It is quite a shame. Now, does this mean that they won’t be teaching evolution? Or will they be taught side by side? I sure hope it’s the latter. Let the kids deduce for themselves whether or not which theory fits into the scheme of things. In any case, as conservative as Luisiana is, I’m sure those kids will have had ID and creationism beaten into their heads anyways. It is a terrible, terrible shame.
It is quite a shame. Now, does this mean that they won’t be teaching evolution? Or will they be taught side by side? I sure hope it’s the latter. Let the kids deduce for themselves whether or not which theory fits into the scheme of things. In any case, as conservative as Luisiana is, I’m sure those kids will have had ID and creationism beaten into their heads anyways. It is a terrible, terrible shame.
ID proponents have been arguing to teach the two side-by-side for many years now, subgenius. You should definitely NOT hope it’s the latter, since that is one way of allowing religious pseudoscience to be taught in science class. Imagine if in a class on astronomy you had part of the class on astrology ... you know, “Some people believe that the planets are huge balls of rock, others believe that they are godlike creatures that have strange powers on us at birth.”
... or in geology: “Some people believe that these rocks were created by slowly cooking over millions of years several miles down in the earth’s crust, others believe that they were all created in 6,000 BC.”
This would effectively ruin science education. It would also ruin it because it would implicitly claim that we get our scientific data both from careful observation of the world, repeated experimentation, etc., AND from reading some three-thousand-year-old Middle Eastern book of myths. And why that book of myths in particular? Because culturally we grew up under its domination through our local religious leaders. Oddly, we aren’t looking to allow Indian or Chinese or Japanese or Native American or Maori creation myths to influence our readings of science. Or perhaps we should?
I agree Doug, but I do wonder if the light of science might just make the id folk sorry they ever started the debate. Children who learn about the scientific method and are then shown id might be better equipped to educate their parents (who are the real problem in most cases).
Children’s minds are generally smart enough and malleable enough to see through trash science. It would be wonderful to watch a generation of kids rebel against the id crap they are being fed at school! ID, taught in the scientific light should reveal its ugliness. Kids are naturally attracted to things they know are controversial. Keeping id out of the classrooms might actually make more of them learn about it from their zealous friends (like sex, before it was taught in school.)
ID probably should be taught in the classrooms, but in history class or social studies class or religion class or politics class. It isn’t science so it shouldn’t be taught in science class, any more than astrology, phrenology or alchemy should be taught in the sciences.
Absolutely. But finding good science teachers seems not to be very easy ...
Very true in Louisiana. I moved a lot as a child and spent my senior year of high school at East Jefferson High in New Orleans. It was the worst school I had ever attended - by far! Education is the key to our success as a population.
This is just a crazy mess. Oh, how I want to simply smack some people, and tell them that they’re rotting these children’s minds with junk. It wouldn’t be quite so bad if they didn’t call ID science. I agree 100% about the notion to at least teach creationism in a classroom outside of science.
I can’t help a bit of Chauvinism. California used to vie with Massechusetts for first spot in the nation in primary and secondary education. Then we voted in Proposition 13 which caused the education budget to be cut drastically, and continually. Now we vie with Louisiana and and Alabama for last place in the nation. I guess this introduction of Intelligent design moves California up so we will now compete with Alabama for next to last place in the nation.
I can’t help a bit of Chauvinism. California used to vie with Massechusetts for first spot in the nation in primary and secondary education.
Occam
Yes, I remember those days! I have always said that my tax money spent on the schools will always be money well spent.I always vote (well, almost always....some of the initiatives have appeared to be a little shady!) for initiatives that will give the schools more money to do their jobs.After prop 13 came the gambling initiatives that were supposed to solve all of our funding problems and leave our schools flush in money. I didn’t believe it then, and rather than being of any help, it appears to have left our schools in more dire straits. Who needs 350 million anyway?
It is unfortunate that by the time my children were born, the only way to assure that they would get a good education in California, was to send them to private schools. I feel sorry for those who don’t have the money. I feel more pity for the teachers (many of my children’s friends) who have to try to teach ill prepared students with inadequate supplies. Nurses and teachers used to get comparable salaries, back when I started. Nurses now make roughly double the salary of a teacher. No wonder the good teachers a moving into the private sector.
You’re right, Asanta, as soon as the lottery contribution was alloted to the school budget, the legislature merely dropped their regular allocation to education by the same amount. And, since the stupid voters in California voted to require a two-thirds majority in the legislature to pass any tax measure, the minority of anti-tax politicians block every measure to support any program to help the public, be it education, transportation, health, etc.
You’re right, Asanta, as soon as the lottery contribution was alloted to the school budget, the legislature merely dropped their regular allocation to education by the same amount. And, since the stupid voters in California voted to require a two-thirds majority in the legislature to pass any tax measure, the minority of anti-tax politicians block every measure to support any program to help the public, be it education, transportation, health, etc.
Occam
Yes, but did you notice that we only need (I think) 10,000 signatures to put any idiotic measure on the ballet that needs only 51% of the vote to pass? I think that process should change, and that we should need a certain percent of the population signing the petition (say....1% of the population, based on the last census) before it is put on the ballet. The number of signatures needed for a proposition has never increased from it’s initial number, while our population has grown rapidly, making it easier to get legislation by crackpot!
Really, just 10,000 signatures? That’s encouraging, Asanta. I’ll send you a PM of my proposal to end gerrymandering. We can see if we can get it on the ballot.
