Of mixed minds

...did run a show on the possibility that the moon landings were a hoax, IIRC.

Yeah, well, I don't expect anything better from Fox. Might as well rename the network American Pravda and be done with it.

--R.J.

Firstly, let me establish that I also see absolutely no reason to believe the Bible to be any more "divine" than any of the other myth books out there; and that I share your disgust with the anti-science, anti-evolutionists groups that have sprung up in Dover and Kansas.

But, when I read about the cancelation of this particular line of study - here being the first I've heard of it; thanks again for spreading the info - I found myself not sure that this was completely positive. Depending, of course, on how it was guided, an investigation into the evidence for, and against - whatever of the latter could really be found - evolution could potentially be an informative, instructive exercise for the kiddies. They say (IIRC) that there are no facts in science, only theories; and that science works by investigating, proving, and reinforcing those theories. I guess that it feels to me like it would be a loss if scientific theories such as evolution could no longer be examined at all by students for fear of controversy and negative publicity. I would find this loss preferable to school districts legislating the teachings of a particular religion into the school books and dumping evolution, of course; but either would be a shame.

(On the other hand, if the Ohio lesson plan had been only about finding "evidence AGAINST evolution", that would have caused me to view it in a completely different light ...)

While I agree with your sentiment as a whole -- a class that goes "hey, let's try to create our own theory on the differentiation of species and see where we end up" would be a very educational semester -- the problem is that the Ohio plan was largely crafted as an anti-evolutionary measure, to the point where the Ohio Department of Education ignored the advice from members of its Science Content Standards Advisory Committee who spoke out against the plan (see this article for details).

Beyond that, my general annoyance with these mseasures is that there isn't much of anything in current evolutionary teaching to be in dispute about. Yet when these anti-evolution plans are introduced, there's always the implicit or explicit assumption that evolution is "unproven" and should be questioned, which ignores the fact that there's already enough evidence supporting evolution that anything which disproves it would have to re-invent half a dozen other fields as well. And I could never understand how anyone can claim "intelligent design is scientific" with a straight face; Saying "Well, we don't know how this works, so [a] God must have been involved, case closed" goes completely against the fundamental ever-questioning aspect of science itself.

If the fundamentalists want to bring the Bible back into the school, why not do it above-the-board and make it a literature class? I'd support a semester spent in critical reading of the Bible, especially if the study plan includes analysis of the less-than-savory parts, instead of sticking only to the Disneyfied evangelical portions...

--R.J.