is science a victim of the Bush administration?

Reason is a victim of the Bush administration. Our shall I say the nation is a victim of fundamental Christianity.

I would take it even further and say that the human condition is a victim of fundamentalist thinking; a philosophy which is too narrow for growth, and highly prone to external manipulation and internal corruption.

To choose to believe what you are told, without reason (pure faith), is very human, but it's not very smart.

rosborne979- Welcome to A2K!

I believe that you have made an important statement, and I need to think about it a bit. I will be back!

This is one of the few points where I do not agree with the position of the American Conservatives. IMHO, evolution should be taught, mandatorily[/i], but it must be noticed that another point of view regarding development of biological life exists (namely, creationism), and to make students familiar with the latter as well.

I certainly don't disagree with anything that's been said so far.

But... whatever the effects on primary and secondary education, and whatever ideological snags come up in public policy, the US's two major public funding units for scientific research (the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health) arre heavily tied up with the military, and tend to see an increased flow of money across the board (that is, even in nonmilitary programs) under hawkish regimes (I mean, administrations). And since review of grant proposals is farmed out to academics outside of the institutions, the gov't is not able to exercise complete control over what kinds of proposals get funded.


(Evolution --> Columbine. Gawd. If a person's going to start pointing fingers at ideologically motivated violence...)

Evolution; mandatory:
Darwinism; optional.

The point by rosborne979 about fundamentalist thinking seems to make sense. Fundamentalism in science teaching should be also alarmed, in the long run.

steissd
Creationism is a religious concept and has no place in public schools.

The faith-based bias of this Admin bodes ill for support of science. Not to mention the preference for what industry wants rather than scientific evidence. Take global warming. The mantra is: More study is needed. Meanwhile we continue to destroy the ozone layer.

Just today I heard on the news a forest-industry official say he'd seen a spotted owl in a populated area, proving, to his satisfaction, that the bird is no longer endangered. So let's resume hacking those old-growth trees! In fact, the gov't is now re-examining the spotted owl's status as protected.

This is the kind anecdotal BS that has replaced science these days...

Au1929, creationism has no place in *science class*. But I think that it is still valid subject material in a theology class, or in a philosophy class.

Granted you won't find many theology or philosophy classes in high schools which can barely succeed in teaching reading, writing and arithmetic, but the principle is still sound.

Best Regards,

What next? Should health classes teach that some people think that illness is caused by demonic possession and can be cured by prayer, history classes that some people do not believe that the Holocaust ever happened, social studies that the pyramids might have been built by aliens and that Aristotle got his ideas from Africans?

Ideas about evolution are not the source of all evil in society. It has increased our understanding of disease and dysfunctional behavior and how to treat it. The Christian religion, on the other hand, taught us that blacks were an inferior race, girls should be silent and submissive, God created a universe with billion of galaxies but only put life earth, God will annul physical laws if you pray hard enough, and corporal punishment is good for kids.

We cannot teach every oddball notion that one sect or another has come up to kids whose critical thinking skills are still rudimentary. Schools should teach kids the theories that have been peer-reviewed and provisionally accepted by the scientific community as being the best explanations of the data that we have, and that theses theories are always subject to revision if warranted by new data or ideas.

They will get plenty of indoctrination about non-scientific mumbo-jumbo from their parents, churches, and TV sets.

The definition of science itself is loose. Creationism is very comforting, because you don't have to think. All you have to do is believe in what someone tells you. I don't think I've ever read anything on this - but what do creationists think about movies like "Star Wars?"

We do not move forward with this administration because everyone brought in is a member of the team. There is no intellectual curiosity, no interest in any of the sciences. Even such social sciences as medicine are reduced to business propositions.

If one spotted owl takes the whole species off the endangered list, just think if this applied to people. I guess it does. Two black people - Powell and Rice - are what the Bush people point to as enlightenment in their admin. But then, Reagan did say if you've seen one giant redwood, you've seen them all.