Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets

[BurtWorm]

We share a country with these people... :eyes:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/04/science/earth/04climate.html?hp=&pagewanted=all


By LESLIE KAUFMAN
Published: March 3, 2010
Critics of the teaching of evolution in the nation’s classrooms are gaining ground in some states by linking the issue to global warming, arguing that dissenting views on both scientific subjects should be taught in public schools.



Bud Craft/Legislative Research Commission, via Associated Press
“Our kids are being presented theories as though they are facts,” said State Representative Tim Moore of Kentucky.




In Kentucky, a bill recently introduced in the Legislature would encourage teachers to discuss “the advantages and disadvantages of scientific theories,” including “evolution, the origins of life, global warming and human cloning.”

The bill, which has yet to be voted on, is patterned on even more aggressive efforts in other states to fuse such issues. In Louisiana, a law passed in 2008 says the state board of education may assist teachers in promoting “critical thinking” on all of those subjects.

Last year, the Texas Board of Education adopted language requiring that teachers present all sides of the evidence on evolution and global warming.

Oklahoma introduced a bill with similar goals in 2009, although it was not enacted.

The linkage of evolution and global warming is partly a legal strategy: courts have found that singling out evolution for criticism in public schools is a violation of the separation of church and state. By insisting that global warming also be debated, deniers of evolution can argue that they are simply championing academic freedom in general.

Yet they are also capitalizing on rising public resistance in some quarters to accepting the science of global warming, particularly among political conservatives who oppose efforts to rein in emissions of greenhouse gases.

...

[drm604]

1. Science class is going to be reduced to a debating society if these people have there way.

Nothing will be taught as fact, everything will be opinion. Children will have no grasp of the nature of science and facts.

[MineralMan]

2. And why, I ask, do schools not teach the Phlogiston theory

any longer? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston_theory

And where are the alchemy classes? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemy

Astrology, too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology

As you can see, these subjects are on the internet, so they must be valid. We are neglecting our children by not opening their little-used minds to all of the woo that is out there.

Health classes should teach about homeopathy, too, and should present anti-vaccination information to students. It's not fair.

[Toots]

3. I have no problem with schools teaching about the earth's climate.

It is a matter of statistics and facts... I do have a problem with schools teaching a belief, any belief, that is not backed up with easily obtainable facts. The purpose of a school is to teach facts. It is a fact the earth is warming. That is a fact no one can deny. The reasons for that warming may be not completely understood and discussion on that aspect could be a good class project but creationism or intelligent design. No Way...Nothing factual about it, it is all just belief, and that belongs in Church, not school.

[BurtWorm]

6. The purpose of science class is to teach science.

Now maybe they could teach why climate change denial, etc., is or is not based on science. But these idiots want them to teach parity between the theories. It's as though they believe (like the PoMos) that scientific truths are political, but these assholes use politics to enforce indoctrination in their version of scientific truth.

[Turbineguy]

4. Evolution is a theory.

Superstition is fact.

[BurtWorm]

5. That should be on a bumper sticker!

:applause:

(Maybe with the word "Ignorant" in front of "superstition.")