I've kinda been hanging back and watching the reactions in the news and blogs to the most recent days of the John Freshwater hearing. Of the news coverage, the articles in the Mount Vernon News by Pamela Schehl provide the most detailed information and are available here and here, although the Columbus Dispatch articles by Dean Narciso, here and here, are also quite informative. Most importantly, now that the MVSB's lawyer is questioning Freshwater directly, it is becoming increasingly clear that Freshwater's testimony has major inconsistencies and that he is being very evasive about answering the questions.
Comments to the articles reflect that an increasing number of people have determined that Freshwater's pants are on fire. Comments for previous articles consisted of little more than proponents and opponents hurling insults at each other, but, with these latest articles, which quote the actual testimony, a larger number of self-identified Christians are reaching the conclusion that A) Freshwater is guilty, and B) that he is not a good Christian either. It's refreshing to see comments from Xians who, at least in this case, say that lying for god is as immoral as other lies.
A lot of blogs with an anti-creationist leaning have recently discovered the hearing and are reporting on it, although in some cases, they seem to be relying on 1 1/2 year old information. What the heck. At least they got here in time catch the finale.
The blogs I was trying to watch most closely are the ones that support Freshwater. Some of these were actually set up specifically to follow the hearing and most indicate support of teaching creationism in school as well as most of the other conservative Xian crackpottery. I was anxious to see how the blogs would deal with Freshwater's testimony a few weeks ago when he denied ever teaching creationism in his science classes and insisted that he was opposed to the teaching of creationism. The bloggers dealt with it as they would most scientific evidence; they ignored it.
The pro-Freshwater bloggers (does that make me a pro-saltwater blogger?) prefer to quote Freshwater's testimony where he insists he never did anything wrong and to promote the idea that he was the innocent victim of an evil conspiracy. I thought the description on the header of agoodchoice.blogspot.com pretty well summarized the viewpoint of a lot of these supporters; " America is in the midst of a raging cultural and spiritual war. Forces of Good, Light, Conservatism and a Judeo-Christian Worldview daily battle the forces of Evil, Darkness, Socialism and False Religions and Philosophies. A Good Choice is on the frontlines exposing evil across America’s political and social spectrum." Um, OK, that sure sounds like a fair and balanced perspective to me. Sign me up in the evil column, please.
In general, it would seem that more and more people are reaching the conclusion that the Mount Vernon School Board had valid reasons for firing John Freshwater and that it was always his plan to lie his ass off if it was necessary in order to win. I can't help wondering what will happen as more Mount Vernon residents realise that Freshwater knew he was guilty of at least some of the reasons for his firing and yet chose to insist on a hearing that has cost the taxpayers half-a-million dollars so far, just so he could gamble that he could outsmart the school board. At least his closed-minded agree-with-me-or-die friends will stand by him.
Showing posts with label John Freshwater. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Freshwater. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Friday, August 28, 2009
A Little More from Mount Vernon Schools
In further news from Mount Vernon School District, they have settled a federal law suit with a student whose family sued because the student was being taught religion in science class in violation of his constitutional rights. The school board's insurance co. agreed to pay $55oo to the the family and $1 each to 2 other individuals plus paying $115,500 of the plaintiffs' legal fees. A similar suit is still pending against John Freshwater.
An article from the Cleveland Plain Dealer mentions that the suit against the school was was brought by the family of the boy who said he was burned by Freshwater. At the end of the article, it is pointed out that 12 fellow teachers have testified on Freshwater's behalf. The article doesn't mention that most of those teachers are also members of the church Freshwater attends or that some of them had also been promoting their religion at school.
What angered me most in the Plain Dealer article was the mention that the plaintiff family has moved to another town and school district do to the backlash against them in Mount Vernon. Those doing the backlashing would, of course, be the loving, forgiving, good, evangelical Xians of the area who apparently feel that as long as their dogma is being taught, that trumps contractual agreements, state and federal laws, and any truth that might indicate Freshwater's guilt. Speaking of that kind of Xian, the photo in the Plain Dealer article shows Freshwater standing next to god's playground bully; Dave Daubenmire of Pass the Salt Min.
An article from the Cleveland Plain Dealer mentions that the suit against the school was was brought by the family of the boy who said he was burned by Freshwater. At the end of the article, it is pointed out that 12 fellow teachers have testified on Freshwater's behalf. The article doesn't mention that most of those teachers are also members of the church Freshwater attends or that some of them had also been promoting their religion at school.
What angered me most in the Plain Dealer article was the mention that the plaintiff family has moved to another town and school district do to the backlash against them in Mount Vernon. Those doing the backlashing would, of course, be the loving, forgiving, good, evangelical Xians of the area who apparently feel that as long as their dogma is being taught, that trumps contractual agreements, state and federal laws, and any truth that might indicate Freshwater's guilt. Speaking of that kind of Xian, the photo in the Plain Dealer article shows Freshwater standing next to god's playground bully; Dave Daubenmire of Pass the Salt Min.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Instruct those MV Instructors
Here's a bit of good news; according to the Mount Vernon (OH) News, all Mount Vernon School District staff will be instructed in what is legally acceptable concerning religion in school. If you've read my blog, or even better, The Panda's Thumb, then you know about the ongoing hearing related to the firing of fundamentalist Xian science teacher, John Freshwater who is accused (among other things)of teaching creationism to his 8th grade science students. Witness testimony in the hearing indicates that several teachers have engaged in evangelizing in the classroom and said they thought it was a good idea. This is probably partly a result of so many of the teachers in the school district having graduated from Mount Vernon Nazarene Univ. which seems to advocate evangelizing in the public schools.
Unlike Freshwater who was reportedly ordered to stop teaching creationism but instead just got more sneaky about it, most other teachers have said they were never told that they couldn't preach fundy dogma in their classes. This new instruction should prevent the all-week-long-Sunday-school-teachers from using ignorance of the rules as a defense. I'm not naive enough to believe this will completely stop teachers from trying to save all those captive heathens, but after going through a hugely expensive, drawn out, circus of a hearing, I doubt the School Board will be very forgiving of transgressions.
Unlike Freshwater who was reportedly ordered to stop teaching creationism but instead just got more sneaky about it, most other teachers have said they were never told that they couldn't preach fundy dogma in their classes. This new instruction should prevent the all-week-long-Sunday-school-teachers from using ignorance of the rules as a defense. I'm not naive enough to believe this will completely stop teachers from trying to save all those captive heathens, but after going through a hugely expensive, drawn out, circus of a hearing, I doubt the School Board will be very forgiving of transgressions.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
A Creationist By Another Name
The comments to an article on the Freshwater lawsuit included a post by someone who, while not supporting Freshwater and identifying himself (I suspect it was a him) as an atheist, insisted that scientific thought was ideological dogma and that scientists practiced "Copernicanism". I left a comment based on my knowledge of the region and the articles I have read, then addressed the above person's comment, saying something defending scientific method and suggesting that I didn't get the point he was trying to make.
The person responded that I didn't get it because I was blinded by my "ideological righteousness" and questioned whether peer reviewed papers would get published if they were reviewed by right-wing fundamentalists instead of left-wing liberals. Then he said I'd never learn and left a link to a website. This person appeared to have issues, but I checked out the link anyway.
The link was to an article by Richard Ryals about the "anthropic principle". Since some of the phrases were very similar to the above comments I suspect they were the same person. The article is about how there's proof that the anthropic principle is valid and people are refusing to acknowledge the evidence.
As I understand the anthropic principle, the proponents believe that the universe is evolving like life on Earth, that there is a "Goldilocks zone" in the universe that has evolved especially to develop intelligent lifeforms and that the universe was predisposed to create intelligent lifeforms as its inevitable goal.
To me it sounds like creationism without the deity, but instead of a god existing to create people, the universe exists to create people and other equally intelligent life. I might have missed an issue of "Scientific American" but I don't remember hearing about proof of extraterrestrial life or a Goldilocks zone in the universe so currently this is untestable and unobservable which would make belief in it, to quote the commenter, "ideological dogma". Nonetheless, the commenter apparently thinks that the anthropic principal should be part of the eighth grade science curriculum.
I think the most important part of science education is to teach students to use scientific method to think objectively and throw out personal biases. Only those things observable, testable and reproducible should be considered in a science class. Gods and anthropic principals can be added when objective evidence can be presented, until then, they don't belong in a science class.
If insisting on factual evidence as a prerequisite to inclusion in science class and peer reviewed publications identifies me as a left-wing liberal, so be it. I think it's a lot better than believing in 6000 year old planets or predestined aliens.
The person responded that I didn't get it because I was blinded by my "ideological righteousness" and questioned whether peer reviewed papers would get published if they were reviewed by right-wing fundamentalists instead of left-wing liberals. Then he said I'd never learn and left a link to a website. This person appeared to have issues, but I checked out the link anyway.
The link was to an article by Richard Ryals about the "anthropic principle". Since some of the phrases were very similar to the above comments I suspect they were the same person. The article is about how there's proof that the anthropic principle is valid and people are refusing to acknowledge the evidence.
As I understand the anthropic principle, the proponents believe that the universe is evolving like life on Earth, that there is a "Goldilocks zone" in the universe that has evolved especially to develop intelligent lifeforms and that the universe was predisposed to create intelligent lifeforms as its inevitable goal.
To me it sounds like creationism without the deity, but instead of a god existing to create people, the universe exists to create people and other equally intelligent life. I might have missed an issue of "Scientific American" but I don't remember hearing about proof of extraterrestrial life or a Goldilocks zone in the universe so currently this is untestable and unobservable which would make belief in it, to quote the commenter, "ideological dogma". Nonetheless, the commenter apparently thinks that the anthropic principal should be part of the eighth grade science curriculum.
I think the most important part of science education is to teach students to use scientific method to think objectively and throw out personal biases. Only those things observable, testable and reproducible should be considered in a science class. Gods and anthropic principals can be added when objective evidence can be presented, until then, they don't belong in a science class.
If insisting on factual evidence as a prerequisite to inclusion in science class and peer reviewed publications identifies me as a left-wing liberal, so be it. I think it's a lot better than believing in 6000 year old planets or predestined aliens.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Freshwater Hates Real Education
John Freshwater is back in the news. It wasn't enough that for the last 20 years or so he has taught 8th graders to distrust and misunderstand science by teaching creationist propaganda, or that he burned a cross into a student's arm with a tesla coil and then accused the victim of lying, or that when he was fired, he insisted on a hearing even though the evidence against him was overwhelming and that has cost the school district at least $300,000 and still counting. Now he has filed a federal lawsuit for $1,000,000 in damages and his teaching job back.
This guy is more self-absorbed than an ingrown sponge. At the hearing they have presented pictures of the student's injury, examples of the creationist handouts that he passed out in class, examples of the posters with bible quotes he displayed in the classroom, and testimony from students, teachers and administrators that he was still teaching creationism after being specifically ordered to stop. So Freshwater's lawsuit claims that he has been defamed, misrepresented and has had his constitutional rights violated. Then he expects the people of Mount Vernon OH to forget about him bankrupting the school system, defaming his coworkers and students, practically causing a religious war, and just let him go back to his old classroom to teach whatever he damn well pleases for as long as he wants. If he cared one iota about educating kids he'd have shut up and gone home last June, but he's so convinced the he's always right and anyone who disagrees should be punished that he will probably keep fighting until he destroys the educational system of all Ohio.
This guy is more self-absorbed than an ingrown sponge. At the hearing they have presented pictures of the student's injury, examples of the creationist handouts that he passed out in class, examples of the posters with bible quotes he displayed in the classroom, and testimony from students, teachers and administrators that he was still teaching creationism after being specifically ordered to stop. So Freshwater's lawsuit claims that he has been defamed, misrepresented and has had his constitutional rights violated. Then he expects the people of Mount Vernon OH to forget about him bankrupting the school system, defaming his coworkers and students, practically causing a religious war, and just let him go back to his old classroom to teach whatever he damn well pleases for as long as he wants. If he cared one iota about educating kids he'd have shut up and gone home last June, but he's so convinced the he's always right and anyone who disagrees should be punished that he will probably keep fighting until he destroys the educational system of all Ohio.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)