Tags: creationism, dinosaurs, politics, religion, Sarah Palin
September 19, 2008 | Rants, religion
We’re Canadians, and while we may watch American movies and television shows, listen to American music, read a good many books from that country and peruse US-based websites, we still do our best to avoid paying attention to the nitty-gritty of what goes on in American politics. This gives us the pleasure of being able to express an opinion when there’s a joke to be made or a bon mot to be dropped, but does not force us to have one at the ready every time some loud mouth at a bar wants to solve the world’s problems over a beer. There are some issues though that we find harder to ignore than others, and one of the main ones in this year’s presidential race is the fact that someone on one of the major tickets believes the Flintstones was a forerunner in the reality TV genre.
Now, we’re not knocking Sarah Palin solely on the basis that she was brought in to pacify the religious kooks who fancy McCain a heathen radical. Obama cut ties with the nutter “reverend” who was acting as his “spiritual adviser,” but that was only because it was politically expedient to do so after years of filling that wackjob’s collection plates. Palin, however, is the only candidate on either side to supposedly subscribe to the idea of young earth creationism, which holds as one of its core beliefs the idea that man and dinosaur existed at the same time.
We say supposedly because the media has been oddly silent on whether one of the “Big Four” carries the kind of notions in her head that should disqualify her from guiding the dramatic arts program at a rehabilitation center, never mind being given the wheel should the aged man at the top of the ticket keel over while throwing out the first pitch at a baseball game.
Palin’s appearance on the scene has (rightfully) frightened so many people that her head has become one of the world’s most photoshopped (click here and, well, look up) and the reports on her have been driven more by a desire to run her back into the wilds of Alaska than they have good reporting (see here).
The UK’s News of the World for example ran the following in a column by Fraser Nelson: (No link available, but trust us, it appeared in the September 14 edition).
MATT Damon asks if US vice-president candidate Sarah Palin believes there were dinosaurs 4,000 years ago – suspecting her religious views mean she doesn’t. Palin goes one better: “When God gave the dinosaurs the ability to poop oil 6,000 years ago, he certainly didn’t intend for us to leave it in the ground,” she says.
NB: Dinosaurs died out 65million years ago. Ask her running mate John McCain: he probably saw it.
As much as we enjoyed this and the headline “McCain Saur It”, this little tidbit was actually “sourced” from the following article on Crystal Air Productions, a satirical website, which also reports on an environmentally themed car that runs on excrement and lets us know that John McCain has extended secret service protection to a polar bear.
What little legitimate coverage there has been of this has been worrying indeed. The UK Independent quotes a resident of Palin’s home town, saying that he had discussed her creationist beliefs with her while Palin was mayor:
“I pushed her on the earth’s creation, whether it was really less than 7,000 years old and whether dinosaurs and humans walked the earth at the same time. And she said yes, she’d seen images somewhere of dinosaur fossils with human footprints in them.”
Now, granted, this was just one guy, but we’re talking about Wasilla Alaska here, a town with a population of 5,469. This is the kind of town where not only does everybody know everybody, but everybody owes everybody else five bucks that they’ll get back to them next payday. One person in a town that small is equivalent to 3 million people if you extrapolate to the wider US population, and that’s more folks than you could squeeze into the Creation Museum even if you used a shoe horn and a whole tub of slick.
Palin should come clean on whether her beliefs are being wildly misquoted by people who bear her a grudge, or if she actually is of the opinion that man and dinosaur existed side by side and perhaps that every household had a giant octopus wash the dishes. It likely won’t lose her the election. Heck in Canada, the vast majority of people believe in the theory of evolution, Stockwell Day, a prime ministerial candidate at the time, remarked that there was “scientific proof” that man and dinosaur coexisted. He’s now the public safety minister, which makes us feel… well, not safe.
[Editor's Note: We apologize for any viewing problems you may be having. We're currently in the midst of another redesign - the final step in our Wordpress migration - which will be completed shortly. By that point we'll be cooking with gas and such hassles will be a thing of the past. Thanks.]
We should replicate Galileo’s Leaning Tower of Pisa experiment with these two Republican dunder-heads
[...] Let’s Talk About Sarah Palin’s Yabba Dabba Science – Palin, however, is the only candidate on either side to supposedly subscribe to the idea of young earth creationism, which holds as one of its core beliefs the idea that man and dinosaur existed at the same time. … Social BookmarkingTags: Creationism,Evolution,fundamentalist-religious-belief,sarah-palinTags: [...]
In a 2006 gubernatorial debate, Sarah Palin said evolution and creationism should both be taught in public schools. But in an interview the following
day with the Anchorage Daily News, Palin said:
http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html
***
In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:
“I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.”
She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum.
***
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,425161,00.html
Exclusive: Gov. Palin on ‘Hannity & Colmes,’ Part 2
Thursday, September 18, 2008
HANNITY: Did you only want to teach creationism in school and not evolution?
PALIN: No. In fact, growing up in a school teacher’s house with a science teacher as a dad, you know, I have great respect for science being taught in our science classes and evolution to be taught in our science classes.
====================================================
Teaching Evolution – Is There a Better Way?
http://www.creationmoments.net/articles/article.php?a=21
Should Evolution Be Immune From Critical Analysis?
http://www.rae.org/critanl.html
Teaching Origins in Public Schools
by David Menton
http://emporium.turnpike.net/C/cs/teach.htm
===================================================
David Menton bio:
* Biomedical research technician at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota in the Department of Dermatology (1960-62)
* Associate Professor of Anatomy at Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri (1966-2000)
* Associate Professor Emeritus of Anatomy at Washington University School of Medicine (July 2000)
===================================================
http://www.rae.org/critanl.html
[snip]
Dr. David N. Menton is a former Associate Professor of Anatomy, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, now retired. In his September 1995 address (“Evolution: Is a scientific critique possible?”) at the Abbey Arts Centre in Abbotsford, British Columbia, Menton commented:
“What I’m suggesting in the classroom is: not teaching creation. What I’m suggesting you consider in the classroom is: teach evolution the way your Minister of Education says you ought to–teach the curriculum the way they say you ought to. I believe in obeying the laws. I didn’t come here to tell you to get yourself thrown out of a job or anything like that…Do
what you’re asked to do.”
“But there isn’t anyone that’s going to stop you from presenting critical evidence against evolution. No one.”
“I eagerly look forward to the first test case in court, where they drag a teacher kicking and screaming into the courts who has done the job they’re
supposed to do. They’ve taught evolution–they’ve covered the curriculum–they’ve covered the points in the book–but they also presented scientific evidence that is critical of these evolutionary views–evidence generated by other evolutionists themselves. I’m waiting for the court case when they take that person in the school and say: ‘You have no right presenting scientific evidence from evolutionists critical
of evolution.’”
“I’ll tell you–the approach that is being taken here guarantees one thing…you’re guaranteeing this course is going to be boring–you’re going to teach evolution as a ‘Just So Story’. Anyone with dissenting points of view is going to get crushed. They’re either going to go along with the evolutionary paradigm, or be told that they can’t speak out; they’re not going to win that round, and neither will you. You’re going to
bore your kids silly.”
[snip]
======================================================
The following suggested Origins of Life policy, which first appeared in the Buckna/Laidlaw article, “Should evolution be immune from critical analysis in the science classroom?” (http://www.icr.org/article/411/) is a realistic, practical and legal way for local and state school boards to achieve a win-win with regard to evolution teaching. Even the ACLU, the NCSE, and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State should find the policy acceptable:
“As no theory in science is immune from critical examination and evaluation, and recognizing that evolutionary theory is the only approved theory of origins that can be taught in the [province/state] science curriculum: whenever evolutionary theory is taught, students and teachers are encouraged to discuss the scientific information that supports and questions evolution and its underlying assumptions, in order to promote the development of critical thinking skills. This discussion would include only the scientific evidence/information for and against evolutionary
theory, as it seeks to explain the origin of the universe and the diversity of life on our planet.”
The real problem with teaching both evolution and creationism/intelligent design in public schools comes down to teaching a religious belief on equal terms with a scientific theory.
For more on the difference between teaching evolution and creationism, see my post “Should Both Evolution And Creationism Be Taught In Public Schools?”
Dr. Kalinda Rose Stevenson
http://kalindarosestevenson.com/main/should-both-evolution-and-creationism-be-taught-in-public-schools_226