I'd settle for less

It's all well and good for the scientific sort among us to rant and rail against the infringement of superstition into science class.

There are few scientific theories more firmly supported by observations than these: Biological evolution has occurred and new species have arisen over time, life on Earth originated more than a billion years ago, and most stars are at least several billion years old. ...To deny children exposure to the evidence in support of biological and cosmological evolution is akin to allowing them to believe that atoms do not exist or that the Sun goes around the Earth.


Alas, "exposure" hardly makes a dent in anyone's mind, never mind a child forced to endure whatever comes her way in a curriculum designed by committees of adults living in far away cities, many of whom could not pass a sophomore's biology test given this past Friday.




If I were the Education Czar, I'd focus on helping kids get a grasp on what a "billion" means before exposing them to anything more daunting than making observations at the edge of a pond.

I'm make sure that they even realize that hundreds of critters can be found in a few drops of water from that same pond.

Instead, I am pounding macromolecules into the skulls of 15 year old children a year before they take high school chemistry.

(A science teacher bleating "just be able to recognize the structure..." is just plain pitiful.)


(By the way, gentle reader--just how long does it take for a billion seconds to pass?)

Blog Archive