I'm from Missouri

This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.

Name:
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States

My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.

Sunday, June 24, 2007

Darwinist reporter makes mountain out of molehill

NY Times reporter Cornelia "Corny" Dean, who has a bad reputation for flagrant pro-Darwinist bias in her news articles, said in a recent news article,
.
The officers of the National Association of State Boards of Education are reviewing their election procedures, after a nominee’s withdrawal left them with only one candidate for the office of president-elect: a member of the Kansas school board who supported its efforts against the teaching of evolution.

The candidate did not support "efforts against the teaching of evolution" -- the candidate supported efforts to teach both the strengths and weaknesses of evolution.

The review will not be completed before balloting ends next month. In a letter to board members, the officers said they had established a group to recommend changes for their consideration at their annual meeting in October.

How can new rules be retroactively applied to an election?

The Kansas candidate is Kenneth Willard, a Republican who voted with the conservative majority in 2005 when the school board changed the state’s science standards to allow inclusion of intelligent design, an ideological cousin of creationism.

Those science standards did not expressly call for inclusion of intelligent design in the science curriculum.

Voters replaced that majority, but Mr. Willard, an insurance executive from Hutchinson, retained his seat. If he becomes president-elect of the national group, he will take office as its president in January 2009.

When they learned Mr. Willard would be unopposed, some scientists and others urged state boards, each of which has one vote, to write in other candidates. But the association’s bylaws make no provision for write-in votes.

I was told that the proposed write-in candidate, an Ohio Board of Education member, is not eligible to be elected NASBE president because he has no experience serving on NASBE committees.

In a telephone interview, W. Bradley Bryant, the president of the association and parliamentarian of the Georgia state board, said he believed that Robert’s Rules of Order would advise treating a write-in “as a vote that was never cast.”

Sounds good to me.

Mr. Bryant, however, said the board had not made a decision.

In their letter to board members, the officers said they espoused diversity of views and tolerance as core values for their organization and for education. But Mr. Bryant said it would be a mistake to assume that meant that the group took a position on the teaching of creationism or related ideas in science classes.

Mr. Bryant, who would not say where he stood on the issue, said it had never arisen in his years on the national board.

If the NASBE has never or not lately taken a position on the teaching of creationism or related ideas in science classes, why should the NASBE start doing so just because of the election of Willard?

This whole thing would probably not even be in the news if it were not for the fanatic pro-Darwinism of Corny Dean. For the following reasons, I would not be alarmed even if I were a Darwinist:

(1) The NASBE does not have that much power or influence -- the state boards are independent of the NASBE;

(2) The NASBE president probably does not have that much power in the organization;

(3) It's a short-term position, and

(4) As I noted above, the NASBE has never or not lately taken a position on creationism or related ideas and I see no reason why the NASBE should take such a position just because of the election of Willard.
.

Labels:

6 Comments:

Anonymous Voice in the Wilderness said...

> who has a bad reputation for flagrant pro-Darwinist bias in her news articles <

As usual, a statement without proof. All you referred to was one of your own articles which also made a statement without proof.

Sunday, June 24, 2007 7:13:00 PM  
Anonymous JanieBelle said...

Perhaps the NASBE just doesn't want a bonehead who advocates ignorance to represent an association that is specifically set up to promote quality education.

Sounds to me like he's not qualified to hold the position, and they should just dismiss him out of hand.

Having Willard as the president of the NASBE is akin to having David Duke as president of the NAACP, or having George W. Bush as President of a Republic of free people.

oh wait...

I think I just invoked Godwin's Law at the end there. Sorry 'bout that.

Sunday, June 24, 2007 10:15:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

JanieBelle said...

>>>>>> Perhaps the NASBE just doesn't want a bonehead who advocates ignorance to represent an association that is specifically set up to promote quality education. <<<<<<

Current NASBE president Bryant does not seem to be worried by the prospect of Willard becoming president. And the executive director of NASBE told me that she was annoyed by all the publicity that Cornelia Dean was creating.

>>>>>> Sounds to me like he's not qualified to hold the position, and they should just dismiss him out of hand. <<<<<<

No one but no one except you has even suggested that he is not qualified.

Monday, June 25, 2007 1:57:00 AM  
Anonymous Voice in the Wilderness said...

> No one but no one except you has even suggested that he is not qualified. <

Perhaps because it is so obvious?

Monday, June 25, 2007 3:28:00 AM  
Anonymous JanieBelle said...

He supports the Intelligent Design Creationism Hoax, therefore ignorance, therefore poor education.

He represents the antithesis of the very raison d'etre of the NASBE.

Therefore, he is not qualified to be its president.

It's as plain as the nose on your face, Larry. Stating that fact anywhere but here or on UD is about like pointing out that the sky is blue, water is wet, and women have secrets.

Monday, June 25, 2007 9:14:00 AM  
Anonymous Jim Sherwood said...

A reporter, Cornelia Dean:
"I believe in old notions! I mean,
To question old Darwin
Is truly a far-one:
I consider it fully obscene."

Tuesday, June 26, 2007 3:03:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home