Creationism, having failed miserably in its attempts to convince the scientific community,
the people, and the courts of its validity,
changed tactics, so that God was replaced with an Intelligent Designer.
When Intelligent Design failed in the same way,
they changed tactics again and are now saying to teach the controversy:
"Give students both theories and have them decide."
It sounds nice and sensible and rational, right?
Well, it isn't. In fact, it's about as anti-science as you can get.
To see why, think back to the time of Galileo
when he confirmed the heliocentric model of the solar system,
and refuted the "fact" that the Earth was the center of everything.
What if the attitude had been "Teach the controversy" instead of scientific consensus?
What would you have concluded if you had lived back then?
The only data you have is that the Earth seems firm and immovable,
and that the sun seems to go around it.
You don't have the knowledge or equipment to be able to
properly evaluate the controversy for yourself.
Nowadays, it's not difficult to get the equipment.
Many stores sell telescopes affordable by the consumer
that have far greater magnification than Galileo's first telescope.
There are also binoculars and even digital cameras that have the 30x optical magnification
needed to confirm Galileo's observations.
But having the equipment is only half the battle.
You must also have the knowledge.
You have to know where to look to find Jupiter, for example,
and you have to be able to tell it from the background stars.
You also have to be able to see the moons of Jupiter and track their progress over several days.
Jupiter is going to change its position in the sky.
So you need to be able to know where it has moved, so you can find it again the next night.
You'll need a lot of tools of science in order to do so.
A good piece of astronomy software is really all you'd need today,
but you'd have to be able to understand the scientific tools and trust them to be accurate.
So even today, the average person would have difficulty confirming Galileo's observation.
A high school student with limited time, budget, and desire is not likely to go and do it on his own.
You could set it up where a teacher takes them to the process and explains how to do it,
assigning their night observations as homework,
but the teacher would have to be very knowledgeable since
every time the teacher teaches the course, the planets would be in entirely different positions.
Not only that, it would take valuable class time and homework time away from learning more science.
Really, the only sensible policy is to just teach the heliocentric model,
explain why it is correct, and talk about Copernicus and Galileo
and how the conclusion was reached scientifically, and then move on.
To teach the controversy--
where you present the geocentric and the heliocentric models together as if they were both equal
and encouraging the students to make up their own mind--
is to completely mislead them about everything science is and how it works.
Science doesn't work by opinion.
Science doesn't work one way for one person
and one way for another depending on their personal beliefs.
Science is a measurement of objective reality.
To teach the controversy is to deny objective reality.
So, you wouldn't teach geocentricism along with heliocentricism and tell them to make up their own mind.
By the same token, you wouldn't teach along with germ theory
the alternative theory of the Wrath of God.
Should students be presented as equal ideas that diseases
are caused by pathogens or as punishment for evil behavior?
Absolutely not!
The same applies to the New Age idea of positive thinking, or the Law of Attraction.
If someone gets sick and doesn't get better, he doesn't need to think that it's his fault somehow,
for not being a better person or not thinking positively or attracting it somehow.
He needs to understand that his body is being attacked by an outside force,
and particular procedures need to be performed to stop it.
Do NOT teach the controversy!
Should we teach the controversy about the shape of the Earth?
Should we include the Flat Earth theory and make students afraid
of falling off the edge if they travelled too far from home?
When we teach gravity, should we give equal time to the idea
that we are all held down by the noodly appendages of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
Should we teach the controversy between gravity and Intelligent Falling?
What about the Big Bang?
Should we teach the controversy here and include cdk007's satirical proposition
that the entire Universe was created when you clicked "Play" on his video?
What about the controversy of the Universe being sneezed
out of the nose of the Great Green Arkleseizure?
Should we teach the controversy and tell students to live in fear
of the Coming of the Great White Handkerchief?
No.
Do not teach the Great Green Arkleseizure Theory.
Do not teach the cdk007 Play Button Theory.
Do not teach Intelligent Falling.
Do not teach Wrath of God.
Do not teach geocentricism.
And do not, not, NOT teach the ridiculous, unscientific,
and completely falsified idea known as Intelligent Design.
School is there to give the students knowledge.
Let's stick to the known facts and ONLY the known facts.
Let's stick to the scientific theories and ONLY the scientific theories.
Let's NOT let the Intelligent Design people do an end-run around peer-review and experimentation.
If they want to be regarded as science, make them play by the rules of science.
Otherwise, you just have more lying creationists wrapping themselves up in lab coats.
(Thanks to Tom S. Fox for transcribing these subtitles.)