Down the bayou: Louisiana passes "It's okay to doubt" act

The Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) voted unanimously to adopt rules today implementing the Louisiana Science Education Act (LSEA), the landmark academic freedom bill passed last summer.

The rules approved by the BESE effectuate the academic freedom bill’s purpose to allow teachers to use supplementary materials to teach controversial scientific theories without threat of recrimination.

Well, I hope it all works out. I worry about Louisiana's low rating in the education stats, but, quite honestly, having lived through so many exploded popular science myths - overpopulation, nuclear winter, global warming, the necessity of human embryonic stem cells for science research, the danger that supposedly exists if anyone believes that the universe shows evidence of intelligent design - I can't imagine why teachers should not be permitted to supplement official insanity with private eccentricities. It would just make so much sense.

Hey, Louisiana man - and just my type (he shoots his own food):



Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy:

Louisiana Academic Freedom Bill: White lab coats to take refuge behind black law robes?

Here’s patent attorney Roddy Bullock on the nerve of the Bayou swamp monsters daring to question Darwin:

Professor Barbara Forrest, an unflagging mouthpiece for Darwinian hegemony, tried to mobilize a "huge network of e-mails" to Gov. Jindal's office to stop the act's supporters from "boldly introducing religion into public education." Alan Leshner of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, or AAAS, proclaimed the act "would unleash an assault against scientific integrity." And, of course, the sky would fall.

Oh, so that’s what all that crap is, over the way! The sky falling. And here I thought someone nearby was doing an under-the-radar home reno .... Silly me, it’s the sky falling after all.

Seriously, Bullock says,

Louisiana may see the next court battle over the teaching of evolution. But making white lab coats subservient to black law robes is the business of scientific cowards – mainstream science has become sadly dependent upon federally protected and subsidized truth. But history shows that science-by-robed-decree, whether by Papal Bull or judicial bunk, is rarely sustainable against contrary evidence. The fine citizens of Louisiana sense this, and simply wish for their children to have science taught fully and honestly in an environment of academic freedom.

Well, I hope academic freedom is reflected in better grades. Louisiana is not a high performing state academically, though it is said to be improving.

(Note: I take assessments like the one linked with a large helping of salt because they often obscure critical information. For example, the parishes of New Orleans, like New York’s inner city schools, may be appallingly bad, but upriver the standards could well be more like those of upstate New York. Let's think before we freak.)

See also:

Governor Bobby Jindal passes Louisiana bill to permit critical thinking about Darwin, and such (But is this a good idea?)

Evolve already, huffingtons ... the alligators are laughing at you

What happens if Darwinism is subjected to natural selection in the Louisiana bayou?

What happens if Darwinism is subjected to natural selection in the Louisiana bayou?

In "Louisiana Confounds the Science Thought Police" at National Review Online, John West of the Discovery Institute* comments on the new Louisiana "it's okay to question what they tell you" law:

Students need to know about the current scientific consensus on a given issue, but they also need to be able to evaluate critically the evidence on which that consensus rests. They need to learn about competing interpretations of the evidence offered by scientists, as well as anomalies that aren’t well explained by existing theories.

Yet in many schools today, instruction about controversial scientific issues is closer to propaganda than education. Teaching about global warming is about as nuanced as Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. Discussions about human sexuality recycle the junk science of biologist Alfred Kinsey and other ideologically driven researchers. And lessons about evolution present a caricature of modern evolutionary theory that papers over problems and fails to distinguish between fact and speculation. In these areas, the “scientific” view is increasingly offered to students as a neat package of dogmatic assertions that just happens to parallel the political and cultural agenda of the Left.

Real science, however, is a lot more messy — and interesting — than a set of ideological talking points.

Ah yes, brings back memories ...

One of the ways I first became interested in the intelligent design controversy yeas ago was encountering a long-departed science teachers' Web site. A teacher opined that the Monarch and Viceroy butterflies' similarity may not really be due to Darwinian evolution, but it nonetheless made a good illustration of Darwinian evolution.

Huh? Yes, but only if Darwinian evolution isn't true. On the other hand, that's not what the teacher was trying to say ... He was trying to say that Darwinian evolution is so true that the material that illustrates it need not be factual.

In which case ... I sensed a story developing.

I went on to study the Monarch and Viceroy similarity myself and discovered that they probably do not resemble each other due to Darwinian evolution.

A couple of years later, I completed a book about the intelligent design controversy, By Design or by Chance?

(Note: The images are from the Government of Canada's excellent guide to the butterflies of Canada. The left is a Monarch and the right is a Viceroy. Actually, we do not know why they resemble each other, despite not being closely related.

(*Yes, yes, those evil Discos who hide their vast wealth in shipping containers in the basement of a shabby Seattle office building, and tilt the world toward theocracy while keeping "bad boy" Berlinski as one of their key proteges. Now go get more of the "truth" about their global conspiracy from "truther" Barbara Forrest.)

Evolve already, huffingtons

In "Big Bang on the Bayou", Ken Connor reflects on the way in which public education Louisiana has become a cause of alarm in the wake of Louisiana's "assault on Darwin":

So why are the denizens of blogs like the Huffington Post in such a huff? Because "science" is their "truth," and it is blasphemous to question their beliefs.

Secularists are unwilling to have their orthodoxy challenged. Just as Galileo had to fight against the church and government of his day, those who dare to question today's "settled" theories are banished by scientific and political Inquisitors. The implications of being wrong are too much to fathom; therefore, the secularist worldview must go unchallenged.

[ ... ]

Thus, any analysis that calls into question any aspect (no matter how small) of the theory of evolution becomes an educational and/or constitutional crisis.

Actually, for most of the huffingtons, Darwinian evolution is not a theory, it is their state-supported religion. It is as subject to criticism in North American schools as Islam is in Saudi Arabian schools or the glorious Communist Party in Chinese schools.

And for the same reason too: Those who do not trust themselves to demonstrate a truth try to enforce it.

Evolve already, huffingtons. The alligators are laughing at you.

More on Louisiana's "assault on Darwin" ...

Floyd and Mary Beth Brown are pretty happy with the new Louisiana academic freedom bill that would permit teachers to discuss reasons why Darwin's theory of evolution might not be correct:

One would think legislation which allows an environment that promotes “critical thinking” and “objective discussion” in the classroom would please everyone -- it did the bipartisan group of legislators in Louisiana -- but such is not the case. The New York Times felt threatened by the legislation, calling it “retrograde,” naming its editorial on the topic, “Louisiana’s Latest Assault on Darwin.” They were attempting to pressure Gov. Jindal to not sign the law, using a number of tactics including implicit ridicule, subtle belittling insults and untruths.

The law is straightforward and clearly restricts any intent to promote a religious doctrine. There is no mention of either intelligent design or creationism. Darwinism is not banned and teachers are required to teach students from standard textbooks. But the Times calls the legislation a “Trojan horse” because the state board of education must, upon request of local school districts, help foster an environment of “critical thinking” and “open discussion” on controversial scientific subjects. This allows teachers to use supplemental materials to analyze evolution and show views other than Darwin’s theory. It allows evolution to be criticized, and the law protects the rights of teachers and students to talk freely about a wide range of ideas without fear of reprisal.

Actually, Louisiana isn't that far off the track.

Actually, even Darwinists are now discussing how to rescue their theory without resorting to a political coup.

As evil intelligent design theorist Paul Nelson writes,

Evolutionary theory is in — and has been, for a long time — a period of great upheaval. Much of this upheaval is masked by the noise and smoke of the ID debate, and by the steady public rhetoric of major science organizations, concerned to tamp down ID-connected dissent. You know the lines: “Darwinian evolutionary theory is the foundation of biology,” et cetera.

But the upheaval is there, and increasing in amplitude and frequency.

Keep moving folks, nothing to see here ...

I am antsy about the Louisiana bill. After you've tried writing curriculum for what seems like fifty different government-led revolutions in education, all you want is for the government to Just Butt Out. But, come to think of it, how would I know they were still the government if they weren't making a mess of things?

Note: The picture is of a Louisiana alligator, from the Louisiana Advocate newspapers in education program. Alligators should be laughing. Do alligators bother with evolution? I can't imagine why. Once you are an alligator, where are you gonna go?

Governor Bobby Jindal passes Louisiana bill to permit critical thinking about Darwin, and such

Big fun on the Bayou:

I see where Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal has signed the Science Education Act On Evolution and Education, according to which

Upon the request of a local school board, the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education will be required to "allow and assist teachers, principals, and other school administrators to create and foster an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning." Assistance from the State Board in this area now will "include support and guidance for teachers regarding effective ways to help students understand, analyze, critique, and objectively review scientific theories being studied."

I wonder if this law will result in an expensive Supreme Court challenge for Louisiana.

I understand what drives all this. I would love to see the Selfish Gene cult, the St. Darwin of Down House League, and the You Gonna Fry! You Gonna Die! School of Ecology off school premises for good.

Still ..., I have mixed feelings about the whole "law" business.

What I understand: Having shuffled through tons of materialist sludge in textbooks and teachers' guides (and succeeded in red pencilling at least some of it into hell), I would love to help write sludge-free material. For example,

- we don't have any idea how life began, so we will act like Darwin and discuss subjects on which we have reasonable (though not by any means unassailable) information, rather than useless speculation.

- lots of what we are now learning about life's development does not conform to theories that were widely accepted even in the recent past. But that is what happens when we study a dynamic field. We see changes. That is what a dynamic field is: One in which we see changes. If you want to study a field in which you will not see changes, move to a planet where nothing changes.

- despite the vast changes in life over time, there is still no free lunch. That fact has implications beyond biology. Learn it here and you will not need to learn it elsewhere.

All that said, I hate government interference in education.

Unofficial history of government interference in education: 2500 years ago, the government of Athens forces Socrates to drink poison. Things have gone on pretty much the same from there, except that paperwork now replaces poison: Every student a project. Every teacher a bureaucrat. Every headmaster a snitch ... O brave new world, that has such people in it ...

Bayou, blue bayou, surprise me, will you?

Here is why there is an intelligent design controversy: