We’ve had some wins and losses in the past year for skepticism. Some of these — on both sides — have been pretty big. Two of our big losses, for example, were Simon Singh’s denial of his appeal to overturn an absurd UK libel ruling, and the firing of Chris Comer who did the horrifying act of trying to alert people about a science talk in Texas.
It turns out, the news may yet turn around for our two allies.
1) Simon has announced he will go for an oral reconsideration of his denial of appeal. Initially, he submitted a written application for the court to reconsider its findings about his libel case (where the British Chiropractic Association is suing him over his use of the word "bogus" in reference to the quackeriffic aspects of chiropractic), and that was turned down. An oral appeal is allowed, and that will happen on October 14. That’s right after TAM London, and I just bet Simon will have something to say at that meeting. Well, what he’s legally allowed to say, at least.
2) Chris Comer’s case is a bit older, so to refresh your memory: in November 2007 she worked (note the tense) for the Texas Education Agency (TEA). She received an email announcing a talk by the wonderful Barbara Forrest, the topic of which was the Dover creationism trial and other encroachments of religion on science. Comer, noting that a lot of the people she knows would be interested in such a talk, forwarded the email to her colleagues.
The TEA then fired her, saying Comer abused her position at TEA to promote an anti-religious stance. It was a ridiculous accusation and clearly a political move, but they tried to cover their butts by saying they have to remain neutral on matters of religion versus science. Note that this is the Texas Education Agency. They have to remain neutral on the truth? What the what?
Ms. Comer filed suit against the TEA saying this neutrality policy is actually a violation of the First Amendment, but a judge ruled against her.
Note: remind me to never, ever break a law in Texas.
Anyway, the cool news is that Ms. Comer is appealing the decision. Yay!
You can watch a short video about all this courtesy of the National Center for Science Education’s YouTube channel:
I’m very glad to see both these skeptics are not going down without a fight. The forces of evil lurk around every corner, and we must continue to rail and rally against them.
August 17th, 2009 at 8:11 am
You say “Note: remind me to never, ever break a law in Texas.”
Under these circumstances, how would you know in advance?
August 17th, 2009 at 8:12 am
Grrrr. I was kicked out of a bar during a ‘discussion’ I was having with creationists. I asked them if they thought ‘both sides of the story’ should be taught in science class. Their leader said yes. I tried to appeal to the younger ones in the group to think for themselves. For some reason I was asked by the bar manager to leave. This after I had bought a round of drinks for them. It was then that my head caught on fire.
August 17th, 2009 at 8:13 am
Texas creationism massacre
August 17th, 2009 at 8:18 am
Maybe we should consider running her for Texas State Governor. I’d contribute to that.
,,,and the war goes on.
Here in Georgia, Red Top Mountain Lodge often hosted religious groups, which was ok (since the facilities rent to the general public) but every once in a while one of the more active members of these little groups would try putting up advertisements for their religion in the Lodge entry, which we had to tell them was not acceptable under Georgia State rules that forbid promoting religion on state property. They always seemed surprised. Apparently they really don’t understand the concept of separation of church/state.
Gary 7
August 17th, 2009 at 8:21 am
I like how the video is called “Expelled for Real”
August 17th, 2009 at 8:24 am
@ William:
I asked them if they thought ‘both sides of the story’ should be taught in science class.
Actually, the correct question should have been if they thought ‘all sides of the story’ should be taught. At least make them fess up to the fact that they want their creation story taught as science, not the umpity gazillion others floating around in the Earth’s mythosphere.
August 17th, 2009 at 8:28 am
If we really want to mess with religionists minds, we could point out that since it appears that everything we know arises from the false vacuum then the false vacuum must be god.
“Bow to the Great Vacuum. It’ll suck your brains right out of your pointy little head.”
That ought to shut them up.
GAry 7
Dang. I REALLY need some coffee.
August 17th, 2009 at 8:32 am
@kuhnigget
Indeed. Good Point. S.M. being my fav of course.
August 17th, 2009 at 8:41 am
@ Gary:
“Bow to the Great Vacuum. It’ll suck your brains right out of your pointy little head.”
Might that explain the pope’s mitre? I always wondered about that funny headgear.
August 17th, 2009 at 8:54 am
6. kuhnigget Says:
August 17th, 2009 at 8:24 am
Actually, the correct question should have been if they thought ‘all sides of the story’ should be taught. At least make them fess up to the fact that they want their creation story taught as science, not the umpity gazillion others floating around in the Earth’s mythosphere.
_______________
If it includes the creation story of the Earth being designed by Deep Thought, built by the Magratheans, run by the mice, and monkey-wrenched by the Golgafrinchans, then I’m all for it.
August 17th, 2009 at 9:25 am
This weekend I got kicked out of a newly-formed “Freethinkers” group in the Houston area. For the record, I am the founder of the Houston Skeptic society.
My crime? In a comment to the first meeting invitation, which was trying to get all bible-as-literature classes banned from school districts, I stated that I did not have a problem with an elective teaching the Bible as literature, from a cultural/historical standpoint, but the main problem is that the available textbooks are largely written by people who believe in premillennial dispensationalism and equate current events to Revelations, etc. It is difficult to find texts that are truly neutral and non-religious. I referenced the current podcast of Reasonable Doubt, which covers the background of these textbook authors. Let’s just say it’s not Bart Ehrman.
I received an email that I had been removed from the group, and when I went to investigate, I get a large banner saying that I am banned from joining the group. My comment had been deleted, and I’m unable to post, comment, or leave messages to anyone, although I can still see everything on the site. I’m going to write an article about this – as I’ve been having my skeptical free-thinking friends look into the site and see if they can join, and what, if any, response I get back from the organizer to my query about his charter saying “There is quite a bit of freedom for your individual expression, examples, and the personal tribulations you have been exposed to or have observed” but kicking me out for saying I don’t think they should be outright banned? (Is that the definition of irony?)
Freethinkers, indeed. I envision dogmatic religious people looking at his site and using it as an example of how atheists/skeptics are just another religious group. (http://bit.ly/fsHFQ)
August 17th, 2009 at 9:34 am
I find it fascinating how religions differ on this topic. I went to a catholic high school and a Jesuit university (Jesuits are sort of like the “education branch” of Catholicism.
I never once encountered a teacher injecting anti-evolution theory into a science classroom. Not even to mention that there were “differing approaches.”. When I was in high school “intelligent design” hadn’t quite been invented as a term yet, but that’s more or less what they taught in the religion classrooms during that part of the curriculum. It was far from the only thing covered, though.
Their view is basically that God created the Universe, but they don’t take the creation story of the bible literally, so as far as they’re concerned God is basically the one who lit the match for the Big Bang, and they never did anything to dissuade us from taking the science at face value.
Obviously Catholics are not fundamentalists, but I still find it endlessly fascinating that the church that persecuted gallileo and hundreds of other scientists for centuries are now the ones with the science-friendly curriculums.
Really the only aspect of science the church still meddles in are the reproductive sciences. Things like abortion, birth control, fetal stem cells, etc… And regardless of their opinions on the subjects they don’t shy away from teaching them in their classrooms. In high school we learned about STDs, how they could be prevented with safe sex, etc… They still preached abstinence only, but the teachers still made sure you knew to wear a rubber.
August 17th, 2009 at 9:40 am
It seems it’s only christian creationists who are insistent upon getting their version taught in public schools. Where are all our Hindu friends or heck, lets just list the top 40 and their number of adherents:
Christianity: 2.1 billion
Islam: 1.5 billion
Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion
Hinduism: 900 million
Chinese traditional religion: 394 million
Buddhism: 376 million
primal-indigenous: 300 million
African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million
Sikhism: 23 million
Juche: 19 million
Spiritism: 15 million
Judaism: 14 million
Baha’i: 7 million
Jainism: 4.2 million
Shinto: 4 million
Cao Dai: 4 million
Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million
Tenrikyo: 2 million
Neo-Paganism: 1 million
Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand
Rastafarianism: 600 thousand
Scientology: 500 thousand
from:
http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html
Each has its version of creation. If you’re going to teach the controversy, teach them all. Then the ONE version that has actual evidence may stand out like the proverbial sore thumb.
GAry 7
I was pleasantly surprised by non theists ranking third on this list
August 17th, 2009 at 9:41 am
Speaking of TAM-London, I hope you’ll invite Geoff Pullum next year. You should get Mark Liberman to Vegas, as well.
August 17th, 2009 at 9:49 am
Note: remind me to never, ever break a law in Texas.
Yeah, they got the death penalty & they ain’t afraid to use it!
Actually, BA, I wouldn’t say that if I were you, I’m afraid it only encourages ‘em.
ie . “The BA said he won’t break the ridiculous anti-frees peech law or our even more ludicrous interpretation of it – it must be working! Qick, lets pass some more .. ”
Sigh.
—-
PS. THX for keeping us up to date here & here’s hoping the side of all that’s good and rational (ie. the scientific truth & not the woo) triumphs in the end in both these cases!
August 17th, 2009 at 9:50 am
Matt,
I had to teach sex-ed to 7th and 8th grade in my first year of teaching (in a Florida Catholic school). Since I was young and single, somehow I was better qualified than the 8th grade nun. We had all kinds of discussions about AIDS, pregnancy, birth control, abortion. I was informed that I should be truthful, scientific even, answer all questions, and end with “and the Catholic church says…” The kids were great, took everything seriously but respectfully, and I think I managed to get through without blushing purple.
Far different from what some of my colleagues were allowed to say in their classrooms.
August 17th, 2009 at 10:00 am
@ 9 Kuhnigget : Might that explain the pope’s mitre? I always wondered about that funny headgear.
My “theory” (in the loosest sense of the word) is that the real Pope is actually a brain-sucking alien symbiote like the “Dax” in Jadzia / Ezri etc .. Dax from ST: DS9 – only evil! It hides in that mitre then takes over and possesses the human body of the Pontifex Maximus whenever the wearer puts it on! Well it would explain a lot wouldn’t it?
For instance, the symbiote dislikes high levels of particular human hormones thus the sex ban & unlike the Dax symbiote, the anti-dax-Pope-Mitre one insists on sticking itself onto one human gender only thus the whole misogyny thing …
Yeah, I know the Catholics here are gunna love that one.
Its not just them that’s affected though – similar symbiotes also effects the Muslims and Hindu’s and Shikhs and Jews just different symbiote species that fit better in different headwear; eg. the turbans and headtowels and those skullcap thingies ..
Now have I offended everyone here?
Any religion not yet offended please raise your hand & I’ll be right on ya!
August 17th, 2009 at 10:17 am
Y’all may find this worth a look – Chiropracters vs Simon Singh on the Aussie ABC TV news program ‘Lateline’ :
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2008/s2618503.htm
Now on the Creationism one – hang on a minute – they fired *Ms Comer* for violating separation of Church & State when talking about *creationism*!
Owww! My irony gland, it burns, it buuuuurrrrnnns! :-0
But then .. wait a minute, isn’t that kind of an admission that Creationism is about religion NOT science?
In which case, creationism being taught in science class would be, well y’know unconstitutional and violating the very law they’re firing Chris Comers for? Well?
August 17th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Kudos and good wishes to them both.
Duly noted.
Though, in my experience it isn’t half bad. I speeded, got stopped and had to pay from my card. That only sucks twice (after checking the account). While I believe the same procedure here sucks thrice (add paying by snail mail request – inclusive the higher administrative cost).
I mean, how many times do you need to learn the same lesson?
August 17th, 2009 at 10:24 am
@ 12 Matt : gallileo
Sorry to be pedantic but I think you meant Galileo didn’t you?
Galileo Galilei to be precise.
See : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei
PS. If someone had to write out lines over creationism it should be a creationist writing out 1000 times : “I will not preach anti-scientific lying nonsense in science class.”
August 17th, 2009 at 10:27 am
@petrolonfire: I am offended that you did not consider FSMism worth offending! If you don’t say something offensive about my religion right now I will be deeply, deeply offended at this slight!
And if you’re wondering how your hypothesis applies to followers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, think “pirate hats”.
August 17th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Let me correct you about breaking a law in Texas…. Murder is perfectly ok as long as the target turns out to be an illegal alien.
August 17th, 2009 at 10:44 am
@ petrolonfire:
By symbiont I assume you actually mean the parasitic crosierworm Ancylostoma religiosus.
It’s main infectious route is by repeated contact with religious texts or groups at an age before the brain’s adaptive immune system against mind rot has developed. As most hookworms, it’s mechanism of infection involves oral, anal and fecal pathways.
Immediately after infection, the victim may appear stunned and desensitized against higher brain functioning. This is mostly a passing phase however, before the parasite has consumed or paralyzed enough synapses that the brain reorganizes in defense to a semblance of functionality.
This is the acute phase of the sickness, wherein the brain in most victims appear compartmentalized, with some still functional rational areas and some dead religious. Characteristic traits involves behavioral modifications such as cramping hands together, mumbling or mouthing meaningless words to no one, and involuntarily visiting locales of infection regularly. Many patients never recovers from this, and will continue to function at this sub-level the rest of their life.
Treatment can consist of learning some basic skill. By learning how to learn, the patients may eventually recover to full rationality. At this time they will also stop being infectious.
[Oh, and if someone notes that this worm has never been observed in body, merely as syndrome, just remind them that it is a supernatural parasite. No need for pesky tests in religious matters!]
August 17th, 2009 at 10:45 am
Re item 2: Welcome to Texas, where “he needed killing” was once a valid defense at a murder trial. The TEA and supporters of their decision don’t care about her rights, they just wanted to punish her for bringing up something they don’t like.
August 17th, 2009 at 11:04 am
I swear, if the judge denies that appeal, he must be the biggest case of a douche in existance.
@jim
Say, what is that “he needed killing” as a valid defense thing? Does it mean that if you felt like killing someone, that is a valid defense?!
August 17th, 2009 at 11:29 am
23. IBY:
It’s ” He done beat my woman and raped my dog. The scumbag just needed killing, Judge.”
GAry 7
August 17th, 2009 at 11:31 am
Looks like she is fighting the creationists with zest.
August 17th, 2009 at 11:36 am
GeekGoddess,
Sorry to hear about your experience with the so-called Free-Thinkers. Just because you’re a nonbeleiver doesn’t mean you have to be opposed to any knowledge of religion. Athiest writer Christopher Hitchens (author of “God is not Great”) is very Bible-literate. Personally, I’ve read Karen Armstrong’s “History of God” and found it facinating but it didn’t compel me to want to start attending church. Better find some Freer Thinkers.
August 17th, 2009 at 11:59 am
I get speeding tickets whenever I drive through Texas. One time when I was driving through for what I though would be the final time I yelled “Thank [enter deity here] I’m never coming back to this [enter expletive here] again!” It was then that my windshield cracked… and spidered… and yea. Don’t mess with Texas and don’t take the Lord’s name in vein there, regardless the status of his existence. You won’t end up ahead, I assure you.
August 17th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
The forces of evil lurk around every corner, and we must continue to rail and rally against them.
Lock and load, folks!
Metaphorically speaking, of course.
Here is the latest recon:
http://www.amazon.com/Family-Secret-Fundamentalism-Heart-American/dp/0060560053/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1250535066&sr=8-1
August 17th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
29. LSandman24
Yeah, I had that happen once in Texas. Of course, I was breaking the sound barrier.
The last time anyone caught me speeding was in 1989. I’ve either slowed down a lot since then or else my latent telepathic ability has become much sharper.
It used to be in Texas, 84 mph was a safe speed. I expect they’ve hired a lot more highway patrol planes since then.
GAry 7
August 17th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
I used to get speeding tickets here in my younger days. But since then, I figured out the 100% sure fire way to 100% avoid ever getting a speeding ticket:
I quit speeding.
Trust me, when you can drive for 10 hours in the same direction and STILL be in Texas, it is tempting to push that pedal down to the floor on long road trips. But my money is better spent on more important things like food, running shoes and booze than speeding tickets.
August 17th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Texas doesn’t need to teach the Bible in class, Texas needs to teach American History 101.
Q: Why did the Pilgrims cross the ocean?
A: To get as far away from state-sponsored religion as possible.
As a non-christian, I’d ADORE being the person teaching the Bible in Texas. I’d get fired, of course, but it would be fun.
August 17th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
The only way to be sure of not breaking a law in Texas is never to go there. In fact, can we nuke it, just to be safe?
August 17th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
@33
Q: Why did the Pilgrims cross the ocean?
A: To get as far away from state-sponsored religion as possible.
My history course was very early last century but didn’t the pilgrims move so they could set up their OWN state-sponsored religion? I could be wrong, I may have been otherwise intellectually engaged that week (AKA sleeping in class again).
Which Bible would you choose to teach: NIV, King James, Vulgate…?
August 17th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
@I’d rather be fishin’
I don’t recall any information about the Pigrims being intent on setting up their own state religon, as a matter of fact I don’t recall them ever being intent on starting up a state of any sort.
August 17th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
@32
“I quit speeding.”
This is why I love cruise control for long trips. Set it and leave it.
As for Texas.. le sigh. The culture war goes on and on and on. Education is the key!
August 17th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
@Gary Ansorge Nice list, but you can add in the LDS at about 14 million and I think you need to divide the Scientology number by 10 (probably 75% of those in SoCal). The number you gave for them is closer to what they claim, which is widely thought to be inflated by that factor of 10 or so.
August 17th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
I know it’s late in the convo. 11. GeekGoddess:
Until last year I had called myself an atheist. I sought out and found an atheist forum and was poking around when I soon stumbled upon a topic where the author invited members of a religious forum over to have a “discussion” (in atheist’s home turf). When the religious “target” arrived and posted the first post… get this… the one who invited her in the first place ripped a strip off of her for posting in an atheist’s forum. If I remember correctly my mouth hung open as I followed a few posts in. I couldn’t take it, so I posted the person’s original invite with link and all to the same topic. The next day they turfed my membership. The troll wasn’t even a moderator, I checked before posting. It needs to be mentioned that I found the atheist forum by linking from a religious forum. (Don’t ask about the mental Rolodex, pls)
I am skeptical, I am a non-theist but I will never call myself an atheist again.
Anyway, had to share.
August 17th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
“State religion” was a bad choice of words on my part. The Pilgrims were loyal subjects of the Crown, the Mayflower Compact showed this. But they did object to the practices of the Church of England that were similar to the Catholics. That’s what I meant to say.
I did say I was most likely sleeping in class, right?
August 17th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Here’s a law written by the Pilgrims in Massachusetts in about 1650:
“Capital Lawes
If any man after legal conviction shall HAVE OR WORSHIP any other God, but the LORD GOD, he shall be put to death. Exod. 22:20, Deut. 13:6 & 10, Deut. 17:2, 6.”
Source: Maine Legislative Law Library, Augusta, Maine.
August 17th, 2009 at 11:57 pm
@ I’d Rather be fishin’, et al:
I think I’d Rather…was close enough the first time. Whether they intended to found a nation or not is moot; the Mayflower colonists were adamant that theirs would be a society based on religion.
Thankfully, the constitution of the USA is not in any way based upon the Mayflower Compact, nor any of their subsequent laws. The people in this country have always tended to be religious, but the country itself is grounded in a secular constitution.
Or so it was for the first 212 or so years.
August 18th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Seems the TEA is still walking on their mental knuckles.
How about astrology? That’s popular too, and has folks claiming a science grounding. Here is an idea the TEA should love: Let’s put all popular beliefs in science class, fire all science teachers, hire shaman, and kids need not bring anything to class but beads and rattles, and they can have pop inquisitions every week.
Science by popular opinion, indeed! Haven’t the folks on at the TEA realized yet that most of this nation is laughing at them and shaking their heads at such primitive thinking.
And this is a EDUCATION board? What an embarrassment for Texas!
August 18th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
And this is a EDUCATION board?
ahem …
August 18th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Oops! Thanks Doug. I’ve recently been posting about the Texas School Board. Same sort of idiocy. A senior moment, I suppose.
August 18th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
I saw an article stating that Texas is facing a growing shortage of secnodary science teachers that . I cannot imagine why.