While it’s not nearly as bas as this stunning example, the Greenville News has another painful-to-read letter that shows us why we need to strengthen science education.
Education based on false hypothesis results in faulty logic and reasoning.
Evolution is unsubstantiated theory and problematic with many scientific and mathematical laws. Carbon dating doesn’t allow for appearance of age at creation. Basic scientific facts and medical cures are totally dependent on a constant state of matter. Minor change occurs but everything still brings forth after its own kind. Genetic manipulation confirms creation. Man, created in God’s image, on a small scale imitates God.
I mean, where do you start with someone like this? Carbon dating’s not used to determine the age of the Earth, for one.
Nest, I’d ask this writer why he doesn’t believe that the universe was created last Thursday, since he seems to believe that his god is a trickster who creates things “with apparent age” – presumably to fool folks who honesty try to figure out what is going on.
The writer (ironically) mentions a “constant state of matter” – which I’m guessing means that he assumes that the properties of matter (like radioactive half life) don’t change over time. Of course, he doesn’t like the conclusions that scientists draw from this about the age of the Earth.
In short, he seems confused about every bit of science he mentions.
Of course, I don’t know the writer’s age and if he is actually a product of South Carolina’s educational system – there’s not enough information in the rest of the letter to tell. But if he’s a fair sample, we have a lot of work to do.
In this endless, wasteful debate over the teaching of The Theory of How-the-Heck-We-Got-to-Where-We-Are-Now, people seem to have forgotten what is truly important. In the State of South Carolina, the real problem is not whether the works of Darwin or the Bible form the correct basis for explaning how the world came to its present state. In the State of South Carolina, the real problem is simply that too many children lack the literary competency to READ the works of Darwin, the Bible, or any other book of text. With a reported half of South Carolina students failing to complete high school in four years, it is simply not that important. This issue is simply a big distraction from the bigger issue of how best to teach Johnny and Susie how to read, write, add, subtract, multiply, and divide.
And, besides, teachers and students are current too busy cramming for the PACT to be distracted by all of this noise.
Oh, by the way, does the State of South Carolina have a legal definition for the word “Science”, or a documented protocol for vetting new scientific theories (in any subject) prior to inclusion in the education standards, or a documented set of criteria that must be met by any supporting body of data, pertaining to any new scientific theory, prior to its inclusion and teaching in public school science courses? (It seems that you need these things in order to teach good science in the classroom.)
That is certainly the main problem. It seems to me that the legislative fuss over the science standards is an attempt to appear to be “doing something about education” that doesn’t actually require hard decisions about funding, etc.
I wonder if this focus on high-stakes testing is part of the solution or part of the problem. But that’s another debate. 🙂
That’s a good question. A quick internet search didn’t turn up anything. It’s something I’d like to know myself. It seems that it’s just up to the standards committees.