here is an article demonstrating the importance of those that know not allowing religious morons to frame the debate.
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2010/09/in_support_of_a_diligent_relen.php
In support of a diligent, relentless critique of creationism
Category: Back To School Special! ⢠Creationism ⢠Science Education
Posted on: September 9, 2010 8:33 AM, by Greg Laden
Have a look at this video, done by Brian Rooney of ABC News Nightline, in which he follows around Billy Jack and Rusty Carter, two young earth creationists who are leading a school group through the Denver Museum of Nature and Science:
Young earth creationists, or 'YEC's' believe the earth and all forms of life that exist today were created over a six day period 4004 B.C.
In this piece, the YEC's are showing exhibits to the young students, asking them questions, teaching them, and so on. Rooney also interviews the two YEC's in the absence of the children, as well as Kirk Johnson, a scientist who works for the museum.
Although the reporter tries to be fair to "both sides" in this story, in the end, the YEC's end up looking very foolish, and some who have seen this have gone so far as to suggest that this sort of thing is a form of child abuse. Unless one is already a YEC, one cannot watch this footage without thinking that the YEC's are doing something very wrong here. In other words, it is a fair and balanced piece of journalism, pretty accurate, pretty truthful.
I can imagine this going very differently. I can easily imagine this story being done by a different reporter who leans towards creationism, or who feels the belief that the earth is only a few thousand years old is a social norm that must not be offended. Such a version of this story might be very different. It would not be hard to find a journalist - perhaps one who does not usually cover science, or who lives in a conservative region, or who is not very well educated in natural history - approaching a story like this with a "balance" that gives the YEC's the same level of credibility as the experts in paleontology. But that is not what happened here. The reporter did a good job
But how did the reporter know how to do a good job?
Background. Clearly, the reporter researched this story before conducting the interviews and, together with the production staff, before editing the final version. In doing this background research, one might run into a lot of YEC type thinking before finding the first real scientist, or real science writing. There is a lot of creationist rhetoric out there. Indeed, the entire creationist movement is based on one main strategy: To get the word out, through various outlets, about the creationist view of the world. There is no research being done by creationists. It is all about the rhetoric. All of the effort spent by creationists is spent on spreading the creed, not producing new knowledge. Therefore, a very small number of creationists can swamp a relatively much larger number of actual scientists when it comes to filling the available info-space with rhetoric.
But there are relentless communicators: teachers, other kinds of science educators, science writers, TV and radio personalities, bloggers, and so on who make it their business to get the word out about real science. They (we, if I may be so bold) do this for a number of different reasons. It is fun. It is important. Sometimes it is a job. But all of what they (we) do is shaped as well by the fact that there is so much anti-science or pseudo-science rhetoric out there that we have to work extra hard to counterbalance it, and hopefully, displace it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McxGZyBBXMY&feature=player_embedded
It has been a long strange trip for sure. For one thing age 33 was better than a quarter century ago, so life happening will test ones beliefs. Secondly, I don't have what you'd call a traditional belief in a Creator. I have no alliance with any organized religion. Lastly, and certainly most importantly, I believe one should keep an open mind. As facts change, a person may find themselves on the wrong side of the argument. To date, the facts haven't really changed for me since my "epiphany".
