for a decade or two, and see what it does to test scores/admission rates/etc. At the end of it, we can point to the result and see who's right. The one downside to this would be that creationists aren't exactly known for paying attention to data. But hey, it never hurts to try.

Rrawr!



#47845: — 11/08  at  11:48 PM
Science course standards are approaching "apalling" pretty much all over. On Monday a first-grade teacher informed me that cold water sinks because it weighs more than does warm water. Not just denser, but heavier. It's getting pretty scary.



#47847: Jeremy — 11/08  at  11:54 PM
Actually, from what I read in the Fark thread on this, Kansas' education standards are completely meaningless and teachers teach what they want to teach. So teachers that taught strict evolution will continue to do so and teachers that taught creation or ID or other baloney will also continue to do so.

I'm not sure that's true (and it didn't really sound like it could be that simple) but that's what somebody said.



#47850: Jeremy — 11/08  at  11:58 PM
Megan: That's a first-grade teacher. Don't worry about it. The kid isn't stuck with that definition for the rest of his/her life. It will be corrected.

My geometry teacher's son once told his kindergarten teacher that she had drawn a trapezoid, but she told him she was wrong. Turned out that she meant to draw a square, drew a trapezoid, and either didn't see it or didn't know what a trapezoid was. Probably the latter because she asked my geometry teacher about it at parent's night and drew a trapezoid for him and told him the story.



#47853: — 11/09  at  12:11 AM
"Maybe that would drive the point home. I don't know. Wacky idea?"

Science, evidence, reason, these things mean less than nothing to a fundie. They are active evils to be exterminated. It's the wide and crooked path away from salvation. They truck in authority (TM) and it's not the kind of authority involved in going to the doctor. It's the kind involved in calling the priest because little Johnny is having seizures and is "clearly" possessed.

If you put the label on medicine, they'd either scratch it off (and lose the dosage information and all of that too) or stop using it. I don't really care of consenting adults opt into misery, pain, and death that way but their children would suffer for their convictions too.

Oh yeah, and it would be more grist for the "We're persecuted!" mill. Persecutors always need to feel persecuted.



#47860: ekzept — 11/09  at  01:01 AM
as soon as anyone has a link to the text of the new standards, and to the online minutes and determinations of the meeting of the Kansas State Board deciding this, this reader would appreciate a link.

thanks.



's avatar #47863: — 11/09  at  01:08 AM
I understand that as from 2007 creationism will be taught in science classes as the scientific alternative explanation for evolution. In Kansas, creationism is officially science. How they did it? Without any scientific evidence, without the support of any academic institution, against the opposition of the whole biology research community?

As from now, do we have an "official" science and an "alternative" science? Here in Israel, the medical establishment gave up fighting alternative medicine and in each hospital you can find a department that offers alternative or parallel (non scientific) medicine like herbal teas, yoga, traditional Chinese medicine, acupuncture, etc. Hospital directors say (in private) that alternative medicine is unexpensive and requires no complex instruments, take make sure that it is harmless, and the "clients" go home satisfied and happy.

Maybe this attitude should be adopted, and "alternative biology institutes" should be openly established within the universities. In fact, we have some of them under all kind of names. It is not the end of the world. It is compromise.

As for jaimito, I find compromise always insincere and fake, I couldn't do it. I am for integrity, truth and intellectual honesty. Creationism is religion and no science, but in Kansas today it has proved that it is real and that it is strong. The question what we do with it.

Quod natura non sunt turpia



#47864: Federico Contreras — 11/09  at  01:40 AM
"Maybe this attitude should be adopted, and "alternative biology institutes" should be openly established within the universities. In fact, we have some of them under all kind of names. It is not the end of the world. It is compromise."


No. It is pandering to ignorance and contributing to the success of charlatans. For evil to triumph, the inaction of good people is enough. So fight pseudoscience and baseless belief wherever you find it, because it it the stuff of nightmares.

Coming from Israel, I would imagine you are familiar with how far people will go to prove they have the better imaginary friend.




#47868: — 11/09  at  02:18 AM
Damn it. How many times are Kansas going to fall for that crap? Kansas is always refered to when people talk about bad science teaching, and it looks like it's with good reason.



#47875: — 11/09  at  05:48 AM
YESTERDAY:



TODAY:




#47876: Tom — 11/09  at  06:08 AM
Here's the contact information for Kansas' Board of Education:

http://www.ksde.org/commiss/bdaddr.html



#47877: — 11/09  at  06:55 AM
In addition, the board rewrote the definition of science, so that it is no longer limited to the search for natural explanations of phenomena.



I love it…Since Kansas science curriculum no longer has to follow naturalistic or materialistic methods, I propose that a Kansas chemistry teacher incorporate the Arts of Black magic into his/her daily lesson plans. That should stir up some of the fundies.

MOM:: Well Johny what did you learn in chemistry class today?

SON:: Mom, it was great, Mrs. Willson had us combine tongue of newt, dried elderberry and invoke a druid chant to create a vortex into another realm.

MOM:: Oh..dear



#47878: — 11/09  at  07:05 AM
...And I'm not kidding. If I were a chemistry teacher in Kansas, I would be preparing my 06/07 lesson plans with a good dose of Archaic Black Magic. If they want to redefine the basic definition of science to include the supernatural, then they have to let me play er..I mean teach in that realm also.



#47879: Orac — 11/09  at  07:07 AM
This is truly depressing. I'm going to have to e-mail Pat Hayes my condolences...

--
Orac “A statement of fact cannot be insolent.”
http://oracknows.blogspot.com



#47880: ajmilne — 11/09  at  07:09 AM
Notwithstanding complaints above that it might not be terribly good journalism, somehow, the absurdity of the 'redefining science' bit above just puts it all in perspective for me. A Douglas Adams moment if ever there was one:

In a place called Kansas, in the meanwhile, a group of neotenous apes declared solemnly that an invisible sky fairy created them in its own image--which, if there actually were invisible sky fairies, would probably have insulted them--and that this was science, because they said so.


The very, very small bacterium evolving in the yawning pockets in their gums--itself a distant relation of theirs and of the apes--the same very, very small bacterium which would eventually become the very, very nasty little beastie which would wipe out all neotenous primates above the age of 15 lacking a full set of teeth--took no notice of their declaration.


... with apologies to Adams' heirs and fans.



#47883: — 11/09  at  07:42 AM
This reminds me of the time in the 1800's when a midwestern legislator introduced a bill to change pi to 3 because he thought that mathematicians had just made the number up, and he wanted to simplify things for school children.



#47885: Jeffrey Harmison — 11/09  at  07:53 AM
I am glad that Kansas is doing this. Evolution is not a fact...and having a few little unconnected bone fragments here and there doesn't make it true...despite all the glitzy computer animation produced by Nature/Discovery Channel.

Very bold and brave to stand up....good job folks!


wink



Page 1 of 14 pages  1 2 3 >  Last »

Next entry: Rat Chow as an Analgesic?

Previous entry: Journal Club Article

<< Back to main

Info

email PZ Myers
About The Tangled Bank...
Search

Members

Login | Register | Members

Syndicate

RSS 2.0

Recent articles