Hart County, Kentucky, angry with evolution

Is this news? Or should I say, “Kentucky — what did you expect?”

The school superintendent for Hart County has seen the end-of-course test for Biology, and he’s shocked. So much evolution. Is this really what we want? Is it the right thing to do?

“I have a deep concern about the increased emphasis on the evolution content required,” [Ricky D.] Line wrote. “After carefully reviewing the Blueprint, I find the increase is substantial and alarming.”

Line contends that the Blueprint essentially would “require students to believe that humans … evolved from primates such as apes and … were not created by God.”

Before we argue over what students eventually believe, I’ll say that Biology just happens to be Biology. To paraphrase a better scientist, nothing in it makes sense except in the light of evolution. There’s no way to get a grasp on one without the other. It would be like trying to teach students to be doctors while embargoing the topic of respiration.

“My argument is, do we want our children to be taught these things as facts? Personally, I don’t,” Line said. “I don’t think life on earth began as a one-celled organism. I don’t think that all of us came from a common ancestor … I don’t think the Big Bang theory describes the explanation of the origin of the universe.”

You think your personal beliefs suddenly matter? And you are . . who? A school prophet or a bureaucrat? The growing narcissism of Christians is dumbfounding. I don’t dictate your sermons, Ricky, and I’m wise enough not to be your pastor.

But, from your comments, you’re a schools chief seeking to block the teachings of a number of fields of science, including Biology, Physics and Astronomy. You oppose curiosity, rational thought, and intellectual development. As it would be with any science illiterate superintendent, you must be fired (tarred and feathered, even better).

Centuries of hard work by millions of people, all to develop these robust disciplines we know as science. What’s the result? Americans are living better, longer lives than ever before. But because of Ricky’s personal feelings, he would professionally block Hart County students from knowing about any of it.

Why do you hate America, Ricky?

Share

4 thoughts Hart County, Kentucky, angry with evolution

  1. avatar someatheist says:

    You should donate your brain to science. I’m sure there could be a study done on people who are given a brain at birth but never use it.

  2. avatar An American Citizen says:

    “You oppose curiosity, rational thought, and intellectual development.”
    … With all due respect, maybe you should relax your scientific brain just for a second and study the English language. No where in his letter to the commissioner did that superintendent state that evolution should NOT be taught. He’s simply saying it shouldn’t be taught as a ‘fact’ but as a theory (like it currently is now). Therefore, your attack on his intelligence is clearly misplaced and you basically point your finger back at yourself. Curiosity, rational thought, and intellectual development would involve providing students with a variety of ‘theories’ and allow them to ‘rationally / critically’ determine, based on their own studies, which they choose to take as the best choice. One would still gain the knowledge and understanding of what the theory of evolution is about and how the idea was formed and supported, along with how other reasonable theories have been formed and supported. Hence, teaching the scientific method through personal experience.
    “But because of Ricky’s personal feelings, he would professionally block Hart County students from knowing about any of it.” — Once again, you take comments way out of context. Refer to the above explanation of how the basics of the english language works. The superintendent never once states that evolution shouldn’t be taught at all in his schools. You attack a person, who by all accounts and records, who has brought a great amount of success to a rural district that isn’t in the most ‘well-off’ part of the state.
    Disagreeing with someone’s opinions or beliefs are your right. But do your research (outside of 1 simple subject matter that you are as ‘extreme right’ as he is ‘extreme left’ on) before you resort to attacking an individual’s character.

  3. avatar wojtek says:

    Evolution is a fact, theory of evolution tries to explain it. As for the word theory…

    In science, a theory is a statement of general ideas that explains many observations by natural means. To a scientist, the word “theory” is a very precise term to identify a concept that has great utility in explaining phenomena in the natural world. Ideas only rise to the level of a theory in science if they have withstood much scrutiny and are exceptionally useful in explaining a wide variety of independent observations. Any theory can be altered or replaced if new observations or new scientific evidence cannot be adequately explained by it. In science, facts never become theories. Rather, theories explain facts. No theory is immune to revision or replacement should new evidence surface. There is a substantial difference between the “everyday” meaning of the word “theory” and the scientific meaning of the word. An idea is often labeled a theory for the purpose of painting it as little more than a guess. This use of “theory” demonstrates a lack of understanding of the scientific meaning of the term. Referring to biological evolution as a theory for the purpose of contesting it would be counterproductive, since scientists only grant the status of theory to well-tested ideas.

  4. avatar toma says:

    @American Citizen: Read wojtek’s commentary and educate yourself. Within science, the word ‘theory’ doesn’t mean “We’re not sure.” The prevailing ‘theory’ is the most robust explanation long subjected to the rigors of thought, experiment, and observation. To say that any crackpot bull should be taught alongside a prevailing theory is laughable. Should we teach that breathing isn’t important to human life because the prevailing theory says it is? Should we teach that objects fall skyward because the prevailing theory of gravity (yes, it’s only a theory) says that they don’t? Your arguments are comical. The philosophy of science is nothing trivial.

Comments are closed.