Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Thursday, November 29, 2007 | Reason : Education | print version Print | Comments |

Document Schools should put faith in science

by Scott Rowed, Calgary Herald

Reposted from:
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/theeditorialpage/story.html?id=13a14d1e-66cc-4ffa-b67d-ac6b5af0042d

In recent years, creationists have become more aggressive in their attempts to undermine science education. The movement, originating in the U.S., has gained political support in Great Britain and Canada.

The Alberta government has been quietly increasing funding to faith schools -- to 100 per cent in the case of "alternative" programs -- and allowing creationism to be taught alongside the Alberta curriculum.

Currently, this movement is most visible in the Ontario election campaign where Conservative Leader John Tory has promised a free vote on funding for all faith schools, pointing to Alberta as an example.

In response to a question, Tory said, "You know it's still called the theory of evolution. But they teach evolution in the Ontario curriculum, but they also could teach the fact to the children that there are other theories that people have out there that are part of some Christian beliefs." His comments show a dismal lack of scientific literacy.

Creationists are fond of stating that evolution is a theory, not a fact. In everyday use, the word "theory" means a hunch or guess. In science, however, it means a comprehensive analysis that explains and interprets the empirical evidence, or facts. A theory is not the bottom rung on the ladder of truth that aspires one day to attain a higher rung called fact.

Humans evolved over millions of years from hominids in Africa and share a common ancestor with the chimpanzee. That's a fact. Whales evolved from land-dwelling carnivores, another fact. The facts tell us "what" happened, whereas the theory of evolution interprets the "how" -- the mechanisms by which evolution works.

When Tory states "there are other theories that people have out there that are part of some Christian beliefs," he refers, of course, to biblical creationism or its latest disguise, intelligent design. His use of the word "theory" ducks under the scientific meaning, yet is used to imply creationism is just as valid as evolution.

This is a common ploy by creationists and is unacceptable for a political leader in a secular society that depends on science and technology.

Creationism usually comes with a choice of two flavours, YEC (young Earth creationism) or OEC (old Earth creationism).

The OECs accept the scientific age of the universe at about 13 billion years. The YECs count the "begats" in the Old Testament and come up with about 6,000 years. The difference is a factor of a bit over two million. Using the same ratio, the diameter of the Earth would be less than six metres. If it were made of rubber and filled with air, it would make a wonderful beach toy.

Tory should clarify whether YEC or OEC would be the official government version of creationism. They cannot both be true -- logically either one is false or both are false. If Tory allows both, he will be using public funds to teach children at least one doctrine that he knows must be false.

When people believe that Adam and Eve had a pet vegetarian Tyrannosaurus rex who used his massive, serrated teeth to crack open watermelons, should we respect their beliefs? (Don't laugh; this is roughly what some creationist cults actually believe).

Should we reward them with taxpayers' money to pass on these wonderful insights to the next generation? Should our future leaders learn to smother their critical thinking and make decisions based on faith rather than evidence and reason? From Canada, we don't have to look too far south to see how tragic these faith-based decisions can be.

Science and technology are the engines of our economy. If we indoctrinate our children with pseudo-science like creationism or intelligent design, or dumb down the curriculum to avoid "offending religious sensibilities,"we are robbing them of exciting careers and harming Canada's future scientific and economic power.

The science curriculum need to be strengthened, not gutted. It needs to inspire young children with the wonders of distant galaxies and nebulas, with the vastness of geological time, and with the incredible diversity of life on Earth and how evolution shaped it.

Teaching biology without mentioning evolution is like teaching astronomy without mentioning gravity. Yet, evolution seems to have become a dirty word in our science classes -- the "e-word."

In Alberta schools (K-12), it's only covered in a brief section in the optional Biology 20. If we want our children to have a good grounding in biology, we need to introduce the basics of evolution and natural selection in elementary grades and continue through high school.

Alberta Education officials say it's OK for religious schools to teach creationism as long as they also teach the Alberta curriculum. But, with evolution erased from the curriculum except in Biology 20, it means our provincial government accepts the "creationism-only" model for young children in publicly funded faith schools.

At a recent high school graduation I attended, several students praised their science teacher, who taught them to accept nothing without critically analyzing the evidence. It's a pity more of our political leaders did not have such teachers.

Scott Rowed lives in Banff and is currently heading up a study on science education and faith schools for the Society for Secular Humanists in Calgary.

Comments 1 - 12 of 12 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #91917 by Dylan Dog on November 29, 2007 at 2:50 pm

Great article!

Other Comments by Dylan Dog

2. Comment #91938 by wonder on November 29, 2007 at 3:18 pm

I've had a lot of success with rearranging the words and always saying, "evolution theory" instead of "the theory of evolution." It sounds more authoritarian like electromagnetic theory, aerodynamics theory, relativity theory, etc. Since they don't say, "the theory of electromagnetism is only a theory, we should teach magic theory too..." I think it would be a step in the right direction to always refer to evolution theory in the same way.

FTA - If we indoctrinate our children with pseudo-science like creationism or intelligent design, or dumb down the curriculum to avoid "offending religious sensibilities,"we are robbing them of exciting careers and harming Canada's future scientific and economic power.

Other Comments by wonder

3. Comment #91950 by JackRussell on November 29, 2007 at 3:46 pm

 avatarA useful article from Scott Rowed, we cannot allow the dishonesty of so called 'creation science' here in Alberta. On this one, the politicians are wrong. Evolution is a fact, deal with it. Creation myths are fine in religious classes but must be left out of science and teaching of the scientific method.

Other Comments by JackRussell

4. Comment #91954 by fatcitymax on November 29, 2007 at 3:59 pm

Please forgive me, but as an American it is a guilty relief for me that Canada and GB are also having to cope with the ID and Creationist infection. I am not hopeful that the US constitutional firewall of separation of church and state will survive. I am aquainted with many otherwise seemingly sensible and rational people who are unable to acknowledge the fundamental importance of this division. I believe that the brains of these people are simply wired differently. They cannot associate and project the consequences of religious madness in countries such as Iraq, Iran, and Israel onto our own country. I feel sorry for future generations. We are failing them.

Other Comments by fatcitymax

5. Comment #91987 by kaiserkriss on November 29, 2007 at 4:55 pm

 avatarGlad to see someone in Alberta familiar with the science curriculum point out the deficiencies in the Alberta curriculum.

Many Press types, including editors of the Calgary Herald are constantly reminding Joe Public on how well educated Calgarians are by pointing out the fact that Calgary has bragging rights to the city with the most University educated population.. Can't be in the Sciences though can it?? Must be basket weaving or something similar. jcw

Other Comments by kaiserkriss

6. Comment #92013 by hopeful on November 29, 2007 at 5:28 pm

Very good article.

Ken Miller also covers the theory/fact distinction very well in his ID lecture. He describes how Atomic theory is made up of many facts, and that "Atomic Theory", regardless of how sure we become of it, will never become "Atomic Fact".

I know similar things have been said before, but this statement in the article is particularly powerful: "The science curriculum need to be strengthened, not gutted. It needs to inspire young children with the wonders of distant galaxies and nebulas, with the vastness of geological time, and with the incredible diversity of life on Earth and how evolution shaped it."

Other Comments by hopeful

7. Comment #92040 by thelogogryph on November 29, 2007 at 6:26 pm

 avatarCanadians need more articles like this. There's a disturbing tendency for Canadians to pay little attention to their own country, and to assume this sort of shifting of the curriculum and culture only happens in the US. Members of the current federal government in particular have said some fairly disturbing things about basic scientific ideas without encountering much public ire.

Other Comments by thelogogryph

8. Comment #92164 by atheist_peace on November 30, 2007 at 2:01 am

 avatar"Humans evolved over millions of years from hominids in Africa and share a common ancestor with the chimpanzee. That's a fact. Whales evolved from land-dwelling carnivores, another fact. The facts tell us "what" happened, whereas the theory of evolution interprets the "how" -- the mechanisms by which evolution works."

This paragraph is pure gold!

Other Comments by atheist_peace

9. Comment #92356 by arogop on November 30, 2007 at 10:42 am

 avatar"If it were made of rubber and filled with air, it would make a wonderful beach toy."

Awesome.

Great article. Very well written.

Other Comments by arogop

10. Comment #92488 by DV82XL on November 30, 2007 at 3:55 pm

fatcitymax - we've already had a period of theocracy in Canada, or at least here in Quebec. Google "The Quiet Revolution" for the full story. Stories from that time can still make me boil, like paychecks delivered directly to the parish priest so he could extract the church taxes before handing the remainder of the money in cash to the poor bastard that had eared it.

If you really want to get a handle on how bad it was google "Duplessis Children," children living in sanctuaries were hastily diagnosed as mentally incompetent. They were in fact simply children born out of wedlock. All at the hands of a government that was controlled by the Roman Catholic Church.

My advice is to do what ever you can not to let the same thing happen in the US. Quebec doesn't amount to a pile of small stones on the world stage. If America goes we are all screwed.

Other Comments by DV82XL

11. Comment #92802 by Gene Goldring on December 1, 2007 at 1:45 pm

Vernon BC, Canada. While sipping on a beer with some friends I was talking with a young girl while she was sitting on her mothers lap. The young girl was in grade 10 and she was talking about basics in biology that she had thus far covered in class. All though her description not one time did she use the word, "evolution" which would have been fitting at several times during her talking points.

When she was pausing for air I took the opportunity to ask if her teachers had ever used the word evolution in class. She said, "No. What is it?"

My reply was, "Everything you just talked about."

Her mother who is a nurse added, "They teach what they want to believe." and a roll of her eyes followed.

This young girl is in the public school system.

If the young girls memory is at fault, fine. My apologies to the public school system in Vernon, BC. If it is a designed omission then shame on the public school system in Vernon, BC.

Other Comments by Gene Goldring

12. Comment #116200 by JuxtaMonkey on January 25, 2008 at 8:00 pm

 avatarA little late with this thread but...exact-ta-mundo. I was 25 (now 27) when I learned that evolution didn't have holes...The surprising thing is, I haven't believed in god sense I was 15. Why must I be subjected to notions of rubbish? What would happen if the idea of creationism or ID made its way into the texts in which biologists or pharmacist learned? I suspect there would be a lot of monkeys in lab-coats scratching their heads..."How did they do it 50 years ago?" I am grateful to have expanded my mind and now to have put to use the VERY USEFUL benefits of a VERY REAL 'law' that most of us here lovingly call evolution!

Other Comments by JuxtaMonkey
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: