I hear you.

Allow me to quote another “good point” from the same page:

“And what is served by the denigrating rhetoric typically used to brand astrologers frauds and charlatans? Surely it would be more effective to adopt a more conversational approach rather than labeling astrologers and their customers irrational, superstitious dupes”.

Educating people, I’m all for it. Ostracizing people, total no go. For every action, there’s an equal opposite reaction. Physics (and good ol’ psychology) 101. When push comes to shove…where does it end?

@John Matthews (#12): Honestly, I’m a little surprised the creationists haven’t embraced the “ancient astronauts” to add to “Intelligent Design” in order to appear to avoid accusations of bringing religion into classrooms… knowing, of course, that the Chariots of the Gods? aspect would be ignored, with the focus on the “creator”.

“…Given the characterization of astrologers and believers in astrology as simple-minded, uneducated, irrational dupes, what threat do these people pose to astronomers and scientists?…”

If we do assume that believers are dupes (and they most definitely are not in most cases) why wouldn’t we want them to be better informed?

What Exactly is Accomplished by Asserting “Astrology is Rubbish”?

http://www.pachs.net/blogs/comments/what_is_accomplished_by_asserting_astrology_is_rubbish/

Yeah, I’m not happy either!

I’ll start a religion with the appropriate doctrine. Every question on every exam and test can then be answered by “This action is impossible by my religious beliefs.”

Since you can’t be penalised for “subscribing to a particular position” then it’s full marks for everyone!

The only way to fail is to try to do it honestly and make a mistake.

Kern’s House Bill 1551, called the Scientific Education and Academic Freedom Act, says students cannot be penalized for subscribing “to a particular position on scientific theories.

So if I believe that the Universe was created when Satan killed God, I can’t be punished? *GASP!* Do Sen. Josh Brecheen and Rep. Sally Kern endorse Satanism?

There was a cartoon several years ago that poked fun of just this sort of thing. Too bad I can’t find the original page, but here’s a web page with it on it:

http://members.cox.net/johnparadox/horsey.jpg

Now, to be honest, I haven’t read the bill in question yet. However, if it’s anything like previous “scientific freedom” bills, I would have to agree with Phil on this one. And I wonder if it protects the teacher’s “freedom” to teach their particular “position on scientific theories”? Perhaps the link between global warming and the decline in the number of pirates?

This is obviously going too far. And that kind of thinking is only contributing to this pathetic culture war that crossed the line decades ago. It will only widen the divide, not bridge it. You cannot grade a student because of his/her personal beliefs, no matter how much you disagree with them. You only grade their answers and work.

So if I believe that the Universe was created when Satan killed God, I can’t be punished? *GASP!* Do Sen. Josh Brecheen and Rep. Sally Kern endorse Satanism?

The point regarding interest rates on English tuition fees applies to current loans, but not to the new loans to be introduced from next year, which will charge up to 3% above inflation.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11483638

Unfortunately, in the US you can do that with a science degree too, with GOP Congresses holding the pursestrings. Reagan’s “why should we subsidize intellectual curiousity?” is religion for them.
It feels almost like such measures are pure defensiveness against those Reality-Based folks telling them different things about the world than their pastor and making them feel dumb.

“it’s a method of self-correcting investigation that compiles evidence describing how the Universe and things in it behave, makes predictions based on that evidence, abandons bad ideas when they don’t pan out, and seeks further evidence for those that do.”

Why can’t we just apply this simple definition to everything we do? Correct when things go awry, continue to always investigate, learn, uncover more knowledge … it just makes so much sense.

Sadly, humans haven’t always shown that they do things that make sense.

Thank you Phil for being one of the few who do!!

@amphiox
What’s funny is I think you might find many believers on a test about the bible giving answers that are either not in the book or are wild interpretations.

What they do have is tuition fees. A university can charge an amount upto a maximum of £9000 per student per year for any of its courses, it is quite at liberty to charge nothing at all should it wish.

To pay the tuition fees most students take out a loan from the student loans company (a government owned finance company), interest is charged on the loan at the rate of economic inflation so that in real terms it is interest free. You do not have to start paying back that loan until you are earning £15,000 per year, if you don’t earn that much you don’t pay..

I should also point out that for the last decade the policy of our goverment has been to raise university attendence from less than 10% of school leavers to 50%+, a policy which is now getting remarkably close to being fullfilled. Whether this is a good thing or not is up for debate but you certainly can’t use the situation in England to support your idea tha “elite” are trying to dumb down the population and stop them going to university.

[...]“Freedom” is the magic word in the American mind. If you’re a lobbyist and you can attach your interests to “freedom” or “liberty” in some way, you’re always going to have support. People will line up to vote against their own best interest if you can convince them that they’ll be more free… somehow.

See? You’re right!