Education Against Climate Change and Evolution: Skepticism with the Help of Creationists

A blow to climate change progress: a Kentucky bill was introduced last week that would have teachers discuss "the advantages and disadvantages of scientific theories," which include "evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning" (New York Times, 2010). Other states such as Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, and South Dakota have already initiated similar educational goals. The South Dakota resolution was passed last week; it called for the "balanced teaching of global warming in public schools." The resolution elaborated, "Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, but rather a highly beneficial ingredient for plant life." By linking the skepticism of climate change with the skepticism of evolution theory, church groups are finding a potent formula to advance their religion in schools.

Evolution theory is based on the fact that organisms progressively advance their biology, keeping components such as their wings or antlers if they help the organism survive. Over many generations, the organism is to improve its design to increase survivability. The theory goes against some church teachings that God created man in the likeness of himself (called Creationism), which would rule out any need for humans to progress in each generation as in evolution theory. Church groups advocate for creationism, a dissenting view of the origins of man, to be taught in schools; however, this would violate the US 1st Amendment's separation of religion and state clause. To make the debate more scientific their strategy has turned to advocating for the teaching of dissenting views of science be it climate change or evolution. Unfortunately on both accounts, the mainstream scientific consensus is that there is no other credible scientific alternatives to: climate change being real or evolution theory being sound.

Tim Moore, the state representative who introduced the Kentucky bill ignores the mainstream scientific data, despite what he saw as a distortion of scientific knowledge compelling him to forward the bill. "Our kids are being presented theories as though they are facts... And with global warming especially there has been a politically correct viewpoint among educational elites that is very different from sound science." Like any skeptic, he puts forth opinion without consideration for the actual data.

And what about consideration for the kids? It is they who are going to have to pick up the pieces as this generation wars on whether climate change exists. The scientific consensus is that climate change is real; if parents want to misinform their kids, they do not need institutional support from states' educational systems. Confusing the generation that will most need to work on climate change solutions will have grave consequences. For example, would teaching our future scientists contradicting theories diminish their quality as future scientists? Institutions such as education are so permanent their effects should not be ignored because it is hard to reverse them; one effect, climate change may be irreversible.

Photo Credit: PhOtOnQuAnTiQuE