Scientific Illiteracy and the Partisan Takeover of Biology

National Center for Science Education ^ | 18 April 2006 | Staff

[PatrickHenry]

A new article in PLoS Biology (April 18, 2006) discusses the state of scientific literacy in the United States, with especial attention to the survey research of Jon D. Miller, who directs the Center for Biomedical Communications at Northwestern University Medical School.

To measure public acceptance of the concept of evolution, Miller has been asking adults if "human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals" since 1985. He and his colleagues purposefully avoid using the now politically charged word "evolution" in order to determine whether people accept the basics of evolutionary theory. Over the past 20 years, the proportion of Americans who reject this concept has declined (from 48% to 39%), as has the proportion who accept it (45% to 40%). Confusion, on the other hand, has increased considerably, with those expressing uncertainty increasing from 7% in 1985 to 21% in 2005.

In international surveys, the article reports, "[n]o other country has so many people who are absolutely committed to rejecting the concept of evolution," quoting Miller as saying, "We are truly out on a limb by ourselves."

The "partisan takeover" of the title refers to the embrace of antievolutionism by what the article describes as "the right-wing fundamentalist faction of the Republican Party," noting, "In the 1990s, the state Republican platforms in Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oregon, Missouri, and Texas all included demands for teaching creation science." NCSE is currently aware of eight state Republican parties that have antievolutionism embedded in their official platforms or policies: those of Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Texas. Four of them -- those of Alaska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Texas -- call for teaching forms of creationism in addition to evolution; the remaining three call only for referring the decision whether to teach such "alternatives" to local school districts.

A sidebar to the article, entitled "Evolution under Attack," discusses the role of NCSE and its executive director Eugenie C. Scott in defending the teaching of evolution. Scott explained the current spate of antievolution activity as due in part to the rise of state science standards: "for the first time in many states, school districts are faced with the prospect of needing to teach evolution. ... If you don't want evolution to be taught, you need to attack the standards." Commenting on the decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover [Kitzmiller et al. v Dover Area School District et al.], Scott told PLoS Biology, "Intelligent design may be dead as a legal strategy but that does not mean it is dead as a popular social movement," urging and educators to continue to resist to the onslaught of the antievolution movement. "It's got legs," she quipped. "It will evolve."

[TaxRelief]

Agreed. The only answer is school choice.

Or ending the public school system (middle class welfare scheme) in its entirety.

[Old_Mil]

Prokaryotic endosymbiosis has been demonstrated in the laboratory for at least a half a century, ignoramus.

Nonsense. And I notice that your link is broken.

[TaxRelief]

Present the credentials of the so-called scientists and let the debate begin!

[Clearly there is no point attempting communication with the run-of-the-mill evomaniacs.]

[Old_Mil]

You should have left the link broken. Right in the summary it states: This review describes current different examples of bacteria able not only to attack and degrade other bacteria, but also to establish stable symbiotic relationships with different eukaryotic organisms.

This is why I find it so hard to take evolutionists seriously. Every time you trot out your so-called evidence, it turns out to be dealing with something else. The endosymbiotic hypothesis deals with the spontaneous rise of the eukaryotic cell through the endocytosis of one prokaryotic cell by another resulting in symbiotic activity. Your linked "proof" does not.

Sorry, no cigar.

[Dimensio]

Present the credentials of the so-called scientists and let the debate begin!

I referenced no scientists, nor even "so-called" scientists. I do not understand the relevance of your statement.

[Clearly there is no point attempting communication with the run-of-the-mill evomaniacs.]

Why? Do you prefer to avoid discussions where you do not have to consider facts and evidence?

[ToryHeartland]

Now, lets look at creationism, and its duplicitous offspring, ID. They can't even be tested and falsified--only believed.

But you have to really, really want to believe! :-)

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"The government schools in the U.S. will punish and imprison those who refuse to cooperate with government school officials."

[wintertime]

I am not a chiropractor. If you will privately e-mail me. I will send you a link to my website.

[wintertime]

Who do you think would be going into fits of apoplexy if the government, expecially the feds, got out of the education business? Fundamentalist Christians or secularists & evolutionists? The former would rejoice, the latter would be on suicide watch.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Although anecdotal, it appears to me that it is the secularists and evolutionists who are the biggest defenders of government schools.

[wintertime]

Can you see how Bible believing Christians don't want a belief system shoved onto their children, that in the end equates Christians with terrorists?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It is the evolutionists and secularists who need compulsory attendance, compulsory funded, price-fixed, monopoly government schools.

[ToryHeartland]

Sorry, no cigar

And no reply from you either to post 127 or post 294 in this thread, wherein your misleading use of the Crick quote is discussed.

My assumption is you have innocently replicated the truncated version of Crick's words from one of a number of 'Creationist' websites without being aware of those sites dishonest use of the quote, but having now been directed to the full context will be happy to cease perpetuatating this misleading usage in future.

[ToryHeartland]

And in similar spirit, I will endeavour to stop perpetuating such perplexing mis-spellings as perpetuatating! Apologies!

[wintertime]

You think we should be spending less than $8 K per pupil per year educating our kids? Since we have at least 2 taxpayers per pupil, you're claiming an expense of $4K a year forces two parents into the workforce?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Regarding: Message #419

Using the comment "Bull" does not address my points. If you could refute them, you would have, but I see that you haven't. Calling them "Bull" will not make these arguments go away and thoughtful readers will see the truth.

In 2003, government K-12 schools cost nearly $11,000 per year, per government K-12 child, and this is a deliberate underestimate. It is likely closer to $12,000 or more today.

http://www.reformk12.com/archives/000174.nclk

Regarding: Private school scarcity

But,,,government schools are a price-fixed monopoly. This creates a very hostile environment for the creation of private schools. Scarcity also forces parents to use government schools.

If government were to open food distribution centers giving away free food, how long would ordinary private grocery stores remain in business?

What you would see would be very few private grocery stores providing ordinary food, but we would see a few gourmet food stores catering to the tastes of the wealthy.

This is what we see today in private schooling. In many parts of the nation, especially those states that came into existance after the creation of government schooling, there are very few modestly priced private schools but there are a few "gourmet" private schools catering to the social tastes of the rich.

Regarding schools making children illiterate:

Yes, the reading and math methods used in government schools make children illiterate and innumerate. Then when grown they are unfit as parents to homeschool.

Regarding vouchers and tax credits:

I personally favor tax credits but only as a means of weaning parents from the government teat. Government education is by far one of the biggest entitlements to the rich and middle classes that I can thing of.

In regard to vouchers, you claim that it will not "decrease per pupil expenditure that much."

The wars over curriculum and school policies, of which evolution is merely one of hundreds, is NOT about per pupil spending. It is about Freedom of Conscience!

Government does not have the right to FORCE children into its indoctrination centers and impose upon them a curriculum that would establish the worldview of the politically powerful and undermine the worldview of those with less power. This applies equally to both the evolutionists and the IDers.

You are a pro-evolutionist and are defending government schools. It is an anecdotal observation but it does seem that most evolutionists and secularists are government school defenders and oppose freedom of choice in K-12 education.

[Right Wing Professor]

This is why I find it so hard to take evolutionists seriously. Every time you trot out your so-called evidence, it turns out to be dealing with something else. The endosymbiotic hypothesis deals with the spontaneous rise of the eukaryotic cell through the endocytosis of one prokaryotic cell by another resulting in symbiotic activity. Your linked "proof" does not.~

Let's be truthful; you don't like evolutionists because we challenge your dogmatic religious beliefs. The endosymbiotic hypothesis says that prokaryotes lived symbiotically within the ancestor of single-celled eukaryotes. We know of numerous examples of prokaryotes living today within the bodies of single-celled eukaryotes. The review, if you'd read it, lists one example where an amoeba, in the laboratory, was infected by bacteria, formed an endosymbiotic association with them, and the association evolved to become obligate on the part of the amoeba. Likewise, some Paramecia have endosymbiotic green algae, and Mixotrichia paradoxa has even lost its mitochondria and replaced them with endosymbiotic bacteria. And you claim this isn't strong evidence that the endosymbiotic evolution of eukaryotes is perfectly plausible?

Endoparasitism, by the way, is often a prelude to endosymbiosis

[Gumlegs]

Much of Randi's work, especially in exposing scientists who think they are qualified to judge people claiming paranormal abilities has a pretty high indignation factor. His book exposing Uri Geller has some pretty ... tart descriptions of the people who were fooled by Geller. He calls Puthoff and Targ "the Laurel and Hardy of psi," iirc.

Randi has also written "Flim Flam," the title of which gives an indication of Randi's attitude.

Perhaps one of the other posters, above, is onto something with the observation that very little of these other ideas have organizations attempting to get them taught as science.

Cheers back atcha.

[Right Wing Professor]

In 2003, government K-12 schools cost nearly $11,000 per year, per government K-12 child, and this is a deliberate underestimate. It is likely closer to $12,000 or more today.

In my state, per pupil expenditure was less than $8K in 2005. Maybe you should do something about your state and local government rather than railing about mine.

Yes, the reading and math methods used in government schools make children illiterate and innumerate.

My oldest kid left Lincoln Public schools having completed a full university calculus sequence, went on to a dual physics math major, and is now in grad. school in the hard sciences.

The wars over curriculum and school policies, of which evolution is merely one of hundreds, is NOT about per pupil spending. It is about Freedom of Conscience!

You are entitled to believe any freaky thing you want about the world. You are not free to teach your religion under the guise of biology to minor children. That interferes with their freedom of conscience.

Government does not have the right to FORCE children into its indoctrination centers and impose upon them a curriculum that would establish the worldview of the politically powerful and undermine the worldview of those with less power. This applies equally to both the evolutionists and the IDers.

Government has the duty to secure minimal educational standards for children, since it's an unfortunate fact that many parents, left to their own devices, will not do so. The alternatives are to maintain public schools, or regulate carefully a system of private schools (as some other countries do), which IMO would create even more problems. Every advanced society in the world has one of these two systems. You would return us to the dark ages.

[Right Wing Professor]

I have FReepmail. Send it there.

[grey_whiskers]

Endoparasitism, by the way, is often a prelude to endosymbiosis

"Endoparasitism precedes endosymbiosis"...hmm, not as catchy as "Ontogeny recapitulates philogeny".

Cheers!

[Doctor Stochastic]

Subduction leads to orogeny.

[Gumlegs]

Oh, no ... not another Wilhelm Reich nut.