Creationist bill, road kill
The bill we wrote about less than two weeks ago — see Montana Creationism: New Bill for 2015 — has died an early death. As you recall, it was sponsored by Clayton Fiscus.
Our friends at the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) report Antiscience bill in Montana dies. They say:
The House Education Committee discussed HB 321 in its February 6, 2015, meeting. Only two testifiers, including the bill’s sponsor, Clayton Fiscus (R-District 46), spoke in favor of the bill, while over a dozen testifiers, including scientists, teachers, theologians, school board members, and concerned parents, testified against it.
That’s it. You can see the legislature’s page for the progress of the bill here: HB 321. It says the bill had a hearing in the House Education Committee on 06 February, and it was “Tabled in Committee” on 09 February. That’s all they say.
Poor old Clayton Fiscus. He tried so hard. And this is a sad day for the Discoveroids too. It’s only the 10th of February. The legislative session in most states is new, but two of their bills have already died. First there was Indiana’s 2015 Creationism Bill — Dead, and now Montana. And it looks like there’s another too, but we’ll save that for a later post.
Copyright © 2015. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
The Sensuous Curmudgeon 
Natural selection at work in the legislature.
Whoopie dance! I wonder if the creationist realize, if they’re going to teach one creation myth they would have to teach them all.
Also NCSE reports creationist bill died in South Dakota.
Despite Sen. Raatz’s comments, Indiana’s bill is still listed as live on the legislature’s website. It will officially die if it isn’t passed by committee by February 25.
vhutchison says: “Also NCSE reports creationist bill died in South Dakota.”
Yes, I’m saving that for tomorrow, because Casey is already complaining about it. I prefer my napalm in the morning.
Thanks, Glenn. Besides not knowing anything about science, it looks like Raatz doesn’t know how the legislature works either. I guess I reported that one too soon.
Ah, Napalm in the morning! Reminds me of the smell of creationists being fryed for breakfast!
This whole class of attempted legislation isn’t the end, of course. Preventing creationists from smuggling their religion into the public schools is an endless game of whack-a-mole. They’ll never give up.
Nevertheless, I think it’s true that the “academic freedom” horse is now dead (Jim) and there’s no use thrashing it any more. Legislatures are now pretty wary of that language. But creationists will just put their money on another runner, as soon as they can saddle one up. Watch out for it.
In a sense, it’s already out on the track. Freshwater demonstrated that firing a creationist who has wormed his way into the science classroom is a desperately long-drawn-out and expensive business. Freshwater was a two-edged sword, perhaps – once established, it’s a precedent, which means that the next case might not be so difficult. But there are still creationists teaching (if that is the right word) in science classrooms, and there are still communities where a strong, vocal minority (at least) wants their religion taught, and thinks science is either an opposing religion or a gummint plot. Or both.
They don’t have to be as out-there as Freshwater about it, and still make it desperately difficult for a rational person to insist on their Constitutional right NOT to have their children prosyletised in the public schools. Freshwater demonstrated what a certain amount of gaming the rules can do. How about gaming them more?
So I’d look out for products from the creationist noise machine that operate on the individual classroom level, and don’t quite subvert the science. The DI’s a little too blatant. This has to be done subtly.
Funny that. The serpent was the most subtle of the beasts, y’know.
I’ve had an email conversation with Clayton. 2013.
The guy was a pleasant fellow at first contact, likely a rancher based on the photos on his senator site. His dog wears a bandana in one photo. He is also living proof that one who inherits wealth does not necessarily inherit intellect.
Clayton, may I recommend the fricassee of roadkill armadillo ala Curmudgeon?
Hint. Even your dog won’t eat it. And that would tell you something if you weren’t an intellectual midget.
Slainte from the Hielands.!
Is that an armadillo? I thought it was ‘possum.
If we can’t tell for sure, let’s call it a ‘possum. Like creationist bills, they can show in just about any state.
RSG, it’s a ‘possum, all right. However it’s understandable that someone not from this hemisphere might confuse the two species from viewing a photo of a flattened specimen. Same size, small pointy face, short limbs, naked tail. In one of this stories, comedian Jerry Clower said Mississippians call armadillos “hard-shelled ‘possums.”
I stand corrected.
THIS is an armadillo worthy of a creationists dinner table.
Thanks !
BlackWatch, where I come from, not recognizing the difference between a possum and an armadillo is like not being able to distinguish a hamburger from a hot dog.
Not to be pedantic, but I assume all of us here are aware that opussums are marsupials while armadillos are xenarthran placentals, so they are very distantly related. But the biogeographical distribution of both marsupials and xenarthrans in the New World compared with Australia and Antarctica are two distinct, though similar, lines of evidence in favor of evolution and against post-Flood dispersal from Mt. Ararat– arguments for which creationists still have no comeback.