Letter writing campaign to Kansas Board of Education members

Another Lloydletta reader commented on the letter to the Kansas Board of Education I published:

While I agree with the letter-writer's anger, I'm afraid it will accomplish nothing. If I was a board member, I would have stopped reading after the first sentence.

Rule #1 of letter writing campaigns: Be respectful to the people to whom you are writing.

That letter got filed in the circular file. I guarantee it. I hope your publishing it is not to set an example of how people should frame their letters.

This reader makes a good point. Here are the addresses for the Kansas Board of Education members. Send them your comments:

martinkathy@yahoo.com, JWaugh1052@aol.com, MSGamble@swbell.net, krw@ourtownusa.net, jwmsbacon@aol.com, carolrupe@hotmail.com, bill.wagnon@washburn.edu, vanmeter@terraworld.net, conniemorris2010@yahoo.com, sabrams@hit.net

Kathy Martin (martinkathy@yahoo.com) is the biggest wingnut of them them all.

North Dallas Thirty quotes from some coverage:

Some of the changes Harris and others are proposing are consistent with intelligent design, but Harris said intelligent design is a "new and maturing science" and it would be inappropriate to mandate teaching it. Instead, he said, students should learn evidence against the theory of evolution, particularly when it comes to species evolving into new species.

This is nonsense. Citing a supernatural "designer" to as a "theory" to explain an empirical observation is not scientific. This type of "theory" can't be tested. Supernatural beings by definition do not have to obey natural laws. It's impossible to make predictions that can be tested based on "intelligent design". Ken Miller says it very well:

The recommendations of the eight dissenting members of the Standards Writing Committee are intended to undermine the teaching of evolution and to support the introduction of non-scientific explanations of origins into the science classroom. The radical redefinition of science in these recommendations would bring supernatural explanations into the classroom under the guise of science, and would distort the meaning of science itself. They would serve only to confuse students, demoralize teachers, and to bring needless religious conflicts into the teaching of science in Kansas.

Ken Miller's quote came from a collection of reviews of the standards posted on PZ Myer's wonderful blog: Pharyngula.