Montana students, teachers blast bill that would limit science education to ‘scientific fact’

[Ophiolite]

Frankly, I haven't been impressed by the arguments presented here against the bill.

The findings of science are expressed within theories. The ultimate achievment of scientific investigations is the production of a well evidenced, explanatory theory. Any legislation impacting on the teaching of science that egregiously and aggressively misrepresents that, as is the case here, is a legal, cultural, logical and pedagogical abomination.

Apart from that there is not much wrong with it.

What's repeatable? The orbits are never
zactly the same.

Indeed. Simulation of orbital motions indicate that the system is inherently chaotic: for example, the ejection of Mercury from the solar system is not ruled out.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I almost posted about this. But the truth is that I've had to dial back my outrage-o-meter. If (as in this case) one legislator introduces a nutty bill, that is not newsworthy. If it survives a committee and may actually be voted on, then it starts to be newsworthy.

Committee tables Montana bill aiming to limit science education to ‘scientific fact’​

Sponsor Sen. Daniel Emrich agrees with rest of committee to table measure​

 

[Bradskii]

From this ex second hand car salesman's Facebook page:

'First Week Representing SD 11 in the Montana State Senate.
God Bless Amarica!'

Ye gods...

 

[Estrid]

The findings of science are expressed within theories. The ultimate achievment of scientific investigations is the production of a well evidenced, explanatory theory. Any legislation impacting on the teaching of science that egregiously and aggressively misrepresents that, as is the case here, is a legal, cultural, logical and pedagogical abomination.

Apart from that there is not much wrong with it.

Indeed. Simulation of orbital motions indicate that the system is inherently chaotic: for example, the ejection of Mercury from the solar system is not ruled out.

Three body problem

 

[Tuur]

I'm sure the science of evolution is the main target, spoken or unspoken. It always is. Then there are the other sciences that challenge their preconceived notions, such as earth science (climate science and the old Earth) and astronomy (the age of the universe, the Big Bang), etc.

You admit, then, that you are basing your opinion on assumption.

The bill is so sloppily written that in practice forbids many other scientific theories as the previous posters have noted. This must be a result of the authors vaunted home-school "education".

Like orbital mechanics? That's a particular bit of hyperbole that's way over the top.

1. Harvard is *not* in Montana.
2. This bill is about the public schools, not med schools.

So you maintain that it's not about wokeness nibbling away at science, but it must be about evolution? Both are assumptions. If your assumption that it must be about evolution is valid, then so is my assumption that it could be in response to wokeness.

Since orbital mechanics has been involved, a subject not usually found in the curriculum of public schools, has been assumed it would be affected by this bill with little outcry, then it's not valid to abruptly limit it's scope to grades K-12.

 

[Tuur]

Yes, we know who started the culture war against science and why.

The only person to testify for the bill, a law professor working in South Korea, understood it to prohibit the teaching of evolution, the Big Bang, and related topics, as NBC Montana (February 6, 2023) reported; he also described these topics as fraudulent and aimed at impeaching the veracity of the Holy Bible.

Thank you. You have done what no one else in this topic has: Found a cite rather than rely on assumption.

 

[Bradskii]

From this ex second hand car salesman's Facebook page:

'First Week Representing SD 11 in the Montana State Senate.
God Bless Amarica!'

Ye gods...

And from his Twitter account:

'why would anyone enjoy exicuting human babies and violating their human rights with a death sentence'.

The man is illiterate.

 

[Hans Blaster]

You admit, then, that you are basing your opinion on assumption.

I have a lot of experience dealing with pseudoscience and anti-science movements. There are really only two things that get taught in K12 education nearly universally objected to in these kinds of attacks: things that promote evolution and the scientifically established age of the earth/Universe (counter to the creationist position) and things that back anthropogenic climate change (counter to the fossil fuel industry position). It's really not hard to guess.

Like orbital mechanics? That's a particular bit of hyperbole that's way over the top.

As noted by others, the bill is so badly written (on purpose, perhaps, but the tabling by the author indicates he likely had no idea what he was doing.)

So you maintain that it's not about wokeness nibbling away at science, but it must be about evolution? Both are assumptions. If your assumption that it must be about evolution is valid, then so is my assumption that it could be in response to wokeness.

I've never seen any "wokeness" in science.

Since orbital mechanics has been involved, a subject not usually found in the curriculum of public schools, has been assumed it would be affected by this bill with little outcry, then it's not valid to abruptly limit it's scope to grades K-12.

 

[Tuur]

I've never seen any "wokeness" in science.

The link I provided about the goings on a Harvard shows one example. So either you deny this is wokeness or you deny Harvard Medical School teaches science. Your call.

 

[Frank Robert]

The link I provided about the goings on a Harvard shows one example. So either you deny this is wokeness or you deny Harvard Medical School teaches science. Your call.

Appears that you still claiming that Harvard made them do it?

 

[Hans Blaster]

The link I provided about the goings on a Harvard shows one example. So either you deny this is wokeness or you deny Harvard Medical School teaches science. Your call.

From what I can divine (and divination is required from that article) the complaint is almost entirely about various diversity and inclusion efforts within Harvard Medical School. The extremely vague term "wokeness" appears only once in a list of various cultural boogymen and then the focus turns entirely to diversity and inclusion efforts in a medical school.

So I shall repeat myself:

1. Harvard is not in Montana,
2. Harvard Medical School is not a K12 school.

Whatever "wokeness" is it has nothing to do with the practice of science. (At this point I should not that medical schools are not training scientists. They are training sophisticated health care workers and granting them "M.D." degrees.)

Going back to my "no wokeness in science" comments, no "wokeness" is not eating away at the edge of science, but more importantly...

The effort in Montana is very clearly aimed at "traditional scientific enemies" of the anti-science community. The bill-writers clumsy effort to invoke "theories" is a dead give away that he learned his "science" from the likes of the AIG homeschool "curriculum".

 

[Shemjaza]

The link I provided about the goings on a Harvard shows one example. So either you deny this is wokeness or you deny Harvard Medical School teaches science. Your call.

I see the accusation of "wokeness" thrown around a lot... but it is rare to see either specifics or clear definitions.

Given that many seem to be willing to define wokeness as "teaching mainstream evidence based principles of biology and physics" it strikes me as just the latest rebrand of the effort to control education that's been going on for over a century.

 

[Tuur]

I see the accusation of "wokeness" thrown around a lot... but it is rare to see either specifics or clear definitions.

Given that many seem to be willing to define wokeness as "teaching mainstream evidence based principles of biology and physics" it strikes me as just the latest rebrand of the effort to control education that's been going on for over a century.

That's a rather a rather convenient, definition. Did you even bother to read the following in the cite?

"We will develop new classes for master’s and PhD students to acknowledge the ways in which racism is embedded in science."

Want to read the actual Harvard statement? Go here:

Anti-Racism Initiatives

Diversity, Inclusion, Belonging and Anti-Racism Initiatives Framed within HMS’ mission statement, the following initiatives form the next wave of our important work toward becoming a more inclusive, diverse and anti-racism institution.

hms.harvard.edu

Can't be bothered? Here's this sentence:

"We will develop new classes for master’s and PhD students to acknowledge the ways in which racism is embedded in science and scientific culture and work to redress these longstanding issues. "

Do tell. Explain to us how racism is embedded in science.

Or please: tell us how astronomy is "riddled in White supremacy" and uses words that are "hyper-masculine." What a cite? How about:

Astrophysicist Natalie Gosnell says field is riddled with ‘white supremacy’

“As an astrophysicist, I’m a product of institutions that are steeped in systemic racism and white supremacy,” Natalie Gosnell said.

nypost.com

Now: Please tell us again how wokeness in science isn't happening.

 

[Gene2memE]

This from the bill:

'Whereas a scientific fact is observable and repeatable, and if it does not meet these criteria it is a theory which is defined as speculation...'

Apart from the bad English, that makes no sense. A theory is an explanation of the 'observable and repeatable' facts. Whoever wrote that (Enrich?) is scientifically illiterate.

I read the conflating of the two meanings of theory and nearly threw up in my mouth.
We all know what right wing conspiracy theorists* mean when they talk about just a theory.

*Emrich is also anti-vax, thinks climate change is a hoax and that the 2020 elections were stolen (but curiously not his own election...) and promotes articles claiming critical race theory is a Marxist plot. Seems like the king of the 'classical liberals' I keep hearing so much about.

 

[Bradskii]

I read the conflating of the two meanings of theory and nearly threw up in my mouth.
We all know what right wing conspiracy theorists* mean when they talk about just a theory.

*Emrich is also anti-vax, thinks climate change is a hoax and that the 2020 elections were stolen (but curiously not his own election...) and promotes articles claiming critical race theory is a Marxist plot. Seems like the king of the 'classical liberals' I keep hearing so much about.

You should check this out:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1578611312393097217

A fellow politician tragically lost his young daughter to some heart problem and Twitted a quite moving piece about her. Emrich's response? He mocked the fact that the guy mentioned that she was fully vaccinated.

What a piece of work the man is. Beneath contempt.

 

[Shemjaza]

That's a rather a rather convenient, definition. Did you even bother to read the following in the cite?

"We will develop new classes for master’s and PhD students to acknowledge the ways in which racism is embedded in science."

Want to read the actual Harvard statement? Go here:

Anti-Racism Initiatives

Diversity, Inclusion, Belonging and Anti-Racism Initiatives Framed within HMS’ mission statement, the following initiatives form the next wave of our important work toward becoming a more inclusive, diverse and anti-racism institution.

hms.harvard.edu

Can't be bothered? Here's this sentence:

"We will develop new classes for master’s and PhD students to acknowledge the ways in which racism is embedded in science and scientific culture and work to redress these longstanding issues. "

Do tell. Explain to us how racism is embedded in science.

Or please: tell us how astronomy is "riddled in White supremacy" and uses words that are "hyper-masculine." What a cite? How about:

Astrophysicist Natalie Gosnell says field is riddled with ‘white supremacy’

“As an astrophysicist, I’m a product of institutions that are steeped in systemic racism and white supremacy,” Natalie Gosnell said.

nypost.com

Now: Please tell us again how wokeness in science isn't happening.

Ridiculous.

The field of scientific study is a part of our culture so of course it is affected by the bias and prejudices of the people in our society... however science has the advantage of being a self correcting system where ingrained issues can be reassessed and corrected.

What we are seeing is the process in action.

Perhaps you can address my point and both define and present specifics about wokeness being applied to science not just an opinion piece from a single educator who has strong feelings about what analogies and metaphors we use to teach people?

 

[Estrid]

Ridiculous.

The field of scientific study is a part of our culture so of course it is affected by the bias and prejudices of the people in our society... however science has the advantage of being a self correcting system where ingrained issues can be reassessed and corrected.

What we are seeing is the process in action.

Perhaps you can address my point and both define and present specifics about wokeness being applied to science not just an opinion piece from a single educator who has strong feelings about what analogies and metaphors we use to teach people?

The NYC subway is riddled with
Anti Chinese racism.

The way it works is if someone says it,
that makes it so.

 

[Frank Robert]

Now: Please tell us again how wokeness in science isn't happening.

The term wokeness as you like use is simply a derogatory cultural war term to inflame the believers.

You appear to be claiming that there is NOT racism in science. Have you read the literature on racism in science. If not here are few examples of what you will find.

Racism in science: the taint that lingers​

Racism in science: a lingering taint​

Racism In Science | UNH Today​

Racism in science: the taint that lingers​

Perspectives on "Race Science" and Scientific Racism​

Myth of race still embedded in scientific research​

How Evolution was used to Support Scientific Racism​

The Lingering, Powerful Legacy Of “Scientific Racism” In America​

 

[USincognito]

That's a rather a rather convenient, definition. Did you even bother to read the following in the cite?

"We will develop new classes for master’s and PhD students to acknowledge the ways in which racism is embedded in science."

Want to read the actual Harvard statement? Go here:

Anti-Racism Initiatives

Diversity, Inclusion, Belonging and Anti-Racism Initiatives Framed within HMS’ mission statement, the following initiatives form the next wave of our important work toward becoming a more inclusive, diverse and anti-racism institution.

hms.harvard.edu

Can't be bothered? Here's this sentence:

"We will develop new classes for master’s and PhD students to acknowledge the ways in which racism is embedded in science and scientific culture and work to redress these longstanding issues. "

Do tell. Explain to us how racism is embedded in science.

Or please: tell us how astronomy is "riddled in White supremacy" and uses words that are "hyper-masculine." What a cite? How about:

Astrophysicist Natalie Gosnell says field is riddled with ‘white supremacy’

“As an astrophysicist, I’m a product of institutions that are steeped in systemic racism and white supremacy,” Natalie Gosnell said.

nypost.com

Now: Please tell us again how wokeness in science isn't happening.

At the risk of violating So's Law, so you're saying identifying and avoiding potential racism in science is "wokeness"? Seems like "woke" only applies to LGBT and African-Americans. It's almost as if it's the juxtaposition of white grievance.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It's almost as if it's the juxtaposition of white grievance.

Odd that, now isn't it. (Though more fully, white Christian grievance.)