The Worst Jobs in Science No.3- Kansas Biology Teacher

Popular Science ^

[scientificbeliever]

3. Kansas Biology Teacher On the front lines of science's devolution "The evolution debate is consuming almost everything we do," says Brad Williamson, a 30-year science veteran at suburban Olathe East High School and a past president of the National Association of Biology Teachers. "It's politicized the classroom. Parents will say their child can't be in class during any discussion of evolution, and students will say things like 'My grandfather wasn't a monkey!'"

First, a history lesson. In 1999 a group of religious fundamentalists won election to the Kansas State Board of Education and tried to introduce creationism into the state's classrooms. They wanted to delete references to radiocarbon dating, continental drift and the fossil record from the education standards. In 2001 more-temperate forces prevailed in elections, but the anti-evolutionists garnered a 6-4 majority again last November. This year Intelligent Design (ID) theory is their anti-evolution tool of choice.

At the heart of ID is the idea that certain elements of the natural world—the human eye, say—are "irreducibly complex" and have not and cannot be explained by evolutionary theory. Therefore, IDers say, they must be the work of an intelligent designer (that is, God).

The problem for teachers is that ID can't be tested using the scientific method, the system of making, testing and retesting hypotheses that is the bedrock of science. That's because underpinning ID is religious belief. In science class, Williamson says, "students have to trust that I'm just dealing with science."

Alas, for Kansas's educational reputation, the damage may be done. "We've heard anecdotally that our students are getting much more scrutiny at places like medical schools. I get calls from teachers in other states who say things like 'You rubes!'" Williamson says. "But this is happening across the country. It's not just Kansas anymore."

[Dimensio]

Hmm. So Macroevolution refers to the theory and microevolution refers to one of the mechanisms that drives the theory. Why not simply refer to them as "the theory of evolution" and "natural selection" respectively?

[Mister Da]

Scientists, by their very nature, constantly question the theories of their area of expertise. For to clearly disprove an established theory of science is a dream of all scientists, the climbing of Mt Everest, so to speak.

I disagree that there are only 2 choices in this debate. There are several "theories" about the origin of species. In my mind, the theory that aliens have produced & manipulated life (as in a zoo) on earth since the "beginning" is just as viable as creationism, and certainly more "provable".

I believe the creationists are ignoring the old adage, "Be careful what you wish for!" If creationism were taught in public schools, which one would it be - christian, muslim, hindu, buddist, shinto, mayan, apache, siminole, cherokee, creek, ............................?

Do you really want the biology teacher, Mr. Mohammed or Miss DeNova, teaching your kids creationism? Do you want the NEA & the left wing bureaucrats & scholars writing THEIR version of creation into the textbooks. Test on Friday, pages 100-110.

When I was in school long ago, I lost no sleep over the contradictions between church & school. The teacher did not discuss religion, & the preacher did not discuss science. Probably most Freepers had the same experience. Clearly, these contradictions can only be resolved by the individual.

All in all, this is really a dumb move by creationists - most of whom disparage the poor education their children receive, yet can't wait for religion to be taught by these same poor educators.

Take your kids to church, synagogue, mosque, etc. for their religious education, & if you just can't stand evolution, homeschool or religious school.

[js1138]

And it's my constitutional right and duty as a Nebraskan to insult Kansans.

As a Floridian it's my right and duty to seek out states that are stupider and call attention to the fact. It's nice when this work is so easy it seems like a vacation.

[Rudder]

When I was in school long ago, I lost no sleep over the contradictions between church & school. The teacher did not discuss religion, & the preacher did not discuss science. Probably most Freepers had the same experience. Clearly, these contradictions can only be resolved by the individual.

Your wisdom is a really cool reminder of the best of my Berkeley hippie years. Such an environment then ...hard science and spiritual purity, each as their opposite nature would imply, battled one another and found peace without either side compromising.

[VadeRetro]

As a Floridian it's my right and duty to seek out states that are stupider and call attention to the fact. It's nice when this work is so easy it seems like a vacation.

As a West Virginian, I feel compelled to note dumber, flatter states whenever they call attention to themselves.

[js1138]

West Virginia inherited its membership. Florida was voted in.

[VadeRetro]

I remember the occasion. The Republic will bear the scars for some time.

[Right Wing Professor]

As a Floridian it's my right and duty to seek out states that are stupider and call attention to the fact. It's nice when this work is so easy it seems like a vacation.

That's 'cos you live in a state that to most of us is a vacation.

[Logophile]

But a rejection of science leads to bad doctoring. I would be as leery of a surgeon who believed that the moon was made of green cheese as of one who rejected 150 years of biology, chemistry, physics and geology.

Someone who disbelieves evolution has not necessarily rejected science.

Science is not what one believes; it is what one does. Scientists create models to describe what they observe about the real world. Such models are generally imperfect and tentative; they are not intended to represent "Truth." Indeed, a model may be abandoned when it ceases to be useful.

This process of model building does not require that one accept or even be aware of the other scientific models that are current. In some cases, those other models may be irrelevant. In other cases, an unusual model may be more useful than a standard one.

I too would be leery of a surgeon who really thinks the moon is made of green cheese. However, I would not be worried at all to learn that my surgeon knows nothing about the composition of the moon—so long as he is a competent surgeon.

Likewise, I would not be worried to learn that my surgeon believes that God created the earth—so long as he is a competent surgeon.

[b_sharp]

You beat me to it. Good explanation.

[Mister Da]

You may be surprised to know my experience was in a small town in Alabama. Berkeley = rural Alabama. LOL!

[Logophile]

I've asked this before without an answer. How can you, Logophile, make such a statement unless you know "...what a practicing physician does?" . . . I assume, based upon your replies, that you're reasonable and not bombastic, and that you deserve fair and reasonable dialogue. . . . Again (simple answer will do): How do you know what a practicing physician does and why knowledge of evolution is irrelevant to that activity? . . . In even simpler parlance: Put Up or Shut UP.

My brother is a physician.

So you tell me: How does an understanding of the theory of evolution affect what a practicing physician does?

[b_sharp]

"Then you got your people who act like evolution is the only science there is. Also believe or choose to ignore that there is evidence against evolution.

Just a point. There is, so far, no evidence against the ToE. In some areas there are lines of evidence that are incomplete and other ares where our understanding is incomplete but, contrary to what the anti-evolutionists want, no evidence 'against' it.

[furball4paws]

You just stepped in it big time. I'm sure C-man will enlighten you.

[furball4paws]

Pond Scum Alert.

[b_sharp]

"Creationism and ID both have valid answers that evolution does not, such as the start of life, the universe, and everything. Not to mention the many flaws in evolution that should lead us to look for possibilities that can fill these evolutionary unfillable gaps.

You seem to have a grasp on things I lack. Could you describe one valid answer creationism has that evolution lacks? Please make sure it is in the purview of evolution, I don't want to have to stray from the evolutionary path too far.

While you're at it could you describe one of those unfillable gaps and how that gap damages the ToE?

[furball4paws]

Any modern drug, especially antibiotics.

[b_sharp]

"Evolutionists haven't found a fossil with their pre-conceived notions of a "missing link" yet they insist on the existence of such creatures. The belief in the existence of a "missing link" or many "missing links" in and of itself is based more on faith than observational science.

You have fallen for the Hovindite snake oil hook line and sinker. There have been, on this very forum, reams of information on the intermediate hominid fossils. Check out either PatrickHenry's List-O-Links or talkorigins.org. Talk Origins also has a number of posts which correct the misinformation Hovind puts out.

[muir_redwoods]

"...evolution passed off as a fact when the scientific community still has it as a theory."

You should acquaint yourself with the definition of the word theory. It doesn't mean hypothesus. Remember, Newtons Laws of motion were corrected by Einsteins Theory of Relativity

[KMJames]

Any modern drug, especially antibiotics.

You forgot to credit "evolution" with the discovery of the internal combustion engine, sliced bread, the White Sox winning the World Series and anything else that we know has already happened.

Of course, we can't really use it to say what WILL happen, but, we can say: "Some things changed in some ways at some time; some things might change".