Thursday, May 20, 2010

No, no, too wordy, let me tighten that up.


Via Audrey II, we have a reasonably cogent argument against "equal time":



I would put it another way:

"So, when you refer to 'equal time' and 'academic fairness,' you'd like us to balance the presentation of experimentally-supported and objective science with unadulterated, ignorant, scientifically illiterate, Christian wingnut bullshit?"

Yeah, that's tighter.

6 comments:

The other Jim said...

I also hear that in some parts of the world, there is a belief that women are inferior to men. Should we teach that controversy too?

I could only make it through the 1st 30-45 seconds killing the window. Some old crap with a "smart english guy" accent.

Niles said...

the other jim:

the old crap with a smart english guy accent was refuting the idea that the pseudo crap had any place in a science class, bringing in the natural endpoints to the idea that would end up teaching astrology in astronomy, etc etc. You might want to watch it again.

As for today...CNN is now..finally...making some air time for the Texas school books situation, where the neocon Christianists are making the 'controversy' the official curriculum for science and history for millions of American students.

I look forward to when they simply stamp 'God did it' on every child's forehead with a silver hammer.

CC said...

Niles:

I'm betting the other Jim actually meant to type "*same*" old crap", meaning that it's the same (albeit correct) refutation we've heard for years, just with a different inflection and just as ineffective as it's been all this time.

IMHO, it's time to stop being polite and trying to address this intellectually. IMHO, it's time for s scientifically literate people to simply say, "Equal time should not be given to ignorant, fundamentalist Christian crap."

No more debate. Call it useless garbage and throw it out, and let the Christians bitch and whine as much as they want.

liberal supporter said...

I wish we'd had the freedom to learn about warp drive and transporters in science class, instead of all that boring stuff that actually works. The first chapter of the book I didn't get to study is titled "Zephram Cochrane".

The other Jim said...

Niles - I agree with his point in graduate education, where very few, highly trained people are taught about these non-controversial controversies.

But I think there is no place at all for bringing this up in basic undergraduate education or before. Confirmation Bias and all sorts of human psychology issues creep into this, potentially setting up for a spectacular backfire.

CC - thanks for the proof-reading. Oops.

Audrey II said...

L.S.: My science classes were similarly anti-freedom. In physics, we had a very one-sided, MSM-approved version of "Force" presented, with no balance at all of Jedi theory. We were taught the liberal "round earth" theory with nary a mention of the other side. And we were told that rotations of the earth were simply that, with no coverage at all of every 7th one being special.

Why the lack of balance? What is science afraid of?