The last time we explained our use of that graphic was Hey Casey! (Number 7). It’s the only thing we could think of to introduce Casey Luskin’s latest entry at the Discoveroids’ blog: What Science Education “Journalism” Looks Like at Nature.
But before we examine what Casey has written, we must remind you of something we wrote two days ago — Will Kentucky Have a Lucid Moment?, about an article in Nature discussing the progress of the evolution-friendly Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) proposed by the National Research Council and intended to be voluntary guidelines to be adopted by all states for use in their public schools.
A state that adopts those standards is inoculated against the toxic effect of the Discoveroids’ anti-science, anti-evolution, pro-creationism Academic Freedom Act, about which see the Curmudgeon’s Guide to “Academic Freedom” Laws.
Because of the clear conflict between the NGSS and the Discoveroids’ anti-science goals (see wedge strategy), it’s not surprising that Casey’s new post is about that same topic — and specifically it’s about the article in Nature. Here are some excerpts from what Casey says, with bold font added by us:
Last month, a reporter for Nature got in contact with me about an article she was researching about the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), an initiative seeking, among other things, to nationalize Darwin-only K-12 science education. She also wanted to ask about academic freedom laws that Discovery Institute has supported.
That makes about as much sense as contacting the Flat Earth Society to get their opinion about NASA’s activities — but okay, the reporter was covering all bases. What happened? Casey tells us:
Nature is a highly respected journal. It’s the New York Times of the science world, and then some. The reporter, Lauren Morello, seemed intelligent and curious, and I got the impression that she was tracking what I told her. We spent about 45 minutes on the phone and then I followed up by email.
And no doubt Casey was dreaming of being quoted in Nature. Are you beginning to understand, dear reader, why we deployed our “Hey Casey” graphic for this? Let’s read on:
Imagine my surprise when her article appeared and reflected nothing — I mean nothing — of my comments to her. Instead, Ms. Morello simply reproduced the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) talking point — a false one — that academic freedom laws enshrine the teaching of “creationism.”
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh, in case you missed it, here’s a link to the Nature article Evolution makes the grade.
Casey goes on and on about the wonders he explained to the Nature reporter, and how terribly wrong her article is to say that the Discoveroids’ “academic freedom” laws would allow creationism to be taught alongside evolution. Casey is shocked — shocked! He wails:
Ms. Morello never quoted me in her story, nor did she mention any arguments from other proponents of academic freedom bills. It’s as if we never spoke. … In the article, she only permitted critics of academic freedom bills to speak. On science education, this is evidently the sort of “journalism” practiced at Nature.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Although we find it to be grand entertainment, and you will too, we’ll skip most of Casey’s rant, including a copy of the email he sent to the reporter. Here’s the end of his post:
Nature seems determined to maintain the NCSE’s false storyline, the simplistic and grossly inaccurate claim that there are only two sides to this discussion: those who want to teach evolution, and those who want to replace it with religious “creationism.” Nature‘s readers, and students, surely deserve better.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Hey, Casey — we know you Discoveroids are desperate to get your “theory” mentioned in quality science journals like Nature. We respectfully suggest that your tantrum isn’t going to help you in that effort. But please, just keep doing what you’re doing. Even if Nature doesn’t appreciate you, your Curmudgeon certainly does.
Copyright © 2013. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.