It is worrisome that many don’t see what there was a darker side to the last election results, (keeping out the wars and gay issues) anti-science was also IMO a part of Bush’s victory.
For this discussion, I’m concentrating now (and I do think the next 4 years will give us many examples similar to this one) on some of those dark anti science elements:
I have heard talk that the current conservative movement was creating their own reality that overcomes ugly truths; but this, on the 21st century, is ridiculous.
Related to this, the current National Geographic has the question “Was Darwin wrong?” on the cover now:
Spoiler for the answer to “Was Darwin wrong?” in the current NG:
[spoiler]NO!
(That “no” is bigger at the beginning of the article in the magazine!) The latest evidence shows that once again Darwin was right. [/spoiler]
So, what can be done to stop this unfortunate turn into Lysenkoism? When the government’s decisions shape science for ideological or religious reasons?
Firstly, Gigo, let me express pleasure at running into someone who can use “Lysenkoism” in a sentence and not think it has something to do with a household cleanser.
I counsel patience. First, they will over-reach themselves, they always do. Second, don’t sweat it. The kids aren’t listening anyway. Thoid, teachers have their ways. I remember one in particular, taught US History exactly like it was in the book, and somehow still managed to plant the seed of skepticism and doubt. And never once expressed an opinion at variance with the rosy Babbitism of the text.
The answer is that scientists have to fight them. Fuck 'em if they dismiss us as ivory tower liberal elites out-of-touch with mainstream American values. We hit back that you teach science in science class and that’s it. We, as scientists, determine what science is. And ID and creationism isn’t science. This argument can be made and won in two sentences. “The core of science is making observations and using them to make predicitons. What predictions do creationism and ID make?” If it takes national ridicule, so be it. It worked the last time, and has worked pretty much every time this issue worms its way back up to the surface.
The 45% number doesn’t impress me. I would have guessed it would have been more like 60%, so color me impressed with the American people.
Well, first we must make such that the GOP understands beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Sun, Moon, Planets, and stars do not revolve about them…but, that’d be heracy! They’ll probably try putting the heat on those who preach a Copernican system, and Galileo will be put on trial once more.
You guys missed the other story: Clear word on marriage
Official objects to ‘asexual stealth phrases’
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) – A State Board of Education member called on textbook publishers to change the wording in health books being considered for use in Texas schools to clearly state that marriage is between a man and a woman.
Republican Terri Leo said certain books attempt to nullify a Texas law banning the recognition of same-sex civil unions by using “asexual stealth phrases” such as “individuals who marry” instead of husbands and wives.
The power house of science and technology… the same nation that sent a man to the moon (conspiracy theories aside) will start teaching creationism and changing school books to clearly state marriage is not gay ! Defies comprehension.
As I have said before, many religious people are very, very angry because they perceive that their religion has been insulted and degraded by atheist-biased evolution teachings. Many in this board may deny it, but the religious are fighting back big time based on this perception.
This is nothing new since the election btw…I read an article about it in last months Wired magazine, how the Intellegent Design folks were starting a new offensive.
BTW, its not just ‘liberal elite’ that think Evolution is true and that those folks who are grasping now at Intellegent Design are boneheads. Thats part of your problem…you really DO think that only ‘liberal elite’ have a lock on rational thought.
My suggestion is to continue the fight in a calm manner. Encourage or even fund shows on TLC, Discovery, History Channel, etc that calmly talk about Evolution, or talk (again calmly) about Intellegent Design and the flaws it has. As to the schools, keep up the fight there too, but IMO a better fight would be to make sure the teachers and the text books explaining Evolution are top shelf. My experience is that teachers themselves are fairly clueless about Evolution…I’ve seen myriad errors by teachers teaching this in my dealings with schools in New Mexico and the South West. And the books are boring and in many cases erronious. The Intellegent Design folks are going to win this fight if you simply try and butt heads with them (at least at the grade school level)…instead fight fire with fire. LET them teach it concurrently with Evolution…but make sure the Evolution being taught is correct, interesting and compelling, and that those teaching it know what the hell they are talking about.
This is beyond beleivable… to not call this a culture war is erroneous. This is hate culture at its worse.
Xtisme I agree that others might object to intelligent design bone headednes… but still who would be more outraged about it ? Its not enough to dislike…
See, now this is the sort of intellectual elitism that lost you the election. If you smarty-pants liberals are so smart, how come so-called “dumb” rural America saw through your lies so easily and gave us our overwhelming 3% victory on November 2nd?
If the evidence for your “theories” is so decisive, then I guess we should see that decisiveness reflected in the polls? But unfortunately for you, 45% of Americans see evolution for the scam it is, and Bush won the election when some polls showed him with that level of support (within MOE). The people have spoken!
A word of advice. If you don’t want to see your “scientific” theories consigned to the trash heap of history, you’re going to have to make some concessions. You’re going to have to stop being so arrogant. If you don’t allow that Intelligent Design is at least a little bit true, middle America is just never going to buy what you’re selling.
An election is just a referendum… not a determiner of the truth. 3% is not overwhelming. Finally the problem wasn’t seeing through “liberal” lies… was it ?
I’m sorry, but if you believe that the Earth was formed in seven literal days then you are a bonehead. It’s not elitism to believe in evolution. When I talk to someone who believes in evolution, or that the Earth is round, or that the Earth revolves around the sun, I don’t think “gee, this is one intelligent liberal-minded individual.” I don’t think anything at all. It’s only when they say something whacked-out that I start thinking they’re a bonehead. And I don’t equate non-scientific thinking with conservatism. I know plenty of conservatives that believe in the basic fundamentals of science, and there are plenty of whacked-out liberals too (Lyndon LaRouche?).
Basically all I’m saying is that evolution is not a political platform.
The only thing that I think is new since the election is that ID and creationism supporters now may be emboldened and more likely to take an offensive. The events in this thread (and the school district in Wisconsin that CNN is running an article about) happened during the election. Combine them, though, and they perceive these as victories and therefore they are more likely to strike now, while they have momentum.
I don’t think that the liberal elite has a lock on rational thought, not by a long shot. But, the core supporters of the Democratic party are so often dismissed as ivory-tower liberal elites, and the evangelical wing of the Republican party finds its views echoed at the highest level so often that I can see how evolution supporters could be associated and mocked with this label. Especially since the Venn diagram of “creation supporters” seems to overlap the “evangelical Republican” by quite a large amount. I would be surprised if election rhetoric wasn’t hijacked into this debate.
The real tactic ID and creationism supporters use most often, though, is the “Teach the dispute line.” This needs to be fought as well, and it leaves evolution supporters looking like they are the ones being overly dogmatic and overly restrictive. But that is why we need short, easy solutions. Science class is for science and ID and creationism isn’t science. We don’t spend equal amounts of time on other discredited theories like geocentrism or Lamarckianism or Lysenkoism. They get mentions in the introduction, and then one moves on to the real theories.
I’m a scientist. I was raised Jewish. And this is no less offensive to me than wanting to devote equal time to Holocaust denial during history class. Or even sticking in a line saying that the Holocaust is an event that some people dispute.
Y’know what the problem is… all of that powerhouse of science and technology happens in the blue states. The red states are still stuck on creationism and beating back the rising tide of homosexuality (or whatever they believe)
Thank the gods I live in a blue state - and even living in a blue state, I STILL am considering fleeing this country.
Correction. Lysenkoism, Lamarckianism, and geocentrism are bad examples. They are all legitimate examples of failed theories. They were based on observations and made predictions. They were wrong. Either the observations, like in geocentrism, were wrong, or the predictions, like in Lysenkoism and Lamarckianism, were wrong. But they should be discussed in science class, because they were examples of bad theories.
ID and creationism are not examples of bad theories. They attempt observations but no creation theory of which I’m aware make predictions. Therefore, they don’t belong in science class. Not even a mention.
They’ll probably try putting the heat on those who preach a Copernican system, and Galileo will be put on trial once more.