Louisiana Law Urges 'Critical Thinking' About Evolution Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana has signed into law a bill that would urge public schools in the state to foster “critical thinking” about evolution, global warming, and other topics, according to the Associated Press.
Opponents have called the bill a way to inject discussion of intelligent design into public-school science classes. As a college student, Mr. Jindal majored in biology at Brown University, and he was lobbied by one of his former professors to veto the bill.
Wonderful.
Posts: 7646 | Location: On Vacation | Registered: 06-06-02
It looks as if the new governor joins a long list of other politicians who successfully hid what he really was in order to get elected. It's a shame that, at a time when Louisiana needs strong, decisive leadership, her governor spends time on claptrap like this.
Posts: 17027 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
I'm at a loss as to what both of you are trying to say. Is it the critical thinking, so often missing in today's students, that is bad? Are you both convinced that Darwin nailed it to the exclusion of any other thought? Do you believe that every biology student categorically accepts Darwin? Did Jindal say that he did when he ran for governor? Does evolution theory explain, or even attempt to explain, creation?
Posts: 7742 | Location: in the backwoods of North Carolina | Registered: 06-07-02
Does evolution theory explain, or even attempt to explain, creation?
No, it doesn't. Nor was it ever meant to. Evolution theory seeks to explain changes in species over time...long periods of time, not ca 6000 years.
As this story, and others over the years, have averred, such legislative acts across the country are an attempt to open the door to the presentation of blatantly Christian explanations. Now, this would be ok, if it were courses in religions. But fundamentalists want the Biblical version taught in science classes. And that, dear CF, is the rub. The fact is, evolution is constantly being scrutinized by scientists, tinkered with, changed. But the idea here is not to do that, but rather offer another explanation: God created everything. Problem is, that's not science. Christianity held back real science for millenia in the name of infallible doctrine.
Posts: 7646 | Location: On Vacation | Registered: 06-06-02
Critical thinking is a useful skill, and is taught in some schools, but as a subject in its own right. It's not taught as 'critical thinking about evolution and global warming'. The limited choice of topics the governor would like students to be taught to think critically about is suspicious.
More often, when politicians or others with an axe to grind talk about evolution or global warming, critical thinking goes out the window. What we get are logical fallacies, disinformation and lies:
The suspicion is that the governor doesn't actually want to promote critical thinking but the views of special interests and religious fundamentalists.
'The conservative Republican earned a biology degree at Brown. During his campaign he expressed support for teaching the concept of "intelligent design" — a view that the universe is too complex to be explained by evolution alone. Jindal said children should learn "what different theories are out there. Not all things are answerable by science. Let them decide for themselves."
Nevers' bill was backed by the Louisiana Family Forum, a conservative Christian organization. And it was supported by the Discovery Institute, a self-described think tank based in Seattle that is critical of evolution theory.'Jindal signature renews La. evolution debate
"Not all things are answerable by science" - absolutely true, and no one could argue with that. Using that idea to pick on the theory of evolution, or to promote one particular religious perspective, shows a lack of critical thinking, however.
'Provides that proposed law shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.'
But it also:
'Specifies the scientific theories being studied include evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.'
If it's not about the particular brand of Christianity that claims to promote 'biblical literalism' then why specify evolution? Why specif those politically 'hot' issues at all?
From the 1986 amicus curiae brief filed by 72 Nobel laureates and 17 state academies of science in Edwards v. Augillard, challenging Louisiana's law that if evolution is taught then creationism must be taught as well (it was struck down by the US Supreme Court):
quote:
By singling out one topic in science -- "origins" -- for special treatment, the legislature conveys the false message that the prevailing theory of "origins" -- evolutionary theory -- is less robust and reliable than all other scientific concepts. This misleadingly disparaging treatment of evolution confirms that the Act favors a particular religious belief.
From the popular biological sciences blog Pharyngula, posted by PZ Myers:
quote:
Bobby Jindal of Louisiana has signed a pro-creationism bill into law, all to pander to evangelical protestant hicks. We know this is a guy with national aspirations, so he's taking a big gamble that we aren't going to swing back towards a more sensible secularism, since the only people who could vote for him now are fundagelical god-wallopers who don't understand science. That may be a fairly big voting base, but I'm hoping that it's shrinking. Either Bobby Jindal is toast… or we all are.
Posts: 1973 | Location: U.S. | Registered: 06-03-02
I'd like to know why Jindal, in the interest of critical thinking isn't insisting that the concept of the Earth being held up by elephants standing on the backs of turtles be taught as well.
(By the way, papers have apparently been filed to recall Jindal. It seems that he is already going back on his position on the state legislature giving itself raises.)
Posts: 17027 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Originally posted by DorianGreyed: (By the way, papers have apparently been filed to recall Jindal. It seems that he is already going back on his position on the state legislature giving itself raises.)
As it turned out, Bobby Jindal vetoed the pay raise. And if the truth be known, several people in the legislature were glad he did because they were catching hell for it, and justifibly so.
The Governor had previously said he would not veto the pay raise to allow the legislature to conduct its own internal affairs. “I clearly made a mistake by telling the legislature that I would allow them to handle their own affairs,” Jindal said. “As with all mistakes, you can either correct them or compound them - I am choosing to correct my mistake now.
So he was against it, then he wasn't against it, and now he's against it again. As I recall, a Democrat who only went 2/3 of that way on something caught hell, even though when he was for "it", he was using a protest vote. Interesting how people view similar actions.
In any case, Jindal deserves credit for (finally) keeping a campaign promise.
Note: I have no idea how much Louisiana legislators make, so I have no idea if the proposed raise was a fair one or not.
Posts: 17027 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
PZ Myers is a real character. His style of verbal assault against creationists (at the Pharyngula website) is always entertaining, peppered with creative neologisms and euphemisms.
Posts: 1973 | Location: U.S. | Registered: 06-03-02
The prospect of Bobby Jindal as McCain's running mate has been kicked around for the last couple of months or so.
As intrigueing as this possibility is, I suspect McCain may very well go with someone different. Someone older with a longer track record behind them.
I've heard of Mike Huckabee as a possibility. Former Arkansas Governor with I believe 10 years behind him. Then Mitt Romney as a good possibility. Former Mass. Governor, & business man who can draw in the much needed campaign cash that the McCain so desperately needs.
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02
Doesn't Huckabee doubt evolution and believe in some form of creationism? And it may be between him and Jindal? Is it an unspoken expectation that the Republican Party wants, and McCain would choose, someone who thinks that way?
None of my business,of course, except that we are somewhat affected over here if a man as ignorant as that becomes President by default.
Originally posted by FredPuli: ...we are somewhat affected over here if a man as ignorant as that becomes President by default.
A man like that was elected president -- twice in the last 8 years! Among industrialized nations the US persists in trying to corner the market on religious insanity. The problem is, it doesn't export very well.
Posts: 1973 | Location: U.S. | Registered: 06-03-02
Originally posted by FredPuli: Doesn't Huckabee doubt evolution and believe in some form of creationism? And it may be between him and Jindal? Is it an unspoken expectation that the Republican Party wants, and McCain would choose, someone who thinks that way?
None of my business,of course, except that we are somewhat affected over here if a man as ignorant as that becomes President by default.
Many people here in the U.S. believe as Mike Huckabee does. That God created man. And rightfully so.
As far as the theory of Evolution goes, they look at it as some crazy notion that man evolved from ape.
Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02
