Slashdot Mirror
Bill Allows Teachers to Contradict Evolution
Helical writes "In an attempt to defy the newly approved state science standards, Florida Senator Rhonda Storms has proposed a bill that would allow teachers to contradict the teaching of evolution. Her bill states that 'Every public school teacher in the state's K-12 school system shall have the affirmative right and freedom to objectively present scientific information relevant to the full range of scientific views regarding biological and chemical evolution in connection with teaching any prescribed curriculum regarding chemical or biological origins.' The bill's main focus is on protecting teachers who want to adopt alternative teaching plans from sanction, and to allow teachers the freedom to teach whatever they wish, even if it is in opposition to current standards."
As long as there was actual dissenting science being taught, I wouldn't care. However, I realize this is probably just an attempt to teach Christianity as science. People are just so insecure and downright anti-intellectual. Science has no purpose related to teleology or ontology for that matter. It used to be outrageous, now it's just depressing and I feel sorry for the people that push this stuff.
I got a catholic block.
I realize most slashdotters have no children (and are statistically unlikely to), but I need to explain something.
When it comes to matters of religion and philosophy, kids are going to take a cue from their parents, and make their own conclusions, just like we did. A child can be told all about intelligent design, but it doesn't mean they'll believe it. It isn't some grand conspiracy to "ruin science".
The people on both sides of this fight are childless morons, eager to tell people how to raise their children. But both sides are fighting a futile fight.
It really doesn't matter to me what any teacher wants to tell my kids about various theories of where the world came from. To me, it's more important that they grow up with respect for other people, and that other peoples belief systems for the most part wont interfere with them. What Mrs CBag general arts degree has to say about the origins of life means shit-all to them in the long run.
I'd hate for them to be the kind of thoughtless shitbags I see posting here about how everyone but them is a "big stupid idiot" for not believing exactly what you're told to, especially when what I was told about evolution 20 years ago is different than now.
I'd hope they realize that at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter if the lady in the office next to me believes God made the universe 6000 years ago, or if some other guy thinks it just popped out of nothing 2.53 billion years ago - both "calculations" are based on a ridiculously small data sample, and both are completely worthless, and almost guaranteed to be wrong.
Personally I think the smug jackasses who wander around, so sure they know everything about the universe from a book jacket or two they read, make bigger fools of themselves than anyone else.
There are very few vocal ID supporters. There are legions of evolution jackasses wasting time preaching to the choir, and generally annoying everybody. Nobody cares what you think, and nobody is impressed with your stupid flying spaghetti monster joke thing. Dawkins really must believe he's the first person in history to question the existence of God. What a fucking douchebag, how would anyone idolize him?
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Either way, forbidding teachers to teach something is no different than the Catholic church of old forbidding teachings that said the world was round. To say one side is "not scientifically based" just because it is different than your view is just as bigoted and close minded as the Catholic church calling Newton a "heretic". You can't block information just because you don't agree with it.
Evolution needs to be taught with both sides presented so that the students can discuss and make up their own minds. Kids tend to learn better when given the facts and allowed to draw their own conclusions.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
That is: is the theory falsifiable? Does the theory make predictions that could potentially be proven wrong by evidence? Intelligent Design fails this test.
Let's not forget that Evolution, especially with respect to the origin of species, also fails this test. As hard as one might try, postulates about things which happened in the past can't ever be proven false. Sure, there's plenty of speculation, but the bulk of evolutionary theory (wrt to the origin of species) does not contain any testable hypotheses.
Now sure, you can talk about micro-evolution, and perhaps even show examples. You can talk about biology, and genetics, which is on even firmer ground - these can be scientifically verified today. But when will the scientifically minded accept the fact that you can't design an experiment to falsify a theory about something which happened in the past? If I told you Paul Bunyan's Ox stomped out the Great Lakes, how could you prove it wrong? From a theoretical perspective, there's no test that we can do today which would show definitively that an ox of mythical proportions couldn't create footprints of likewise proportions which would subsequently fill with water.
I think evolution is nice speculation about what happened in the past, but it won't ever be true in the mathematical sense. Children often have problems dealing with ambiguity, and if you start teaching something that might be false, they'll assume everything you teach is either potentially, or completely, false. If the authority of the teacher, or what is taught, becomes suspect, children often become unmanageable, or worse, assume that, "there's no such thing as truth, and everything is relative..."
This bill isn't so much about acceptance of science as it is letting teachers manage their classrooms appropriately. If we can teach science by example, by showing things which can be verified, we will have people who expect to verify the truth. From a pedagogical perspective, teaching evolution is really teaching children to have a blind faith in science, because no high-schooler, much less a middle school student, will be able to independently verify the theories. And this is more important than teaching a particular pet scientific theory.
So which would you rather have - a population which believes in evolution and accepts everything told them, through blind faith; or a society which might not believe in evolution, but expects to test and independently verify everything?
Think about the implications this has on politics for a moment before replying...
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
I went to a catholic grade school that taught evolution. I think most of this religious anti-evolution shit is confined to the south.
"If you plant ice, you're gonna harvest wind."
Whoa, so you mean, you, a person of religious faith, were engaged in an argument despite a basic ignorance of the concept involved? WELL SHUCKS,THAT'S A NEW ONE ON ME!
And don't contradict me. I'll see you in court because you're breaking the law.
And don't you try using those tampered Hubble images, because they're fake too!
Privacy is terrorism.