Archive for the ‘Creationism’ Category

A simpler truth.

Courtesy of Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal.

I would highly recommend coming out to this event if you’re in the area. It only costs $5 for students if you pre-order or your tickets. More information can be found below:

Read the rest of this entry »

Found on this website, “Ten Questions to Ask Your Biology Teacher About Evolution” is meant to be a handy guide for students skeptical of evolution. According to this article at The New York Times, science teachers in the US are increasingly having to deal with similar anti-evolution ploys. Reading through the list gave me a few chuckles, so I thought — with only my knowledge from high school biology — I would go through the list and do my best to respond to the various challenges.

—

1. ORIGIN OF LIFE. Why do textbooks claim that the 1953 Miller-Urey experiment shows how life’s building blocks may have formed on the early Earth — when conditions on the early Earth were probably nothing like those used in the experiment, and the origin of life remains a mystery?

It appears to be a favorite tactic of anti-evolutionists to try to tie evolutionary biology with the question of the origins of life. The truth is, biological evolution, natural selection, and common ancestry don’t say anything about how life began. Life could have started any number of ways; evolution is merely the proposed mechanism to explain the diversity and robustness of modern life.

That being said, we aren’t completely in the dark as to how life on Earth began. Unfortunately, we may never be able to prove how life on Earth began, but rather only likely ways that it could have began. While there is some controversy as to whether the Miller-Urey experiment replicated the atmospheric conditions of early Earth¹, it did show us the possibility of creating the building blocks of organic life from non-living materials. In that respect, it is still an important experiment, with implications for our search for the origin of life.

Regardless, this is not a criticism of evolution — it’s a criticism of the Miller-Urey experiment.
Read the rest of this entry »

Scientific American has published this handy map of the creationism battle in the United States. Specifically, the map explains what’s currently going on — and where.

This is a must see for anybody who is concerned about, but not too familiar with, the current creationism battlegrounds.

A couple weeks ago, I wrote about the Louisiana Science Education Act, a bill blatantly constructed to set the precedent for an anti-scientific, religious curriculum to be taught in public schools.  The bill, furthermore, is allegedly tied to The Discovery Institute, an anti-evolution organization famous for losing the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case, in which it was ruled that the teaching of Intelligent Design was in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  They are also known for their well-publicized Wedge Strategy, a manifesto stating its purpose as to “reverse the stifling materialist world view and replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions” as well as “affirm the reality of God.”

Well, in a sad, but predictable turn of events, the bill has since been enacted by governor Bobby Jindal.

Quote:

The bill has been opposed by every scientific society that has voiced a position on it, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science. AAAS CEO Alan Leshner warned that the bill would “unleash an assault against scientific integrity, leaving students confused about science and unprepared to excel in a modern workforce.”

Jindal, who was a biology major during his time at Brown University, even received a veto plea from his former genetics professor. “Without evolution, modern biology, including medicine and biotechnology, wouldn’t make sense,” Professor Arthur Landy wrote. “I hope he [Jindal] doesn’t do anything that would hold back the next generation of Louisiana’s doctors.”

Link.

Recently, the Louisiana House recently approved the so-called “Louisiana Science Education Act” which purports to “promote critical thinking, strengthen education and help teachers who are confused about what’s acceptable for science classes.” Any veteran skeptic may already be aware of what this wording is leading to, but for the rest, the bill is a very thinly-veiled attempt to undermine the teaching of evolution in the science classroom, and provide an opening for religion to wedge itself into the public education sector.

Link.

Below is the actual wording of the bill. In the interest of “critical thinking” and “open and objective discussion” as the bill itself claims to promote, decide for yourself if this is a bill intended to advance the teaching of science in the classroom, or is instead religiously-motivated. (Emphasis added by myself):

Be it enacted by the Legislature of Louisiana:

Section 1. R.S. 17:285.1 is hereby enacted to read as follows:

§285.1. Science education; development of critical thinking skills
A. This Section shall be known and may be cited as the “Louisiana Science Education Act.”

B.(1) The State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, upon request of a city, parish, or other local public school board, shall allow and assist teachers, principals, and other school administrators to create and foster an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.

(2) Such assistance shall include support and guidance for teachers regarding effective ways to help students understand, analyze, critique, and objectively review scientific theories being studied, including those enumerated in Paragraph (1) of this Subsection.

C. A teacher shall teach the material presented in the standard textbook supplied by the school system and thereafter may use supplemental textbooks and other instructional materials to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an objective manner, as permitted by the city, parish, or other local public school board unless otherwise prohibited by the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

D. This Section shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.

E. The State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education and each city, parish, or other local public school board shall adopt and promulgate the rules and regulations necessary to implement the provisions of this Section prior to the beginning of the 2008-2009 school year.

Section 2. This Act shall become effective upon signature by the governor or, if not signed by the governor, upon expiration of the time for bills to become law without signature by the governor, as provided by Article III, Section 18 of the Constitution of Louisiana. If vetoed by the governor and subsequently approved by the legislature, this Act shall become effective on the day following such approval.

Digg had a link to this video on youtube which seemed like prime material for discussion on here:

I don’t know how unbiased this is; obviously we’re only seeing one side of the story, but if her refusal to teach creationism was even part of the reason for termination then it’s cause enough for outrage.

Regardless, bravo to Ms. Comer for standing up for real science in a political and social climate that is clearly hostile to it.

The notoriously conservative Fox News has posted its review of Ben Stein’s anti-science, creationist propaganda flick Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed on its website. The verdict? Prepare for a surprise.

Yes, Fox News hated Expelled. Even worse, they felt that reviewing Mariah Carey’s new album took precedence. Oh, and they liked her album, too. Here’s an excerpt:

Even more than “Emancipation,” “E=MC2″ sounds like a jukebox full of singles for the best summer party ever. “I Stay in Love” is a killer ballad, and “Wish You Well” is a gospel-tinged ode to Aretha Franklin’s “Natural Woman” that shows off the best of her range. Another track, “Bye Bye” is almost a sequel to Carey’s long-ago hit with Boyz II Men, “One Sweet Day.”

…wait, silly me, we were talking about Ben Stein’s film. Here’s a juicy piece of that review:

Directed by one Nathan Frankowski, “Expelled” is a sloppy, all-over-the-place, poorly made (and not just a little boring) “expose” of the scientific community. It’s not very exciting. But it does show that Stein, who’s carved out a career selling eye drops in commercials and amusing us on sitcoms, is either completely nuts or so avaricious that he’s abandoned all good sense to make a buck.

To wit: Stein, Frankowski and pals say in “Expelled” that perfectly good scientists and educators are being stigmatized for wanting to teach their students creationism and “intelligent design” — in other words, junk science — in addition to or instead of conventionally accepted Darwinism. You see, Stein, like some other celebrities, finally has shown his true colors and they aren’t so pretty.

Ouch. Better keep the Clear Eyes handy, Ben.

Whenever you encounter a creationist in an argument, you can be sure that they will bring up one of a variety of arguments dating back to the time of Thomas Aquinas. On the surface, this appears to be a blessing for skeptics, because they only have to learn a few counter-arguments that are guaranteed to be effective, and applicable.

However, what nobody realizes is that this could all very well be a tactic on behalf of the International Creationist Conspiracy. The skeptical community is being lured into complacency by only having to respond to canned and unoriginal arguments. One of these days, a creationist is going to come up with a truly original argument, and then we’ll all be fucked.

PZ Myers has a very  amusing story posted on his blog.

I’d summarize it here, but I can’t, in good conscience, steal Myers’ fabulous setup and punchline. Read it. Now.