The National Center for Science Education is usually involved with combating Evolution Denial in America's classrooms, but now it's turning to help teachers deal with Climate Change Denial as well. And why not? Both proceed from simliar theological and political ideologies. Both depend upon similar forms of pseudo-skepticism. Both are attempts to deny reality in favor of preserving one's favored ideology.
From August to October 2011, the nation's National Earth Science Teachers Association (NESTA) queried Earth- and space-science teachers about their experiences of climate-change education.
Depending on the region, 25-30% of respondents reported that students, parents, administrators or other community members had argued with them that climate change is not happening or that it is not the result of human activity.
Some school boards and state legislators have threatened to require educators to 'teach the controversy' about climate change -- a term coined in relation to evolution that amounts to presenting a scientific theory as one of various possible viewpoints.
Source: Nature, 19 January 2012
Insofar as global warming skepticism partakes of the same tactics and attitudes as creationism, it is legitimate to point out the relationship as part of arguing that one is as nutty and the other. That's because the tactics and arguments used by creationists are not legitimate tactics and arguments for use in science.
The NCSE won't be taking a position on the political question of what should or should not be done, but they will be trying to help schools teach about the existence global warming and climate change, how it occurs, and what it means for humanity in the future.
"I think we can make an important contribution," says [Eugenie] Scott. "If teachers understand that there is a place that they can go to for help, we can use some of the expertise that we've gained over the years dealing with evolution to apply to this related problem." ...
Scott acknowledges that there is more to teaching climate change than explaining the science clearly. "We need to be aware of the fact that people are very emotionally concerned about these issues," she says. If people feel threatened ideologically, politically or economically, "all the science in the world won't convince them". She adds that the NCSE will also help teachers to understand the views of parents and others who oppose the teaching of climate change.
"Knowing the motivations behind a parent's views can help a teacher come up with a solution or response that might assuage that parent's concerns and let their kid remain in the classroom," says Scott.
Comparing the illegitimate tactics of creationists to the tactics and arguments used by global warming deniers reveals just how situational their supposed "standards" are: they reject behaviors which they themselves are happy to use in the right ideological setting. It reveals that the are not genuine supporters of science -- rather like the supposed supporter of free speech who only happens to support it when it comes to speech they like but not speech they don't like.
When a person uses a legitimate argument against the tactics and methods of creationism, but then uses those tactics and methods themselves when it comes to global warming, I will doubt that they truly understand that argument in the first place -- I will suspect that they only used it because it sounded good against something they disagreed with, not because they truly understood what it meant. If they really understood it, then wouldn't ignore it once the ideological setting shifted.
No comments:
Post a Comment