Blogs / Bad Astronomy

Perhaps you’ve heard all the uproar about President Obama’s speech today. A group of folks is very concerned about a speech of his today, because he’s talking to schoolkids. And hey, didn’t Hitler talk to kids…?

That’s about as good as their logic gets. I wish I were kidding. Read the transcript of Obama’s speech, and see if you can find the alarming parts where he calls for the formation of Brown Shirts, or the extermination of a group of humans, or the invasion of Poland. I must have missed it, instead seeing things like where he says,

Now I’ve given a lot of speeches about education. And I’ve talked a lot about responsibility.

I’ve talked about your teachers’ responsibility for inspiring you, and pushing you to learn.

I’ve talked about your parents’ responsibility for making sure you stay on track, and get your homework done, and don’t spend every waking hour in front of the TV or with that Xbox.

I’ve talked a lot about your government’s responsibility for setting high standards, supporting teachers and principals, and turning around schools that aren’t working where students aren’t getting the opportunities they deserve.

But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world – and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.

And that’s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.

Call the Allies! Load the B-29s!

Seriously, read this whole speech. It’s inspiring, wonderful, and designed to inspire kids to stay in school, accept the responsibility of the education, learn things, and then go and and do good for the world.

Of course, there is a lunatic fringe in this country who will go ballistic about Obama no matter what he does; these are the ones saying the speech is indoctrinating children into accepting his socialist health care plan that will mutilate puppies and convert our elderly into Soylent Green. These people may be rabid racists, or simply mentally unbalanced, but we know for a rock solid fact that these people are utterly, completely wrong. Whatever you want to call them, it’s clear they are so far from the norm of the American people that they can’t even see the horizon from where they are. Simply reading the speech transcript shows that simply and clearly. But it’s also a fact that this subset of the population will always be with us.

But you know what? That doesn’t mean we have to give them a voice in the mainstream press. They have a right to their speech, but that doesn’t obligate anyone to pay attention to them, especially on the platform of national TV. I’m looking you right in the eye, Fox News. Not only do you give these people — factually wrong and provably so — a voice, you reiterate their comments and use your own voice to back them up.

This sort of thing mainstreams a view that is charitably called crazy. Again, I urge you to read Obama’s actual speech. It’s awesome, and something every kid should see and hear.

Yet because "news" media like Fox have aired so much invective from the wildly fringe reality-polluting community, even mainstream folks are arguing that Obama’s speech is evil. I saw a news report yesterday about an elementary school in North Carolina where they didn’t air the speech because so many parents complained. I can’t help but wonder what they would would have said if George Bush had made this same speech. Of course, Bush never would have said something like:

You’ll need the knowledge and problem-solving skills you learn in science and math to cure diseases like cancer and AIDS, and to develop new energy technologies and protect our environment. You’ll need the insights and critical thinking skills you gain in history and social studies to fight poverty and homelessness, crime and discrimination, and make our nation more fair and more free. You’ll need the creativity and ingenuity you develop in all your classes to build new companies that will create new jobs and boost our economy.

And maybe if he had said those words, the people I’m talking about would’ve complained anyway. Critical thinking skills? Ha!

If I sound angry, then, yeah, I am. I’m tired of ignorance held up as inspiration, where vicious anti-intellectualism is considered a positive trait, and where uninformed opinion is displayed as fact.

It’s killing any real debate in this country, where the system of government depends utterly on a well-informed public. When rampant idiocy is presented as reasonable discourse without any rebuttal, then we all suffer.

What we need are government officials not afraid to talk like Barney Frank did to such a voice of lunacy. To reiterate, crackpots have a right to air their diseased notions, just as we have the right to tear those ideas to shred when they do. More than that, the news media have a responsibility to do so.

Let me leave you with this revolutionary and dangerous notion from President Obama:

Don’t be afraid to ask questions. Don’t be afraid to ask for help when you need it. I do that every day. Asking for help isn’t a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of strength. It shows you have the courage to admit when you don’t know something, and to learn something new. So find an adult you trust – a parent, grandparent or teacher; a coach or counselor – and ask them to help you stay on track to meet your goals.

I would add that we all need to not be afraid to speak out against nonsense and to call out willful ignorance when we see it.

Never give up. Never back down against evil. Never tire, because this struggle will be eternal.

Remember:

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.

I sometimes feel that I have to apologize on behalf of America to the rest of the planet. What must they think of someone like Anna Falling, who is running for Mayor of Tulsa, Oklahoma on the platform that there’s not enough religion in government?

“Some may ask why this issue during a Mayoral campaign? And I say why not?” said candidate Anna Falling.

Pssst! Someone tell her the answer to "Why not?" is: "The Constitution".

I think that if you run for any publicly elected office, the only prereq is that you have to read the Constitution and answer a quiz with ten True or False questions on it. Sample questions:

1) Is it OK for the government to endorse only Christianity?

2) Would it be legal to, say, put up a stone monument to The Ten Commandments as the only religious icon in a courthouse?

3) Where exactly in the Constitution does it say this country was founded on Christian principles?

etc.

I love this part of her website on, "Why Anna?":

By now you have likely seen that I have stepped out to run to become Tulsa’s next Mayor. We believe that we are the candidate to beat for campaign experience and issue strength.

Psssst (again): referring to yourself in the royal first person plural may not instill confidence in the voters. Unless you’re running for 19th century Queen of England. Then you’ve got a shot.

Tip o’ the crown to Mandy Qualls for alerting me to this.

What is the purpose of punishment?

Seriously, I’m curious. I suppose it breaks down into two broad categories: it teaches the person punished not to transgress laws, and it is used as an example to others not to do the same. Punishment also serves other purposes, such as satisfying people’s need for retribution and justice.

That’s all well and good in theory, but things get a little fuzzy when applied in practice.

UK writer Jon Ronson presents the case of Gary McKinnon. As a young man, McKinnon was a UFO nut. Suspecting that the U.S. government was hiding secrets of alien technology, he hacked into the computers of NASA, the Pentagon, and more. His intent was probably not malicious, and he claims any damage he might have done was accidental. Moreover, McKinnon has Asperger’s syndrome, and can become obsessive over certain things, such as compulsive internet use.

So, what do we do with Mr. McKinnon? He did in fact hack into those systems, and knew what he did was highly illegal. However, he claims his intent was not malicious, and the evidence appears to back that up to large extent. Do we punish him, and how to do so?

Given treatment and adequate supervision, he probably won’t repeat his actions, so punishment won’t have any real efficacy on him specifically. Punishment for him might sway other hackers from doing any harm — "make an example of him", as the saying goes — but I suspect that hackers know well what awaits them if caught. However, if Mr. McKinnon is not punished, it may assuage the fears of hackers, tacitly encouraging them to continue (and allowing them to claim later they were not trying to be malicious, using McKinnon as a precedent).

It’s a tough call, in my opinion.

Still, I have to wonder about how the U.S. is tackling this. McKinnon is a UK citizen, and under the new laws pushed through in the aftermath of 9/11, the U.S. can demand extradition for McKinnon, forcing him to be tried in the U.S. under our laws. The U.S. has done exactly this, and the UK has acquiesced. As things stand now, McKinnon will be forcibly relocated to the U.S. to stand trial for what the government calls "the biggest US military hack of all time".

The thing is, if convicted McKinnon will go to jail. If prison were just incarceration, then I might be swayed that this is reasonable and fair retribution. But we all know that prison is far, far more than that. A lot of pretty nasty stuff will await McKinnon if (realistically, given the political climate, when) he goes to jail. For anyone, that sort of fate is terrifying. For someone with Asperger’s, it’s overwhelming. He has apparently been considering suicide.

To me, given what I know, this situation is extremely difficult to judge. In many and perhaps most cases our criminal justice system is fair if somewhat overtaxed. But there are too many heartbreaking cases like McKinnon’s, where the black-and-white print of laws and procedures seems to lack the subtlety of real life. As a scientist, I know that the Universe rarely behaves in a plain and simple matter; there are always underlying effects, multiple causes, and complicated give-and-take that muddy most people’s clean version of reality. And humans can be far more complicated than the Universe at large.

I think we may have such a case here. Punishment must be meted out, but what should that punishment be? I fear the shockwave from the tip of our legal lash will transfer far too large a burden compared to what is warranted.

So Texas Governor Rick Perry withdrew his nomination of decided not to nominate the far-right ultra-religious Planter’s sampler Cynthia Dunbar for head of the state Board of Education, but, as predicted, he has instead nominated another creationist: Gail Lowe.

She is yet another in a long series of ill-qualified religious ideologues on the Texas BoE: she wants to insert "strengths and weaknesses" into the curriculum (the weaknesses to which they refer don’t really exist; they really mean false creationist attacks on evolution), she wants to make classes more political, she wants to remove other solid scientific reasoning from science classes.

I find it interesting indeed that you find none of this when you go to her website. Instead you find vague claims about her stances which give almost no real information. Of course, her record is pretty clear.

So the head of the BoE is once again someone with antiscience beliefs. I wonder if they’ll appoint Jenny McCarthy as head of their Department of Health?

And so, as usual…

So Texas had its brief shining moment of light when the state Senate rejected creationist goofball Don McLeroy’s bid to once again head up the Board of Education. McLeroy was the guy who famously said, "Someone has to stand up to experts!" when talking about the science advisors contacted by the BoE to advise them on, y’know, science.

And even in that very post I said that this win was at best temporary, since the same Governor Rick Perry who picked McLeroy in the first place would pick his replacement.

And guess what? I hate being right all the time. It looks like Perry may pick über-far right religious zealot Cynthia Dunbar to replace McLeroy.

Dunbar actively and opens hates the public school system (check that link in the last paragraph for details). Dunbar campaigns to tear down the First Amendment of the Constitution. Dunbar is a ball of crazy even by Texas politics standards.

Right now, she has not yet been nominated by Governor Perry. Given his own leanings, even if he doesn’t tap Dunbar I’m sure he’ll find some other young-Earth creationist to try to teach the children of Texas fantasy instead of science.

To the good folks of the Lone Star State: make your voices heard. Contact Perry’s office and let him know you’d rather have someone grounded in reality in charge of the education of your children. Otherwise — and honestly, I’d love to never have to use this graphic again, but I know I will –

Ian O’Neill at Astroengine posted this stunning bit of video featuring Arizona State Senator Sylvia Allen.

It’s not that she says the Earth is 6000 years old — twice, just to make sure — that floors me. It’s the casual way she said it, as if she said "I had a cup of coffee today." From her manner, it’s clear that not only does she believe this complete and utter nonsense, but this is a simple fact woven into her mind just like the Sun is bright or chocolate is tasty.

To her, the Earth being 6000 years old just is.

Now, to be fair, this video is without context, and so we can’t be absolutely sure she’s a creationist. But it sure as heck sounds that way, and given her voting record it fits right in.

The irony, of course — and there’s always irony when creationism is involved — is that she’s talking about uranium mining, and it’s through the radioactive decay of uranium that we know the Earth is billions of years old. And she also praises technological achievements!

AIIIIiiiiieeee!

So while you soak that up I leave you, of course, with this: