Wednesday, April 2, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version

CEAI Action Alert for Science Teachers

by FRIENDS OF CEAI

http://www.injesus.com/index.php?module=message&task=view&MID=MB007EEH&GroupID=0A007FOT

CEAI Action Alert for Science Teachers
FRIENDS OF CEAI

We Need to Hear From Public School Science Teachers

My name is David Brackin and I've been a member of CEAI for over 20 years. Over the past few months I've been allied with The Florida Policy Council in trying to change the new Florida State Department of Education Science Standards. The Florida Family Policy Council (FFPC) is a state based pro-life, pro-family, pro-marriage educational advocacy group that is associated with Dr. James Dobson and Focus on the Family.

The Florida Department of Education has written new science standards that will require Florida science teachers to present evolution as a proven fact. There are no provisions included in the standards that will allow for the critical analysis of the theory of evolutions. Thus many of us that object to the "science" used to present evolution as a fact have no recourse but to teach the lie of evolution as though it is a proven fact.

Over the past month I've been able to present to the Florida Department of Education why I think the new standards need to be changed and I've met personally with Florida Senate Majority Leader Daniel Webster, Florida House of Representatives Speaker Marco Rubio, and several other legislators about an Academic Freedom bill. Each of the legislators said that my testimony as a teacher that has been confronted about teaching the weaknesses in the theory of evolution is critical to the passing of the bill and that we need to hear from more teachers with that experience. The next hearing on this bill will be the week of April seventh.

We now need to hear from public school K-12 science teachers or students about any of the following as soon as possible especially those in Florida:

1) Have you ever been confronted, reprimanded, or given a directive, for criticizing evolution or presenting scientific evidence critical of Darwinism?

2) In light of the new dogmatic evolution standards recently passed by the Board of Education, ("Evolution is the fundamental concept underlying all of biology and is supported by multiple forms of evidence.") do you feel that you are free to give critical analysis of evolution in the classroom and not be confronted or disciplined?

3) Do you feel that there is a hostile environment generally in your school or district toward those who dissent or disagree with evolution or Darwinism?

4) Do you have legitimate fears about what would happen to you if you criticized evolution in light of the new dogmatic standards?

The Florida Family Policy Council has asked me to be the liaison between any one with these experiences and themselves.

If you as a teacher or a student have stories, experiences or opinions on any of these topics, please e-mail me at djbrackin4@bellsouth.net.

David Brackin

Add to del.icio.us Posted: Wednesday, April 2, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 57 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #154120 by oshottan on April 2, 2008 at 5:48 pm

what an asshole.

Other Comments by oshottan

2. Comment #154121 by Mal3 on April 2, 2008 at 5:49 pm

Well, if they could actually come up with an alternative theory as to explain the complexity of life that isn't "God did it!", then I say more power to them, criticize Darwin all you want.

However, I don't believe that to be the case in this particular instance.

Other Comments by Mal3

3. Comment #154124 by chuckgoecke on April 2, 2008 at 5:58 pm

many of us that object to the "science" used to present evolution as a fact have no recourse but to teach the lie of evolution as though it is a proven fact.

Exactly where is the "critical analysis" and objectivity used to come up with this statement?

Other Comments by chuckgoecke

4. Comment #154126 by Myotis Lucifugus on April 2, 2008 at 6:07 pm

wow...it seems the IDers are not giving up on this subject.

Other Comments by Myotis Lucifugus

5. Comment #154129 by CShepGuy on April 2, 2008 at 6:19 pm

Reading this I got the feeling that reaching out to Science teachers could only backfire on this guy.

Other Comments by CShepGuy

6. Comment #154130 by zosky on April 2, 2008 at 6:22 pm

He forgot to add one last question:
are you a paranoid schizophrenic?

Other Comments by zosky

7. Comment #154138 by rod-the-farmer on April 2, 2008 at 6:31 pm

I had to do a bit of searching to figure out what CEAI stands for.

Christian Educators Association International

I guess (hope ?) making that clear up front would sabotage the appeal to the politicians, right away.

Warning, Will Robinson. Christian alert Warning, warning !

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

8. Comment #154145 by dragonfirematrix on April 2, 2008 at 6:52 pm

Whenever I hear arguments a community is trying the push their various religous agendas against the teaching of evolution, I think of radical religious fundamentalists like those in the Middle East.

I am not a teacher or student, but I see no problem gathering as much empirical evidence as necessary for presentation in official proceedings.

Gather the documentation. It can only help further the cause of science and The Law of Evolution.

We need to fight the spread of Kansas.

Hail to the FSM.

Other Comments by dragonfirematrix

9. Comment #154146 by Librarian on April 2, 2008 at 6:52 pm

This is scary. I'm a Middle School Librarian in Colorado. In our district we had a 6th grade science teacher publish a book about Intelligent Design. He ran a debate in his class where the winning team found that there is no link to humans and global warming. He is retired now.

Other Comments by Librarian

10. Comment #154152 by lbalough on April 2, 2008 at 6:58 pm

Zosky,

What in the hell are you thinking? Why are you correlating paranoid schizophrenia and religiosity? The DSM IV does not include "susceptible to a superstitious world view." If it did, 80% of the world would be on anti-psychotics. Besides, I was diagnosed with schizophrenia four years ago (I no longer technically qualify as this anymore) and I am very much a disbeliever. Please do not insult my sz brethren by co-mingling us with the religionists.

Other Comments by lbalough

11. Comment #154155 by Shuggy on April 2, 2008 at 7:07 pm

The Florida Family Policy Council (FFPC) is a state based pro-life, pro-family, pro-marriage educational advocacy group that is associated with Dr. James Dobson and Focus on the Family.

So let's untangle that. They're anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-gay-marriage, and associated with a pro-beating-of-children group (James Dobson is the author of "Dare To Discipline").

What do these things have in commmon with being anti-evolution?

Other Comments by Shuggy

12. Comment #154170 by troyreynolds86 on April 2, 2008 at 7:41 pm

Just once, for all of the hand waving that is done in the name of some anti-evolution rhetoric, I would like for the esteemed opposition to present to the public the supposed holes in the Theory of Evolution. Then, and only out of sheer politeness and in the name of Christian charity, I would like to see them yield the floor to a real biologist to present the evidence for evolution. Let us settle this matter with a true presentation of each case. If such damning evidence of Evolution's supposed fallacy does exist I suspect a Nobel Prize would be waiting. Bring the best you've got. It would be entertaining.

Troy

Other Comments by troyreynolds86

13. Comment #154175 by discipline on April 2, 2008 at 7:49 pm

Shuggy: "They're anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-gay-marriage, and associated with a pro-beating-of-children group"

Correct. James Dobson is the perfect storm of ignorance, arrogance and greed -- the Unholy Trinity. If I believed in evil, he would personify it. And yes, he actually does advocate physically beating children into obedience. A perfect summation of the Christian worldview.

Dobson is even farther to the right than the typical American evangelical -- he opposed their recent push to start recognizing the importance of global warming and other environmental issues.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/14/evangelical.rift/index.html

A truly frightening and despicable character.

Other Comments by discipline

14. Comment #154176 by The Reverend Dark on April 2, 2008 at 7:49 pm

What an utter twat!

How dare he write such things about evolution, when the real issue is with the theory of gravity.

We are actually held in place by lint. This is known among the gibbering lunatics as lintelligent design and it should be taught alongside the theory of gravity as an alternative.

Teach the controversy.

You are either Innie with us or Outie.

Cheers,
The Reverend Shayne Dark

Other Comments by The Reverend Dark

15. Comment #154177 by theantitheist on April 2, 2008 at 7:50 pm

Troy,

They did in Denvor and got whipped

Other Comments by theantitheist

16. Comment #154188 by apettway on April 2, 2008 at 8:14 pm

"Reading this I got the feeling that reaching out to Science teachers could only backfire on this guy." ~CShepGuy

Damn straight. I am a molecular biologist that took up teaching just so that I can prevent these ignoramuses from screwing up good science. I wish I could say that most science teachers know enough about the nature of science and the philosophy of science to fall for this wrongheaded way of thinking, but I am afraid many that I have met would sympathize with this rhetoric.

Other Comments by apettway

17. Comment #154192 by troyreynolds86 on April 2, 2008 at 8:25 pm

theantitheist,

Glad to hear. Is there an address where one could delight in reading about this?

Reverend Dark,

Would that be belly button lint or clothes dryer lint? I feel we maybe on our way to a major schism.

Troy

Other Comments by troyreynolds86

18. Comment #154193 by cal_mertes on April 2, 2008 at 8:27 pm

Instead, I think we should demand that all fundical s(fundamentalists and evangelicals) schools be required to teach the controversy. Their science books should have to include disclaimers that the contents are not supported by scientific evidence where appropriate.

Further history courses should include notices that the events of the gospels are not supported by the historical record and many events claimed to have occured are missing which is strong evidence that the events never happened.

Further demand their congregations receive information on biology including evolution from qualified teachers.

Other Comments by cal_mertes

19. Comment #154198 by bassbastard on April 2, 2008 at 9:05 pm

I have had to help my daughter along in her understanding of science due to other kids bringing notes to school sbout evolution being wrong. Parents are actually trying to have the curriculum changed to include ID. I can not say I am completely athiest, so I am in the minority here, but denying evolution is like denying procreation via sexual conduct. Religion is a disease.

Other Comments by bassbastard

20. Comment #154214 by oriole on April 2, 2008 at 10:18 pm

My question is, why does BIG RELIGION keep out the theory of the UNINTELLIGIBLE DIVINE? We UD'ers are not saying that Jesusism is WRONG, we're only saying it's clearly not a fact, it's JUST A THEORY, and there are other good theories out there as well. Let the Church set a good example to BIG SCIENCE by TEACHING THE CONTROVERSY.

So I'm saying to the Church, give equal time in your Sunday schools to your Jesusism (how many of you knew that Jesusism was EVEN OLDER than stodgy old Darwinism?) and the MODERN theory of the UNINTELLIGIBLE DIVINE, based on the concept of IRREDUCIBLE INCOMPREHENSIBILITY.

Unintelligible Divine theorists tell us that concepts such as the Trinity, which are clearly irreducibly incomprehensible, force us to conclude that divinity is unintelligible. Sure, MICRODIVINITY, i.e. the existence of very small gods which are only marginally different from humans, might be possible, but MACRODIVINITY, i.e. the existence of really God-like Gods which are a whole different species, is clearly an entirely different thing.

TEACH THE CONTROVERSY, that's all we're asking. Don't expel unintelligibility from your Sunday schools, and you'll teach big science that they should also welcome unintelligible theories in the science classroom.

Other Comments by oriole

21. Comment #154217 by Hobbit on April 2, 2008 at 10:42 pm

Further to the comments by oriole

Not only should they teach and give equal time in church to UNINTELLIGIBLE DIVINE and Jesusism, but should also include the study of Mohammadism, Joseph Smithism, Vishnuism, Rainbow Serpantism and all the other ism's that make up the big wide world of made up religious bullshit.

Pehaps we should ask the good Dr if he will start doing that at his sermons whilst he spanks the monkey.... ahhh.... children into submission.

Other Comments by Hobbit

22. Comment #154220 by kram50 on April 2, 2008 at 11:08 pm

bassbastard...you are so right!!
Reading an article like this just drives it home even more (not to mention the rest of the crap that flows from the minds of the deluded).
Look at the questions Brackin has asked.
-Do you have fears about what would happen to you ?
-Do you feel that there is a hostile environement?
This appears to me as if he was hoping that somehow religious folks that have nothing to do with this would see these questions and immediately (with both hands covering there mouth) say, Oh my, is this what the non-believer does? Oh my gosh!!!
These people are so afraid of the truth they will try anything.
Who are they trying to fool?

Other Comments by kram50

23. Comment #154250 by Philip1978 on April 3, 2008 at 1:44 am

Hey, isnt Wooter a teacher, perhaps we could get Clearmind to drop a line about snowflakes, chickens and the Mona Lisa!

I actually have half a mind to send an email to this guy myself and explain what evolution ACTUALLY is, he seems somewhat paranoid that in some way it is a bad thing!

Ok, so it wipes his God off the table but still, if he is not prepared to listen to reason then he should not be lobbying for teaching at all!

Philip

Other Comments by Philip1978

24. Comment #154252 by Severus on April 3, 2008 at 1:51 am

The whole point of Science is to be self critical. if they are unable to grasp this simple concept then they don't have the capacity to be teaching anyone. perhaps their superiors should be asking them what they understand the scientific process to be or how many of the tens of thousands of papers available that critically analyze evolution they have actually read. either they are incompetent or they are lying.

Severus

Other Comments by Severus

25. Comment #154254 by Steve Zara on April 3, 2008 at 1:55 am

Does anyone have any details of Pastafarianism's take on evolution? Were all creatures created at once using His Noodly Appendage, or is it some sort of Culinary Design Theory, with the occasional application of Magic Pesto to help things along?

Other Comments by Steve Zara

26. Comment #154265 by Mark Barratt on April 3, 2008 at 2:26 am

Whenever I see something like this I always wonder how much time these Christians spend in Church presenting scientific evidence critical of Christianity.

After all, that'd be the best way to set an example.

They don't even need to use science, why don't they present the various verses in the Koran that call Christians hellbound liars as the product of possible authentic revelation?

After all, academic freedom is paramount, right? Everything should be questioned.

Other Comments by Mark Barratt

27. Comment #154266 by Quetzalcoatl on April 3, 2008 at 2:28 am

-Are you a person of strong religious belief?
-Do you feel that the theory of evolution, with its elegant explanation of how modern lifeforms came about, undermines your faith?
-Are you someone who finds critical thinking and questioning to be threatening?
-Do you feel or want to feel as if you are being persecuted for your beliefs?
-Do you wish that others would just see the light, and agree with you and your beliefs?

Then write to David Brackin, and support him in his courageous fight against the dark forces of neo-science. Start your letter "I'm a religious fundamentalist, and I KNOW I am right because....."

Contributing to this campaign will increase your likelihood of getting into heaven. So get writing, and don't forget: God is always watching.

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

28. Comment #154270 by Logicel on April 3, 2008 at 2:50 am

Richard M wrote: Subsequent use of the Roman colander has had a significant effect on Western interpretations, but fundamentally, it seems to me that it's a load of bollocks.
________

Consider yourself reported to the "Inquisition al dente." (got this hilarious phrase off a French site)

Other Comments by Logicel

29. Comment #154272 by rod-the-farmer on April 3, 2008 at 2:53 am

Richard Morgan said of the FSM

Virgin Rosemary myth later on.

Now see, already we have evidence of a schism in FSM followers. The way I read that particular passage was that it was Virgin Olive Oyl.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

30. Comment #154273 by Steve Zara on April 3, 2008 at 2:55 am

Comment #154260 by Richard Morgan

I prefer the Perforated Pasta (Penne) theory. It is like ID, as it is full of holes. But in this case, you can fill them full of something nice, like augergine pesto.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

31. Comment #154280 by emmet on April 3, 2008 at 3:35 am

Would that be belly button lint or clothes dryer lint? I feel we maybe on our way to a major schism.

No need for a schism: good cdesign proponentsists will teach the controversy.

Other Comments by emmet

32. Comment #154291 by Szymanowski on April 3, 2008 at 4:18 am

the critical analysis of the theory of evolutions

... which can be found on the interwebs ...

Other Comments by Szymanowski

33. Comment #154295 by Adam Morrison on April 3, 2008 at 4:26 am

I don't agree with teaching evolution as fact, you teach it as scientific theory. That being said, of course we have to teach what a scientific theory is (mounds of evidence, great explanatory power, have not been able to disprove it, etc...). Heck if I could come up with a better solution than evolution that suited the evidence I would in a heartbeat (and be immortalized in the annals of science).

But the reality is, we don't have a better theory, evolution does fit the evidence and is constantly firmed with new discoveries and nothing else compares that we can come up with today. I wish these poofists would give their heads a shake and clear the theist cobwebs out.

PS: Forget pastafarianism, I'm trying to bring light to the theory of new born humans. Stork? That's ridiculous, how can a 12lb bird carry a 5-8 pound baby and still maintain air-speed velocity. A Wandering albatross however, now that's a bird that can carry a baby. Teach the controversy! Not the lie of storkism

Other Comments by Adam Morrison

34. Comment #154320 by Tagred on April 3, 2008 at 5:19 am

Adam #154295

Would that be the european or African version?

Other Comments by Tagred

35. Comment #154339 by phasmagigas on April 3, 2008 at 5:52 am

i can really see those tired teachers out there getting all excited to get to the evolution unit.

Unlike with the other science units they do this one differently. They stand on their desks stamping their feet shouting 'fact, fact, fact' and threaten eternal suffering if the students dont repeat 'survival of the fittest' every morning.

And if they ask a question.......well by darwin woe betide anybody who asks ANY question about evolution, FACT, FACT, FACT.

Other Comments by phasmagigas

36. Comment #154345 by rod-the-farmer on April 3, 2008 at 5:59 am

Re Steve Zara in comment # 33 Comment #154273,

augergine pesto ?

Is that what one would use with the spiral type of pasta ? Or maybe aubergine ?

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

37. Comment #154370 by black wolf on April 3, 2008 at 6:30 am

People from all viewpoints keep confusing things in their argument, if with good intentions. To clear things up:
Evolution: A process that factually happens.
Theory of Evolution: A scientific theory that explains the fact of evolution.

Other Comments by black wolf

38. Comment #154386 by Raiko on April 3, 2008 at 6:56 am

This is only mildly related, but I am always half amused and half-confused with their chosen terminology as 'pro-marriage' and 'pro-family' people. Their point is, after all, to prevent certain marriage and family formations that don't please them, so they're decisively anti-marriage and anti-family. Calling themselves 'pro' either seems like self-mockery.

Other Comments by Raiko

39. Comment #154388 by TheSwede on April 3, 2008 at 6:59 am

What is Darwinism?

Other Comments by TheSwede

40. Comment #154391 by 3legcat on April 3, 2008 at 7:05 am

i am grateful for the creationists. they have been extremely helpful, their short sighted theology and ham handed tactics have given public science just the boost it needed, when it needed it most.

thank you guys really i mean it, thanks for everything, most especially Dover.

Other Comments by 3legcat

41. Comment #154392 by irate_atheist on April 3, 2008 at 7:06 am

Excellent. A self-confessed ignoramous.

Give the man a dunce's hat and stick him in the corner.

Other Comments by irate_atheist

42. Comment #154405 by Philip1978 on April 3, 2008 at 7:27 am

TheSwede

Darwinism? Dawkins knows what all that is about!

:)

Philip

Other Comments by Philip1978

43. Comment #154415 by liberalartist on April 3, 2008 at 7:43 am

And people wonder why American education system sucks? Perhaps it is because total morons are teaching our children religious crap instead of science. I am sure if he were a history teacher he would be teaching the kids all about the founding of our "Christian" nation. Floridians did the right thing; lets just hope it doesn't get undone. They obviously have not given up the fight. Just when you think a state has gained a sense of reason, fundies make a comeback and the fight starts all over again(Kansas comes to mind here).

Other Comments by liberalartist

44. Comment #154431 by sidfaiwu on April 3, 2008 at 8:17 am

1) Have you ever been confronted, reprimanded, or given a directive, for criticizing evolution or presenting scientific evidence critical of Darwinism?

2) In light of the new dogmatic evolution standards recently passed by the Board of Education, ("Evolution is the fundamental concept underlying all of biology and is supported by multiple forms of evidence.") do you feel that you are free to give critical analysis of evolution in the classroom and not be confronted or disciplined?

3) Do you feel that there is a hostile environment generally in your school or district toward those who dissent or disagree with evolution or Darwinism?

4) Do you have legitimate fears about what would happen to you if you criticized evolution in light of the new dogmatic standards?

Translation:

"Please, please, PLEASE, let us be victims! We need to be victims to make our adhominem attacks more effective! It's easier to make scientists look like oppressors than it is to actually do science in order to test their theories."

Other Comments by sidfaiwu

45. Comment #154436 by skyhook on April 3, 2008 at 8:42 am

That's the problem with this state. Too many churches, handful of science museums - not enough thinking!

I hear far too many "God Bless You"s and other drivel here in Tampa. I'm pleased to see the odd Darwin fish and FSM logo on the backs of cars but they are massively outnumbered. And so far I'm the only one wearing the Scarlet letter T-shirt.

Considering this is the place where the space shuttles take off (yes it is a FACT) using some well worked out science (PHYSICS & CHEMISTRY - oh yes FACTS) you would think that science was a bit more prominent & celebrated in Florida.

Now I'm thinking about it, how does the lintelligent theory of gravity deal with launches into space?

Other Comments by skyhook

46. Comment #154465 by Darwin's badger on April 3, 2008 at 10:12 am

Pardon my French, but James Dobson is an effing c*nt. This Brackin bloke seems to be using him to give his organisation credibility?!

Mind you, Dobson did try to make Ted Bundy the "Just say no" poster boy for his anti-pornography campaign, so maybe he's working on the principle that the two negatives will make a positive. Or something.

Other Comments by Darwin's badger

47. Comment #154469 by Geoff on April 3, 2008 at 10:25 am

1) Have you ever been confronted, reprimanded, or given a directive, for criticizing evolution or presenting scientific evidence critical of Darwinism?

If not, why not? Please provide the name of your department head, so he or she can correct this omission.

2) In light of the new dogmatic evolution standards recently passed by the Board of Education, ("Evolution is the fundamental concept underlying all of biology and is supported by multiple forms of evidence.") do you feel that you are free to give critical analysis of evolution in the classroom and not be confronted or disciplined?

Please remember, though, that religious dogma does not count as "critical analysis.

3) Do you feel that there is a hostile environment generally in your school or district toward those who dissent or disagree with evolution or Darwinism?

Again, if not, why not?

4) Do you have legitimate fears about what would happen to you if you criticized evolution in light of the new dogmatic standards?

Please note the word "legitimate". Remember that appearing uneducated and/or delusional should be a disadvantage for a science teacher.

Other Comments by Geoff

48. Comment #154485 by TheSwede on April 3, 2008 at 10:47 am

Philip1978

But why Darwinism? Since when did Charles Darwins scientific thoery of on natural selection as the origin of species become an ideology, I wonder?

Other Comments by TheSwede

49. Comment #154490 by Mark Barratt on April 3, 2008 at 10:57 am

It's not an ideology, of course. The whole "Darwinism" thing is a consequence of the religious mindset. People who feel they have a single perfect belief system that tells them how to live their entire life and how to think in every situation seem to have trouble understanding science, which has different specific theories for different subjects. Natural Selection tells you nothing about how a ball bounces, etc.

PZ Myers' "Newtonism" post is pretty good:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/03/why_we_need_academic_freedomto.php

Admittedly, Dawkins doesn't help by constantly using the word "Darwinism", but only in the sense that it can be taken out of context rather easily and used to paint "Darwinism" as a philosophy. When you listen to him talk it's clear what he means by it.

Other Comments by Mark Barratt

50. Comment #154491 by Diacanu on April 3, 2008 at 10:59 am