Abject stupidity has poked its empty but familiar head above the horizon once again, this time in Los Alamitos, home of the world's most notorious
watermelon patch.
According to
Nayeli Pagaza—in a post in today’s
Los Alamitos Patch (
School Board Orders Global Warming Class to Include Conservative Views)—
Before Los Alamitos High School science teachers can tackle topics such as global warming, they will have to demonstrate to the school board that the course is politically balanced.
A new environmental science course prompted the Los Alamitos Unified School District on Tuesday to rewrite its policy for teaching controversial subject matter. Concerned that "liberal" faculty members could skew lessons on global warming, the board of education unanimously voted to make teachers give an annual presentation on how they're teaching the class.
“I believe my role in the board is to represent the conservative voice of the community and I’m not a big fan of global warming,” said board member Jeffrey Barke, who led the effort. “The teachers wanted [the class], and we want a review of how they are teaching it.”
|
Barke |
Pagaza notes that “there is a consensus among scientists … that global climate change exists.”
Among the merely political, however, there is controversy. And that, according to the Los Alamitos Unified School District Board, means that instruction must adjust:
“Most teachers are left to center, and if we leave it to teachers to impose their liberal views, then it would make for an unbalanced lesson,” Barke said. “Some people believe that global warming is a crock of crap, and others are zealots.”
. . .
“We define a topic to be controversial if it has more than one widely held view,” said Assistant Superintendent Sherry Kropp, who will take the district's helm when Superintendent Gregory Franklin steps down at the end of the school year. “There are many issues regarding the environment that have become politicized these days and we want kids to be exposed to all sides.”
. . .
“If the textbook talks about the evil adventures of humanity, we want teachers to describe an opposing view,” Barke said. “Teachers and textbooks are biased.”
|
Kropp |
OK, let me see if I understand. Even if the reality of global climate change is uncontroversial among
experts (viz., relevant scientists), if it happens to be controversial among
citizens, then instruction must reflect that by “giving both sides.”
Right. Nearly half of the American public—probably more than half in benighted Los Alamitos—believes in astrology, which is based on the notion that the positions of celestial bodies influence human affairs. The experts re such bodies, of course, deny this notion or, anyway, regard it as utterly pseudoscientific.
But so what. There’s disagreement here. Among citizens. Who are experts, anyway?
So, according to Los Al logic, instructors who teach the usual astronomical factoids need to pause and explain the astrological POV: "Many Orange Countians, on the other hand, believe that the positions of the heavenly bodies determines our fate. OK?"
Good f*cking grief.
See also:
Saddleback College President Tod Burnett to Impose Prayer on Campus? (
Mission Viejo Patch)