Creationists Attempting to Expand Suppression of Science in Ohio

The Akron Beacon Journal (Hat tip to Thoughts from Kansas) shows the consequence of giving polital party to believers in creationism (a.k.a. cretins). The cretins have developed a “Controversial Issues Template” to attempt to cast doubt on established science:

The proposal “is a lot of gobbledygook — it’s just another wedge into the teaching of ID in science classes,” said Martha Wise, a 28-year board member from Avon, who has been an opponent of the creationist supporters.

This is seen not only as an attempt to teach creationism, but to promote the right wing agenda in all areas where their policies are contradicted by established science:

Lawrence Krauss, a Case Western Reserve University physics professor, said he is alarmed at the attempt to challenge stem cell research, evolution and global warming.

“They are not controversial from the view of science,” he said.

If teachers debated all the issues with any uncertainty, nothing would ever be taught, Krauss said.

“When they teach history, are they going to say some people say the Holocaust never happened?” he added.

Krauss and others recruited former U.S. Rep. Tom Sawyer of Akron to oppose Owens Fink.

“I have no problem with debate in classrooms, but science classrooms are a place for established science,” Sawyer said.

Be Sociable, Share!

1 Comment

  1. 1
    caliibre says:

    Why can Creationists &/or Intelligent Design (ID) advocates solve Sudoku Number Puzzles so quickly?


    It’s just a matter of faith! It’s the same method creationists and now ID specialists resort to in trying to prove their unsustainable “intelligent design theory”. Creationists can just stop searching for reality by just assuming all gaps in current understanding and/or knowledge of evolution must be filled with a (G=god) solution. As Prof Richard Dawkins explains in chapter four of The GOD Delusion; “If an apparent gap is found, it is assumed that God, by default must fill it.” Saves them having to think and question I suppose.

    Much like the progress one makes by eliminating the possible numbers in each square as a Sudoku puzzle is solved, “gaps shrink as science advances and God is threatened with eventually having nothing to do and nowhere to hide.” This of course “worries thoughtful theologians” however the greater worry for scientists (and the rest of us) is that groups through politics or fear will walk away from the “essential part of the scientific enterprise [that is] to admit ignorance.”

    Nothing is more dangerous than a, ‘I have all the answers’ arrogant preacher followed by a bunch of non-thinking ‘god-botherers’ driven by blind faith who absolve themselves from their societal responsibilities with the comfort of unquestioning feeble-minds!

    Although some see Dawkins as a bit of a raver and less scientific in his arguments than he could (should) be, if you read Pascal Boyer’s “Gods, Spirits and the Mental Instincts that Create Them”, Dawkins’ ’emotional’ approach to battling the “ID” lobby is also needed.


Leave a comment