New at Rosetta Stones: Stories from Survivors of Creationist “Science” Education

I’m republishing our Adventures in Christianist Earth Science Education series over at Rosetta Stones. The posts are essentially the same, but with fewer in-jokes (like the word “Christianist”), and aimed toward an audience whose computers (or brains) have naughty-word filters. There will be places where I’ll add direct invitations to creationist students to really think about what they’re learning. I’m also letting through some creationist comments I’m getting, in case you want to go have fun with their myths, misconceptions, and outright ignorance about science. I’ve already had a dude making the “we only use 10% of our brains” claim – it’s hilarious. I’m still contemplating how much creationist schlock I’ll allow to clog up my comments section, but I actually haven’t gotten much. I’m impressed.

Image shows a priest at left saying, "No question!! God did it!! God wills it!!" and a professor at left holding chalk in front of a chalkboard and saying, "Do you have any questions?" Caption says, "Religion vs. Science. Faith does not give you the answers; it just stops you asking the questions."

And I’ve had a ton of comments from people who fully support robust science education. And then there are my favorites: comments from people who survived that creationist crap and managed to discover what science really is later on. Some of them broke my heart. But all of them give me a lot of hope. At least some of these kids make it out.

Please go read their stories, and if you have a story of your own, I’d absolutely love for you to share it either here or there. All my respect and support to you!

Image shows the Eleventh Doctor, pointing at someone off-camera. Caption says, "Who's awesome? You're awesome!"

New at Rosetta Stones: Stories from Survivors of Creationist “Science” Education

5 thoughts on “New at Rosetta Stones: Stories from Survivors of Creationist “Science” Education

  1. 1

    I’m glad you did this – it will make these posts available to a larger audience, which is good. The anti-science bias of the religious right needs to be made clear to as many as possible, although at Scientific American you are still largely preaching to the choir. The comments of the people raised on this tripe make clear why this matters.

    Keep up the good work.

  2. 3

    Dana, is there a link to RS? if there is, i don’t see it. (Of course, I do have a bad case of “it’s right in front of you. if it was a snake, it would’ve bit you” syndrome.)

Comments are closed.