As you know, Louisiana is a swirling vortex of voodoo and creationism. It was the first state (of only two) to enact a version of the Discovery Institute’s anti-science, anti-evolution, pro-creationism Academic Freedom Act (about which see the Curmudgeon’s Guide to “Academic Freedom” Laws). It became the infamous Louisiana Science Education Act (the LSEA).
Last month, in Another Science Circus in Louisiana?. we wrote that Louisiana is about to revise its science standards for public schools. The process may take a year to complete, and there will be opportunity for the public to participate. It’s going to be ugly.
Meanwhile, a propaganda war is being waged in the form of letters to newspapers. We wrote about one from a social scientist in Louisiana Creationism: A Professor’s Opinion. He gave all the Discoveroid talking points, and he hoped that the new science standards would “emulate the spirit of free inquiry encapsulated in the Louisiana Science Education Act.” After that, in Letter from Barbara Forrest, we wrote about an excellent reply in the same newspaper.
Today we have a response from another Discoveroid supporter. In the Baton Rouge edition of the Advocate we read Louisiana Science Education Act religion ties misunderstood. [Better link to re-titled headline: Science Education Act not a creationist law]. The newspaper has a comments section, but we don’t see any yet. The letter-writer’s first name is Cecil, and he describes himself as a “retired management consultant.” Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:
In various opinions published in The Advocate, including columns by James Gill and a recent letter from professor Barbara Forrest, the authors have quite wrongly interpreted the Louisiana Science Education Act.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! The LSEA was written and promoted by the Discovery Institute, and they defend it every year there’s a repeal effort. It’s not difficult to understand the law’s intent. But Cecil is going to help us. He says:
The act expressly excludes the use of religious views in the teaching of science. The wording is: “This (law) shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against any particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.” What could be more clear?
We discussed the law’s phony “shall not be construed” language in the Curmudgeon’s Guide, to which we linked earlier. Let’s read on:
And yet opponents of the law keep trying to twist the meaning by claiming that it is a “Trojan horse” that opens the door to religious material. They are especially fearful, it seems, that the religious ideas of “creationists” could creep into science courses covering various theories of evolution.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! What about all that “educational” material offered by the Discoveroids — for example, see their Educator’s Briefing Packet, and this impressive list of Books by Center for Science and Culture Fellows.
Cecil isn’t worried about that stuff. He explains:
Forrest and other opponents of the law also confuse the concept of “intelligent design” with creationism. It is true that some proponents of creationism use the evidence of design in evolution to support their religious beliefs. However, there are many highly qualified scientists who make a purely scientific case that Darwin’s theory of evolution cannot account for the complexity of biological organisms and that there is strong scientific evidence that some kind of design mechanism is at work.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Here’s more:
Still, no one yet knows the source of the design function, nor how it works. It stands as one of the great unsolved questions in science, along with the source of the Big Bang, Stephen Hawkings’ “theory of everything” and others. I find the subject fascinating and one that should be included in advanced biology courses, not excluded.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Cecil thinks intelligent design “theory” ranks right up there with the other great science questions. He finishes his letter with this:
The Louisiana Science Education Act helps to keep the scientific doors open to such exciting research.
So there you are, dear reader. Louisiana is full of people like Cecil. Maybe the new science standards will also provide for teaching about the Time Cube. They should keep the scientific doors open to that exciting research too.
Copyright © 2016. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.