Kansas is at it again...
Jan. 25th, 2005 07:02 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
acroyearfrom a Usenet posting in talk.origins:
to summarize, basically, they've decided that since Science doesn't acknowledge their beliefs, then they'll just redefine the word science itself. their new definition of science now allows for non-causal conclusions, meaning intelligent design and other non-provable (more importantly, non-falsifiable) explanations can be included.
on top of that, there's a whole bunch more BS about how the "evidence against evolution" (there is none, but the students will have no clue how to know that) and "teaching the controversy" (there is none, except at the sociology level, which is out of scope of ANY high school biology class) will become required learning.
i give it 5 years when not a single university in this country will accept a Kansas student for ANY science-related degree program.
i feel extremely sorry for those students of Kansas who actually thought they might have become doctors or such, 'cause they'll never get into a program as long as their view of science is so totally screwed up by the ignorant bastards responsible for their welfare.
still, these are the same people so ruled by their unchanging *beliefs* that they still believe Wal-Marts haven't destroyed their communities yet.
naturally, the documents overstress the "theory, not fact" crap, which so far has held up as unconstitutional in the south, but we'll have to wait on the appeals for how wide-spread that judgement goes.
update: Kansas hasn't actually voted on these; these documents are just proposed recomendations to try to sneak intelligent design, creationism, and bogus anti-evolutionary "evidence" into the system. of course, with the current kansas board, its just possible that they might be listening...
In case anybody is interested, there is a website at http://www.kansasscience2005.com/ that has an early draft of proposed revisions to the Kansas state science standards.
In particular see http://www.kansasscience2005.com/ProposedRevisions_KSstandards.pdf which deals with evolution, ID, and the definitions of science and methodological naturalism starting on page 3.
to summarize, basically, they've decided that since Science doesn't acknowledge their beliefs, then they'll just redefine the word science itself. their new definition of science now allows for non-causal conclusions, meaning intelligent design and other non-provable (more importantly, non-falsifiable) explanations can be included.
on top of that, there's a whole bunch more BS about how the "evidence against evolution" (there is none, but the students will have no clue how to know that) and "teaching the controversy" (there is none, except at the sociology level, which is out of scope of ANY high school biology class) will become required learning.
i give it 5 years when not a single university in this country will accept a Kansas student for ANY science-related degree program.
i feel extremely sorry for those students of Kansas who actually thought they might have become doctors or such, 'cause they'll never get into a program as long as their view of science is so totally screwed up by the ignorant bastards responsible for their welfare.
still, these are the same people so ruled by their unchanging *beliefs* that they still believe Wal-Marts haven't destroyed their communities yet.
naturally, the documents overstress the "theory, not fact" crap, which so far has held up as unconstitutional in the south, but we'll have to wait on the appeals for how wide-spread that judgement goes.
update: Kansas hasn't actually voted on these; these documents are just proposed recomendations to try to sneak intelligent design, creationism, and bogus anti-evolutionary "evidence" into the system. of course, with the current kansas board, its just possible that they might be listening...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-01-26 02:49 pm (UTC)1) The students who apply to college in the next 5 will have several years of the old curriculum and (hopefully) be at the point of thinking when the new one goes into effect. Figure that the curriculum won't change until next year.
2) It takes universities a little while to change. In some ways they are like the government (well, the publics are a part of the government in a lot of ways). As such, failure to recognize a degree from an entire state would probably require work from at minimum the Board of Regents, possibly all the way up to the state legislature.
3) Not everyone will be completely messed up even if creationism is taught.
If someone were to be in Kansas (for whatever reason related to their parents work); it is quite possible that the parental units might have debunked the curriculum a little bit; they go to the community college and take biology, etc., then go to UTenn or VATech for the rest of their 4 year degree. Such a person should be eligible for Med School.
For that matter, in general the transcript asks for High School, SAT, and maybe HS GPA. I don't know if there is room for students to list 3 years in one school then graduate in another.
I would hate to see EVERYONE discriminated against because they happen to have come from Kansas. That idea just sticks in my craw.å