Teaching creationism.

[Dave]

This is more "anti-creationalist" but it is a link off the story Claire linked and 2013 but is new to me.

Louisiana counts the cost of teaching creationism – in reputation and dollars

Peter Kulakowsky, a biotech entrepreneur in Louisiana, recently published a letter in the New Orleans Times-Picayune, saying that:

"As the director of a biological laboratory in Louisiana, I need enlightened staff. Distracting the state's students in their formative training [through the Louisiana Science Education Act] only cripples them."

The Louisiana Science Education Act does more than harm the potential of Louisiana's students. It is already directly impacting the state's economy. Louisiana State University's former graduate dean of science, Kevin Carman, testified before the state legislature in 2012 that top scientists had left the university citing the Louisiana Science Education Act as a reason. Other scientists chose to accept jobs elsewhere, because they didn't want to come to a state with a creationism law. Carman said: "teaching pseudo-science drives scientists away."

Louisiana's third largest industry is tourism, and the state generates millions of dollars each year from conventions. After the Louisiana Science Education Act was passed, the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology cancelled a scheduled convention in New Orleans in 2011, costing the city an estimated $2.9m. The society launched a boycott of Louisiana, and the state has become less competitive at attracting certain conventions because of its anti-science stance.

I wonder what the current situation is?

[Dave]

Seems there is a, sort of, change going on in Louisiana . . . if it ever gets a chance.

The law allows public school teachers to use supplemental materials to promote "critical thinking skills" in areas like evolution and global warming. Critics call the law a backdoor way to introduce creationism into science classes, which supporters of the law deny.

BESE members voted 7-2 to include information from the state law in the standards, before the committee then approved the full package without dissent. The board is expected to give final passage to the standards Wednesday.

But the transition to the new teaching benchmarks won't be immediate.

The upcoming 2017-18 year will include teacher training and field testing, according to the education department, with the standards fully phased in by the 2018-19 school year.

The classroom standards set guideposts for what students from kindergarten through 12th grade should know in basic science, physical science, physics, biology, chemistry, earth science and other scientific fields by the end of each grade.

The current standards were written in 1997. The education department says only two states, New Mexico and Wisconsin, use older science standards. The rewrite was aimed at better preparing students for jobs in STEM fields — science, technology, engineering and math.

Louisiana ranks poorly in national comparisons of science testing results.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/louisiana/articles/2017-03-07/science-standards-rewrite-wins-support-with-evolution-tweak

[Tank]

Hi

I have split this off of the Evolution Resources thread as that isn't intended as a discussion thread but a data resource.

Regards
Chris

[Dave]

Good one, Chris.

But perhaps it can encompass the wider social and ecocomic effects that such a restricted education regime can cause.

[Tank]

Good one, Chris.

But perhaps it can encompass the wider social and ecocomic effects that such a restricted education regime can cause.

Just start a separate thread. We can all do that. And if you think it's worth making it sticky then just ask.

[Icarus]

 The natives are restless. In this case a non native........http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/05/creationist-geologist-sues-us-park-service-after-it-rejects-request-collect-samples

[Dragonia]

Maybe this is a good place to leave my thoughts about recently having watched the debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye.
( https://youtu.be/wvO3zJaNBjs ) (2 1/2 hours of mind-numbing stupidity)
I think the debate happened 2 years ago, but I just got around to watching it. I must say that I used to love Ken Ham and his unapologetic way of defending the Bible. It made perfect sense to me at the time. Now, watching him debate and listening to him give answers, seriously it is like nails on a chalkboard to my ears. It was as though he had a script in his head and he could not veer from the script. And if pushed, he would just say "Bible". Many of the direct questions that Bill Nye asked were never answered, because there are no good answers. Ken Ham just opened himself up to look like a complete idiot and I can not believe that he still has any credibility, even with Christians. 

[Icarus]

Dragonia, at one time, you thought Ken Ham to be a rational spokesman for the god of the bible. HOORAY you have recovered from the reverie. You are an admirably intelligent individual who has seen the absurd, way off the deep end, folly of the likes of Mister Ham. 

That goobers like Ham continuously resort to the bible as authority is an exercise in abject stupidity.  (goobers: as a person of the mid south you will recognize that goobers, pinders, ground peas, and peanuts are all colloquial synonyms....apologies to Mister Peanuts himself, Jimmie Carter. Actually I respected Jimmie.... and still do) ..... If you use the adjective dipshit, to modify the word goober then it will apply well to the Ham person.....why do you suppose that the Aussies assisted him in his emigration to the U.S.? )

I am so distressed with the xtian revertment to the bible as the final arbiter of truth that nausea overtakes me. One only need to research the history of the xtian bible to learn that it is most unlikely to be an historically reliable document or an account of the irrefutable word of omnipotent and omniscient god.

Oops, I thinlt that I am on arant. Forgive me Dragonia.

[Dragonia]

I am so distressed with the xtian revertment to the bible as the final arbiter of truth that nausea overtakes me. One only need to research the history of the xtian bible to learn that it is most unlikely to be an historically reliable document or an account of the irrefutable word of omnipotent and omniscient god.

Oops, I thinlt that I am on arant. Forgive me Dragonia.

Truly, no apologies are necessary, it is easy to rant when it comes to deep, stubborn, blind idiocy.
I understand your nausea reaction, as it catches me off guard from time to time also.
The thing is, I fervently hope that Ken Ham does more harm than good to his cause, with debates and publicity like this, and I believe seeds of doubt are being sown by shit "debates" like this.
You see, even when I was a strong Christian, this whole Creationism concept was hard to balance with the vast majority of science. The foundation of the Bible didn't hold up without Creation, so I dared not believe in evolution. But it always bothered me that God was allowing humanity to be fooled with apparent facts.

Damn fundamentalism and creationism and literalism.