Touched by his pharyngeal arches
Pharyngula is an arch science blog by a rural Minnesota biologist who is fighting the good fight against those vestigial "intelligent design" crazies. You know those folks who should have died out in the nineteenth century, but reappear among us wishing to confuse impressionable kids by teaching religion in science classes. We used to call them "creationists" or "blinkered scripture zealots" didn't we?
In any case, despite Pharyngula's best efforts, I still retain my fervent belief in the flying spaghetti monster. I know that my noodly master is Real because He has His own wikipedia entry. [Whereas pharyngula does not.] [But I'm adding him to our blogroll anyway, because this red-blooded patriotic Minnesotan is researching the effects of alcohol on fish.]
posted by Mark D. @ 7:08 PM |
| 
17 Comments:
"creationists" or "blinkered scripture zealots"?
Pretty kind words for Morons. These folks may perch on the right, but we don't claim them. Kind of the same way most Daily Kos posters are considered Democrats.
I can't say I'm happy my tax dollars are helping someone study the effect of alcohol on fish. I'd rather subsidize that personally around a campfire or maybe in a restaurant.
-Censored.
Pharyngula not being on our blogroll before now is a major sin of omission. I'm glad to see you've rectified it.
Sorry, Censored. You can't have it both ways. You can't use the religious right when their moral outrage helps get your candidates elected and your legislation passed; and then drop 'em like a bad habit when their stupid is showing. Besides, even your dear leader thinks "intelligent design" warrants further study. Asked if intelligent design should be taught in schools, Bush said, "I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought.... You’re asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."
Face it, your party's been taken over.
Quick Mark - where in this...:
""I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought.... You’re asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."
...does it say "teach creationism in science class?"
I'll wait for that answer.
The atheistaliban is being intensely disingenuous when they say this is about "science" - if it were, the psychology and sociology academies would try practicing it once in a while.
No, fundamentalist atheism wants all mention of the role of religion in history (at least, all positive role) expunged from public education. And the left, being a religion itself, cannot tolerate false idols.
"Sorry, Censored. You can't have it both ways. You can't use the religious right when their moral outrage helps get your candidates elected and your legislation passed; and then drop 'em like a bad habit when their stupid is showing."
Says who?
In politics, as in all things in life, you take what you need and leave the rest. Yes, I WILL take the outrage and the motivation and the sheer faith from the religious right, and leave the parts that bother me (excessive biblical literalism being a big one). Absolutely. Just as I would leave Moore and Dean and Kos but take the smart stuff from the Democrats, if they ever come up with anything smart again.
"Face it, your party's been taken over."
Personal observation - whenever anyone says "face it", it's usually a sign that they're talking from whence their methane issues.
Jeeze...
In the original story the President WAS saying that, in fact, creationism, AKA Intelligent Design should be taught ALONGSIDE Evolution.
In other words, as ID proponents suggest- "teaching the contoversy". A lazy rhetorical trick that gets their foot in the door.
In science there are many questions, and many answers- that is the nature of science and science education. In ID, there is but one answer to EVERYTHING- "god did it". Not very accurate, not very satisfying, and for sure not very educational either.
You water down education, than inevitably you're looking at ending up living in a 2nd rate country. Problem is, we're a good way there and we need every advantage we have to stop the slide as it is now...
"In the original story the President WAS saying that, in fact, creationism, AKA Intelligent Design should be taught ALONGSIDE Evolution."
I see that as more "in the same building" than "in chemistry class". Stop me if you have any more detailed information.
"In other words, as ID proponents suggest- "teaching the contoversy". A lazy rhetorical trick that gets their foot in the door."
Calling it a "lazy rhetorical trick" is a...well, lazy rhetorical trick. And the existence of ideas that (let's take the boogeyman of "TEACHING ID IN SCIENCE CLASS!!!!!!" off the table) address the "why" rather than the "how" of existence is a perfectly legitimate subject for education - if it's "critical thinking" than you want from them.
"In science there are many questions, and many answers- that is the nature of science and science education. In ID, there is but one answer to EVERYTHING- "god did it". Not very accurate, not very satisfying, and for sure not very educational either."
That's an incredibly patronizing, downright silly description of the issue.
Let me clarify one thing; I don't care about "intelligent design"; I personally see nothing incompatible with the notions of evolution and God. I'm going to bother to hem my response into the context of ID.
But the entire history of the study of philosophy and theology is not a matter of "God did it", but rather "Why are we here?".
"You water down education, than inevitably you're looking at ending up living in a 2nd rate country."
Utter strawman.
For starters, if you think teaching kids science - the "how" of existence - and ignoring the "why" is itself the road to being a "first class country", you apparently missed the entire Soviet era.
The greatest eras in Western thought were led by people who could kick your ass at science AND art AND philosophy AND debate AND pistolry - people who learned to critically unwrap the "why" along with the "how".
I don't give a rat's ass if you do that in different classrooms; I wouldn't expect to have
"Problem is, we're a good way there and we need every advantage we have to stop the slide as it is now..."
Er, the "slide" has nothing to do with the teaching of creation or ID or anything of the sort, since all of them are pretty much outre in the classroom.
For that matter, introducing the notion of debating the "Why" of existence into school isn't a fix, either. The whole notion of compulsory education is rotten to the bone, and is its own worst problem. But that's a matter for a different post.
The left makes the consistent mistake of assuming the fringe on right IS the right.
Why can't I have it both ways? It makes it inconvenient for you?
mb - Great comment about sociology. ID is no more religion that that is. (Not that we need either in schools.)
Its funny how the crowd that wants to eliminate civics, history and English as requirements is purporting to want to improve education.
Want to improve education, destroy the teacher's union and increase competition.
My my my... so many wingnuts with their lacy thong panties in a bunch.
Those of us hanging out in the reality based part of town see "the fringe on the right as the right" because it is the fringe who are driving so many stupid stupid policies.
You've got nothing to offer, fringesters- this reckless stupid war, the fact that you let OBL get away, the budget you didn't balance, SS "reform", our international pariah status, torture- torture for fuck's sake, Terry Schiavo, ID, and a host of other insane "policies"- the whole steaming pile of garbage you've built up for all Americans to enjoy; it's ALL the result of mainline Conservative Republican actions.
But oh yeah, you bet, you're really protecting us from your "fringe" all right.
I'm just curious about what sort of fringe group is advocating that English, civics, and history no longer be taught in schools...
Me, I think it's hilarious that there are serious efforts to teach creationism in science classes (which makes the U.S. educational system looks only slightly less backwards than the Taliban's), while the idea of teaching labor history is viewed as outrageous and pointless in most quarters, even lefty ones.
They don't teach civics anymore, its combined with history and called social studies. The gist of it is that there are so many better economic/government types than capitialim/republic, what a shame we are stuck with it, and wouldn't it be nice if it were more progressive.
So far as English, I was vague. I meant that they aren't teaching in English all the time. I love how "immersion language schools" are so great, yet sending a hispanic kid to a school taught in English is somehow damaging. Let me be clear. Immersion schools are fine, and everyone should be required to learn at least one additional language, but there is simply mo excuse to fail to teach children English. Like it or not, English is the language of success in this country.
So far as the rest of the inane comments, stupid war etc. Clearly, you're missing the point.
Generally, conservatives support the war as well as the conduct of the military. So far as pariah, I'd agree no one on the right really cares what France thinks. We also recognize that both the EU and the UN are doomed. While the EU is the folly of others, we're footing the bill for the UN and that doesn't sit well with us.
Torture? You got no clue, check out our own SERE training. We do worse to our own troops. A little light humiliation and barking dogs is just that. You're outrage is just silly. The right doesn't advocate torture, that's why we want to hunt down terrorists who behead people etc.
Terry Schivo was a media circus and a tragedy. Like most on right I believe that death issues, abortion, capital punishment and euthanasia are states rights questions and not constitutional. I'll also remind you I didn't bring it up. Who's the user of the issue here?
Finally, I'd be happy to allow the teaching of labor history if you're willing to allow it to be presented as part of organized crime.
Censored.
Ugh...
"Andy":
"My my my... so many wingnuts with their lacy thong panties in a bunch."
Wow. Cutting-edge rhetoric, there, buddy. I bet you must have worked hours on that - or did you crib it from Atrios? (My money's on "crib")
"Those of us hanging out in the reality based part of town see "the fringe on the right as the right" because it is the fringe who are driving so many stupid stupid policies."
I suppose in the fantasy-based community (where Howard Dean is mainstream, the constitution is crawling with penumbrae and Kos is legitimate) you think that. But Bush got elected in 2000 BECAUSE, in large part, he negated the radical social right (the Buchanan crowd).
You can phumpher and bellow all you want, but the fact is the GOP is vastly closer to mainstream than the Democrats are these days. And the '04 election showed it!
"You've got nothing to offer, fringesters- this reckless stupid war,..."
...which has liberated 50 million people, and that we're winning anyway...
"...the fact that you let OBL get away..."
...which is baked wind (the current Kerry-surplus lefty dogma about Operation Anaconda is militarily gibberish), and irrelevant; Bin Laden is not the sole person behind terror; killing him wouldn't end the war. The fantasy-based community has this...er, fantasy that this is a criminal investigation, that if we can handcuff Bin Laden and put him in jail, all will be done...
"the budget you didn't balance..."
...because of, y'know, the popping of the Clinton Bubble and 9/11 - perhaps you remember that? Maybe?
As if a balanced budget is the supreme goal, in and of itself (and as if Democrats talking about "balanced budgets" isn't farcical on its face, if you remember the Reagan years).
"...our international pariah status..."
Which is why NOBODY wants to come to America! The supply of immigrants, legal and illegal, has DRIED UP!
Pull your head out of your Kos, Andy. We're only a "pariah" to people who have an agenda to flog.
"...torture- torture for fuck's sake..."
...which, largely, wasn't and isn't.
"...the whole steaming pile of garbage you've built up for all Americans to enjoy; it's ALL the result of mainline Conservative Republican actions."
Then why are you here? Why aren't you in Canada? Because the majority of Americans voted for Bush, and conservatives are going to *extend* our gains in '06!
"But oh yeah, you bet, you're really protecting us from your "fringe" all right."
51% of the population is no "fringe".
In the fantasy-based community, EVERYTHING to the right of Paul Wellstone is considered "fringe", while the Dems declare the likes of McCain and Hegel "the Good Republicans" (barf). Eventually, you learn to filter it out.
Mark D:
"I'm just curious about what sort of fringe group is advocating that English, civics, and history no longer be taught in schools..."
All of them are bowdlerized beyond recognition. I have two kids in school, and I read their textbooks. They are a fecking travesty. World War II is largely presented as a series of American atrocities against the Japanese, for feck's sake! The Holocaust is covered - as a minority versus majority issue, rather than the result of eliminationist bigotry, like what happened to the Jews was little different than what happened to suffragettes!
"Me, I think it's hilarious that there are serious efforts to teach creationism in science classes (which makes the U.S. educational system looks only slightly less backwards than the Taliban's)"
Quick, Mark - show me this "serious effort". And by "serious", I don't mean a couple of school districts near Moonshine Holler, Arkansas; I mean a major school district whose standards affect a signficiant number
of people.
"Less backward than the Taliban?" Well, hyperbole CAN be a hoot, but my daughter goes to the same school my son does (and being a good Republican, kicks her teachers' asses at most political discussion). Please retire that cliche from your arsenal, k? Thanks.
Then, since our education system is sooooo bad, tell us how it is we remain a First World nation.
Our education system has huge problems - mostly (I suggest) related to its' being compulsory, rather than any specific topic. That's another topic altogether - but come on, I mean, you think the march of science would stop even if a few school districts mentioned Creationism in class? Or even if EVERY school district did? (And remember, you're still challenged to show me any significant ones that do!). No. Science would still be science, scientists would still learn it, and life would move on. (No, I don't *advocate* it - I was a pre-med for three weeks, give me a break - and I also find nothing incompatible about the Christian creation story and evolution - but get serious; discussing a philosophical idea that has animated most of civilization's moral and ethical progress for the past thousand years will not derail science any more than the left's bowdlerization of the academy will.
"while the idea of teaching labor history is viewed as outrageous and pointless in most quarters, even lefty ones."
Although it IS taught (or at least, the history of the labor movement is taught), to a degree vastly beyond its importance in learning about this nation's history (which is a statement about its posture in class, not its importance in history)!
Kids today learn diddly about the origins and meaning of the Constitution (other than what baaaaad hypocritical white patriarchal men the founding fathers were, of course) - I think both of my kids know more about Federalism than their teachers do, not that they have any choice in my house. They learn little beyond PC bromides about the Civil War (didja know it wasn't about slavery at all? Whoah!), beyond Harriett Tubman (which they learn in great detail). World War II? Ibid. The Cold War - the crucial struggle in creating the world they live in today, is treated as an exercise in mass paranoia. English class? My BA was in English - and yet very few of the authors whose canon DEFINES our language, Shakespeare and Marlowe and Twain and on and on, make more than the most cursory appearances, to make room for marginal and scarcely significant authors from communities that were on the wrong side of the cultural eight-ball.
Against such a backdrop - where kids can grow up thinking that the likes of the labor movement and the Civil Rights movement and Joyce Carol Oates were the benchmarks of the past 200 years - ow could teaching Creationism in Biology class do any fecking HARM, in all honesty?
There's too much in this last comment to even begin to approach [my head is spinning], so I'll just question one tiny thing: You really think, Mitch, that the CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT is not a benchmark of the last 200 years in American history?
Um, Mitch. I know I know "let the wingnut soar" and all that, but really your lengthy comment is one of the silliest parades of sophistry and paper tigers I've seen scuttle through here.
(a) The "serious efforts" I referred to stretch back to 1999 and the Kansas Board of Education's decision (since reversed, last I checked) to teach creationism and evolution as equally valid theories, and continue in the present with the Teach the Controversy campaign, which I'm sure you've heard about. These are "serious", not "just kidding around" efforts.
(b) Creationism is not a "philosophy", any more than the Epic of Gilgamesh is a philosophy. We could argue about this "intelligent design" trojan horse though.
(c) All of them are bowdlerized [sic] beyond recognition. I have two kids in school, and I read their textbooks. They are a fecking travesty. World War II is largely presented as a series of American atrocities against the Japanese, for feck's sake! The Holocaust is covered - as a minority versus majority issue, rather than the result of eliminationist bigotry, like what happened to the Jews was little different than what happened to suffragettes! and later they learn little beyond PC bromides about the Civil War (didja know it wasn't about slavery at all? Whoah!), beyond Harriett Tubman (which they learn in great detail). World War II? Ibid. The Cold War - the crucial struggle in creating the world they live in today, is treated as an exercise in mass paranoia. I can't go on. Mitch, needless to say you are going to have to provide quotes and citations in order to get me to stop laughing aloud at this nonsense and forwarding it to my friends as evidence that wingnuts just like to make up shit in order to confirm their blinkered worldview. Seriously, I want citations. And quotes.
(d) Also please include some labor history citations from these blowhardized textbooks while you're at it. I musta gotten left out of this labor-history educational bandwagon when I was a schoolboy.
(e) I agree that the teaching of literature is slipping, I'll fight that fight with you, friend. And it's heartening that you are open-minded enough to require reading the works of an anti-semitic gay atheist spy (Marlowe) alongside Shakespeare and Twain. The Jew of Malta and Doctor Faustus do indeed offer schoolkids some timeless truths about anti-machiavellianism and hedonism.
(f) What the feck does Joyce Carol Oates have to do with anything?
Sarah:
You really think, Mitch, that the CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT is not a benchmark of the last 200 years in American history?
You're lucky, Sarah. I used to teach at a MnSCU institution. So I know that kids today aren't so hot at reading comprehension; their attention spans just don't allow much.
Read it again. I said that the Civil Rights movement gets *vastly* more coverage than many other, equally-important events in US and World History, in my kids' history classes.
Mark:
Um, Mitch. I know I know "let the wingnut soar" and all that, but really your lengthy comment is one of the silliest parades of sophistry and paper tigers I've seen scuttle through here.
You condescend to your mother with that mouth?
Seriously, bigfella - I know it's SOP on the left to toss out cutiepies like "Wingnut" in lieu of answers, but you COULD do better. Right? Maybe?
(a) The "serious efforts" I referred to stretch back to 1999 and the Kansas Board of Education's decision (since reversed, last I checked) to teach creationism and evolution as equally valid theories, and continue in the present with the Teach the Controversy campaign, which I'm sure you've heard about. These are "serious", not "just kidding around" efforts.
Which got just as much flak from the right as from the left, and (this is important) were reversed, which was why I went to such pains to try to get across that that particular episode was excluded from the conversation.
Seriously; show me a significant jurisdiction where Creationism is *currently* taught as science. Not where it was threatened. Not where people talked about it. Not where Pat Robertson said "wouldn't it be cool...". In classrooms, now.
I noticed that you skipped my fairly direct question; you said the US educational system was a Taliban-level embarassment. Why are we a successful nation, then?
(b) Creationism is not a "philosophy", any more than the Epic of Gilgamesh is a philosophy.
Gosh, d'ya think?
I guess when I wrote that I was assuming that your approach wasn't too pointillistic to realize I was referring to the entire broad discipline of the study of philosophy, religion (for its impacts on sociology, philosophy and history) - that you wouldn't be so anal-retentive as to require a complete definition of "philosophy" for purposes of a *comment*. My mistake.
We could argue about this "intelligent design" trojan horse though.
No, we couldn't. It's a non-issue to me. Nothing about Evolution, holes and all, is in any way inimicable to my religious faith, bloviations of jihadis on both sides notwithstanding.
(c) All of them are bowdlerized [sic] beyond recognition.
sic thyself: http://dictionary.reference.com/wordoftheday/archive/2001/12/12.html
Mitch, needless to say you are going to have to provide quotes and citations in order to get me to stop laughing aloud at this nonsense and forwarding it to my friends as evidence that wingnuts just like to make up shit in order to confirm their blinkered worldview. Seriously, I want citations. And quotes.
Make sure you send me the list of friends you forward it to. Because I wanna make sure the whole list of cites and quotes goes directly to them with no middleman.
Deal?
I don't have their textbooks at home - they go back to school at the end of the year - but school starts in three weeks. There'll be a whole new crop soon. I'll make sure they're up on my blog.
(f) What the feck does Joyce Carol Oates have to do with anything?
I thought I was fairly clear; literature classes today give short shrift to a lot of "DWEM" authors, to make room for a lot of writers of lesser merit who are women and minorities.
Joyce Carol Oates being an example. A capable enough author, certainly, and someone who should be read - but not at the expense of, say, Mark Twain.
Didn't think it was that opaque.
You're lucky, Sarah. I used to teach at a MnSCU institution. So I know that kids today aren't so hot at reading comprehension...
Read it again. I said that the Civil Rights movement gets *vastly* more coverage than many other, equally-important events in US and World History, in my kids' history classes.
You certainly didn't teach writing it seems. Here are the words you used, or "wrote", beginning with the JCO comment:
I thought I was fairly clear; literature classes today give short shrift to a lot of "DWEM" authors, to make room for a lot of writers of lesser merit who are women and minorities. Joyce Carol Oates being an example.
Conclusion: JCO is an author of lesser merit than some other folks.
Here's your comparision of the Civil Rights movement to Oates authorial merits:
Against such a backdrop - where kids can grow up thinking that the likes of the labor movement and the Civil Rights movement and Joyce Carol Oates were the benchmarks of the past 200 years...
Conclusion: Joyce Carol Oates is to novelists as the Civil Rights movement is to historical benchmarks.
But don't sweat it. I'm sure you didn't mean to write that; you were probably tired or distracted or something.
Mitch,
When the President and Republican congressional leadership promote the teaching of so-called Intelligent Design alongside evolution, you've got a lot of burden to prove that conservatives are against teaching it, or that only a fringe element of Republicans support it. (Hint: "Fringe groups" don't include national political leaders.)
BTW, the Kansas School Board is still trying to push ID into the curriculum.
So Mitch, is terrorism only a threat if it actually succeeds? That seems to be your logic here.
Post a Comment
<< Home