... apparently they should never be mixed, at least not if you want to keep your job as science curriculum director in the Texas Education Agency. Okay, so this article is more about anti-intelligent design than evolution, but I liked the alliteration. What is it about science that is so hard for the general public to understand in this country - I can understand not getting the complexities of genetics or string theory or the complicated dating techniques for rocks, but it seems as though the most basic of scientific ideas are still too difficult for the public to grasp. Don't believe me? Just look at the links to charts in the last paragraph. The US is statistically significantly below average in science knowledge (or at least the 15 year olds in the US).
What's even more frustrating about the whole situation is that politics inevitably come to play a role in it as well. Why would anyone in their right mind fire this woman for forwarding an email about a lecture? Yes, the lecture is on a controversial (not scientifically controversial, mind you) topic, but does forwarding notice about it necessarily indicate endorsement? I think absolutely not. Whether she believed in evolution or not isn't the point. As science curriculum director, I would think that it is her responsibility to promote and endorse a venue for discussion of science topics like the evolution-intelligent design debate (debate, hah, fiasco would be a better word).
Okay, sorry about the long rant. I suppose it's just a rant-y sort of day.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment