Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
This time it's Brunswick County, North Carolina. And the school board is filled with the usual assortment of ignorami:
The Brunswick County school board is looking for a way for creationism to be taught in the classroom side by side with evolution."It's really a disgrace for the state school board to impose evolution on our students without teaching creationism," county school board member Jimmy Hobbs said at Tuesday's meeting. "The law says we can't have Bibles in schools, but we can have evolution, of the atheists."
When asked by a reporter, his fellow board members all said they were in favor of creationism being taught in the classroom.
And the usual ignorant arguments are being used:
The topic came up after county resident Joel Fanti told the board he thought it was unfair for evolution to be taught as fact, saying it should be taught as a theory because there's no tangible proof it's true."I wasn't here 2 million years ago," Fanti said. "If evolution is so slow, why don't we see anything evolving now?"
The board allowed Fanti to speak longer than he was allowed, and at the end of his speech he volunteered to teach creationism and received applause from the audience.
And it looks like they have an equally ignorant attorney:
Board attorney Joseph Causey said it might be possible for the board to add creationism to the curriculum if it doesn't replace the teaching of evolution.
No it isn't. Period. Get over it.
Politics
Comments
Sounds like Mr Fanti was an example of his own statement...... both "slow" and non-evolving.
Posted by: DavidR | September 24, 2008 9:57 AM
At least the school board/taxpayers will have someone to go after to recoup their losses - Counselor Causey looks to be setting himself up for a malpractice suit.
Posted by: BobApril | September 24, 2008 10:02 AM
I don't see what the big deal about teaching creationism is. Do teacher's really not have enough time to add, "Some people choose to ignore the mountains of scientific evidence and instead prefer to imagine a supernatural being of unimaginable power used it's magical abilities to wish everything into existence. This is called creationism. You may learn more about the science behind this in collage when you study denial and mass hysteria in Psych 101." I mean it's like 10 seconds, tops.
Posted by: Abby Normal | September 24, 2008 10:24 AM
School choice would solve this problem.
Posted by: Marc | September 24, 2008 10:34 AM
"The law says we can't have Bibles in schools, but we can have evolution, of the atheists."
Awww, poor little poo poo.
The topic came up after county resident Joel Fanti told the board he thought it was unfair for evolution to be taught as fact, saying it should be taught as a theory because there's no tangible proof it's true.
Awwwww, poor little puppy poo. Boo hoo hoo.
Posted by: 386sx | September 24, 2008 10:34 AM
We have at least two creationists running for the state board here in Kansas (again) too. District 8 and District 10, currently held by moderates who are not running for re-election.
I have a feeling we are going to see yet another re-hash of '99 and '04 in '09. Even with the proactive stance of the various citizens groups, the voters seem to ignore these issues until after Kansas has become a laughing stock (again).
Cheers.
Posted by: FastLane | September 24, 2008 10:54 AM
Someone needs to go in there and tell these people to their faces, in public, that they are delusional, stupid, and insane. Rub their noses in it until it comes out their ears. Yes, they'll get flaming mad, but there's not a damn thing they can do about it because they'll get shot down in court, and their public statements thus far will prove their undoing.
Know what? I think maybe we ought to let some of these backward places just secede from the union. Let them have their little theocracy. Let them fall so far behind in technology that they can't even provide potable tap water and sanitation. After a couple of cholera epidemics, they might just get over their taste for obscurantism and prideful ignorance.
Posted by: g347 | September 24, 2008 11:25 AM
The most effective way to combat this is for some locals to point out that it's going to cost the district a hell of a lot of money.
Posted by: Taz | September 24, 2008 11:37 AM
Fanti wasn't there when his parents were born, either. Does that mean that God poofed all of creation into existence when Fanti gained consciousness?
I don't think that keeping religion out of schools should be done. I think that all religions should be brought into school, paraded around, shown what they are about, what their histories are, and then let the children decide what they think of them. Oh, wait! The parents probably wouldn't want little Janey or Joey exposed to such things as Islam, Confucianism, Jainism, Sikhism, Wicca, etc.
But whatever you do, teach it as "religion" and not as "science."
Posted by: Umlud | September 24, 2008 11:43 AM
Fanti wasn't there when his parents were born, either.
More pertinently, he wasn't around about 2000 years ago.
Posted by: Josh | September 24, 2008 11:48 AM
The state school board has already told them "Not only No, but Hell No!"
http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20080917/ARTICLES/809170272/0/article
Posted by: IasonOuabache | September 24, 2008 11:51 AM
Are these people flipping comatose?
"If evolution is so slow, why don't we see anything evolving now?"
I dunno, maybe because it's...SLOW? Like, you know, YOU?
(And I'm not even going to tackle the factual error in that statement; the self-refutation is enough.)
Posted by: Kristine | September 24, 2008 12:02 PM
We've heard from Fanti; how does Mingo feel about it?
/Gratuitous Serenity reference
Posted by: xebecs | September 24, 2008 12:17 PM
What schools need is a MOMENT OF SCIENCE!
Posted by: Ursula | September 24, 2008 12:39 PM
What schools need is a MOMENT OF SCIENCE!
Posted by: Ursula | September 24, 2008 12:39 PM
In (lukewarm) defense of my fellow shyster ... um ... esteemed member of the bar, it is just possible that he said something correct that was mangled by the reporter, such as "it is possible to teach about creationism in a comparative religion or civics course but not as an alternative to evolution in a science class."
Okay, it's a weak defense but you go with what you got.
Posted by: John Pieret | September 24, 2008 12:45 PM
Here's an unusual piece I just posted which I'd love to see debated by school board members. (Did you ever get my link, Ed?) It demonstrates that while science and faith can be compatible, creationism and ID are not only dishonest, but, of all things, unscriptural!:
http://phoebekate.com/2008/09/14/randomness-creationism-and-intelligent-design
It's called: "The Creationist Chimera of Accidental Evolution Lives On As the Centerpiece of Intelligent Design." Creationists can try to dance all around this argument but cannot escape the central premise.
Posted by: David White | September 24, 2008 12:57 PM
lets all wave our noodly appendages!
Thanks FSM!
Posted by: Kevin | September 24, 2008 1:34 PM
From the article linked to by IasonOuabache
No wonder they have to sneak religion in through science class.Posted by: Taz | September 24, 2008 1:36 PM
When asked by a reporter, his fellow board members all said they were in favor of creationism being taught in the classroom.
Translation: "When asked by a reporter, his fellow board members all said they were in favor of costing their school district hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of dollars in legal fees in a losing cause."
Posted by: QrazyQat | September 24, 2008 2:16 PM
I don't see what the big deal about teaching creationism is. Do teacher's really not have enough time to add, "Some people choose to ignore the mountains of scientific evidence and instead prefer to imagine a supernatural being of unimaginable power used it's magical abilities to wish everything into existence. This is called creationism. You may learn more about the science behind this in collage when you study denial and mass hysteria in Psych 101." I mean it's like 10 seconds, tops.
Ten seconds of joyful honesty and integrity, ten days of parental complaints.
Posted by: dogmeatib | September 24, 2008 5:51 PM
If rocks erode so slowly, why can't I see them getting smaller?
What a moron.
Posted by: Robski | September 24, 2008 6:03 PM
Posted by: Alex, FCD | September 24, 2008 6:19 PM
"The most effective way to combat this is for some locals to point out that it's going to cost the district a hell of a lot of money."
Silly Taz, thinking that for one minute rational thought would stop these creationists in their path. GOD is on their side; they cannot lose. They can point to hundreds of court decisions that agree with them....er...they can make up a few court decisions that can be twisted into supporting their case. Anyway, they can be sure "Liars for Jesus" will be working overtime for them.
Posted by: wrpd | September 24, 2008 8:25 PM
The Brunswick County School Board may listen to things the state education people have said, which have mostly been sensible. However, there are other possibilities, such as the DI showing up to "help" them re-make themselves as completely secular critics of evolutionary science. We need to keep watching what these folks do in future meetings.
Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry | September 24, 2008 10:34 PM
I doubt the DI will touch this one, Wes. I think they learned from the Dover trial that once a school board makes public statements that include the C word, coming in and telling them to stop talking about creationism and start talking about ID doesn't work very well. Even if the school board members lie through their teeth on the witness stand (yes, I'm looking at you, Bill Buckingham and Alan Bonsell), the die is already cast.
Posted by: Ed Brayton | September 24, 2008 11:32 PM
I've often wondered what the content of such creationism classes would be? Wouldn't they have to completely reinterpret evidence they just presented in evolution class?
Hohum...
Posted by: Dan | September 24, 2008 11:53 PM
Oh they have plenty of content:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
Posted by: steve s | September 25, 2008 12:16 AM
I've often wondered what the content of such creationism classes would be? Wouldn't they have to completely reinterpret evidence they just presented in evolution class?
http://www.stateportpilot.com/pages/17%20Creationism%20Brown.html
So yeah if evolution is completely false, then yes they would have to teach the complete exact opposite of evolution in creationism class.
Evolution is "propaganda" and "illusions", but he has no problem if it's taught as a theory though!
Posted by: 386sx | September 25, 2008 12:25 AM
If creationists claim that ID is an *alternative* to evolution, let them teach it in schools under the following conditions:
- It is taught before evolution
- Since it is an alternative theory, let it be taught without ever mentioning evolution (after all, evolution can be taught without mentioning creationism)
Under these conditions, let them explain their "theory" to their hearts content...
Posted by: MartinB | September 25, 2008 2:29 AM
If the DI and its Fellows were capable of learning, then they wouldn't keep repeating false information once they had been publicly corrected. I don't see that happening. It took them several months to realize that they could not control the situation in Dover and make their withdrawal, but I don't think that they would have had a problem continuing with the case if they could have done so on their own terms. It would be utterly rational for the DI to take a pass on any school board that is reported to take up "creationism", but I have no confidence that they see things that way inside the DI. Having talked with Casey Luskin about legal issues and IDC and seeing his stuff since Dover, I believe they think that they can still pull the old switcheroo and get away with it. I think that they are most interested in finding markets for their "Explore Evolution" textbook. We know that in Darby and in Dover what got the DI's attention was that initial report of people in power over a school district talking about being inclined toward creationism. I think the Brunswick County case may make a good test of whether they have taken the lesson, but we should still be paying attention to find out whether they have or not.
Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry | September 25, 2008 8:35 AM
@steve s
Thanks for the list.
Wow! It's not just a rewriting of evolutionary evidence, it's a rewriting of what science is, and history too.
@386sx
It's striking that intellectual consistency is not part of his modus operandi.
Posted by: Dan | September 25, 2008 9:02 AM
@MartinB
How about teaching many other creation stories? There are some really evocative ones. It would show how imaginative people can be.
At the end of the list steve s linked to, there are a (very) few lines to consider other creation stories. It's interesting that the reasons they use to refute the Quaran are the same as I would use to refute the Bible.
Posted by: Dan | September 25, 2008 9:09 AM
Doonesbury did a classic series where a character had some illness which had evolved forms. The creationist client has a dilemma! The school board should really catch something soon. I found a link to the cartoon: http://stupidevilbastard.com/index/seb/comments/doonesbury_takes_on_creationism/
Posted by: Mike | September 25, 2008 1:05 PM
If the DI and its Fellows were capable of learning, then they wouldn't keep repeating false information once they had been publicly corrected.
I dunno. I don't think they actually need to learn. They're a frighteningly effective threat to American education as they are. Legal issues and whether or not this or that school board provides the Supreme Court case they're dreaming of aside, they (and their ilk) continue to repeat false information exactly to the grass roots base that sops it up. And that base continues to sop and spread the disease like a plague.
The creationist/ID camp gets publicly corrected on stuff all the time, in blogs, in newspaper letters and editorials, in tv interviews, in newspaper articles, and still we have to deal with Jo-Bob saying things like:
it's unfair for evolution to be taught as fact; it should be taught as a theory because there's no tangible proof it's true.
you haven't proved evolution. why not give equal treatment to both sides?
teach the controversy!
what about these horrible gaps in the theory? there are gaps you could drive a Mack truck through.
and so on.
I don't think there is much impetus for them to do other than repeat lies. It continues to work (if we measure success by their level of general community support).
Posted by: Josh | September 25, 2008 1:38 PM