Skip to main content

And This Man Was a Teacher?

Well it seems that, once again, I don't have to search very hard to find something to write about. Take Chris Taylor, for instance, once a teacher in the great state of Texas who decided to spill his guts on Twitter, perhaps being overly-burdened by the fact that he never made these beliefs known while he was in the classroom. After proclaiming his desire to go back to teaching, he promises to "shove my beliefs down the throats of my stds." Just in case you were wondering, he means students, not STDs. I'm not concerned with some of the political statements that follow, about Israel re-annexing the Gaza Strip and the need for Canadians to listen to Beck and Limbaugh to become smarter (up for debate in their own right, but not my concern here; everyone is entitled to their own political opinion, no matter how uninformed and ignorant it may be).

No, my concern is with his blatantly evolution-denying posts (well, in fairness, I'm concerned about most of them, but these in particular). You can find his posts here: http://twitter.com/#!/cltaylor463

"Evolution is a fraud. Every so called evidence I can disprove without a shadow of a doubt." Like the evidence from DNA, fossils, biogeography, radiometric dating perhaps? No, a reasoned discussion of the evidence isn't possible in the short format of Twitter posts, and it would be unreasonable to expect that from Taylor anyway. He focuses on attempted potshots on evolution such as, "There is no visible proof that Man evolved. Why keep the lies up?" What, does your dwelling place exist someplace under a rock? Vestigial organs, commonalities in DNA and the fossil record all speak to the evolution of humans, along with all other animals. He contents himself with repeating old, worn arguments from the creationists, arguments that real scientists (which Taylor certainly is not) grow weary of answering.

If that wasn't bad enough, when he grows tired of "disproving" evolution with trite statements he shows himself as not only anti-science but anti-gay as well, calling it "lust" and a perversion. He asserts that "gay marriage isn't accepted worldwide," which only confirms to me that his habitation is beneath a block of granite. Most countries do not recognize gay marriage, but an increasing number are doing so; thus to make that statement is only partly true. Of course, the countries who do not recognize same-sex marriage not only include the United States but such paragons of virtue as Saudi Arabia, North Korea and Iran. I'm sure he is proud to be in such esteemed company.

This is just the tip of the iceberg with this man. The more posts I read, the more I realize the true depth of his ignorance and bigotry. Any school to which he applies should be made aware of his Twitter account; then I hope that he won't be able to get anywhere near America's children.

Comments

  1. After unions are destroyed, next the Republicans will finish off public education.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I encourage anyone to "shove [their] beliefs down the throats of [their] stds." when I am counted among them. What a ridiculous thing to say. Where did this guy "get" his education?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Today I Am Ashamed of My Alma Mater

Over a week ago, my alma mater, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, released what it touted as a "bold" and "ambitious" workforce plan for the next several years. The backlash was both strong and immediate, forcing the University Administration, currently headed by President Karen Whitney, to release a " Frequently Asked Questions " for its plan. The outrage on social media, as well as a MoveOn.org petition with several thousand signatures, doubtless have already channeled the displeasure of the community, alumni, and students with the plan. The University is accepting public feedback, but this seems to be only a political window-dressing for a plan that Whitney herself was  quoted  as saying "...is 95-98% a done deal." For over a week I debated over what form a blog on the topic would take, and while I realize that what I have to say here is little different from what I and others have already stated elsewhere, I feel the need to address thi...

How I Left Creationism

There is a discussion going on right now in the science community about whether or not we should debate creationists: it is a debate within a debate, if you will. There are good arguments on both sides, but I have to think that we should debate creationists, and we should do it as often as we can stand it. Why do I think this? Last week, I saw that Michael Shermer posted a link to a story of a woman who argued this very point. As a former creationist, it was going to debates between Shermer and Kent Hovind that began to convince her of the legitimacy of evolution and of science. I too was once a creationist. Without ever having read anything about it, without it ever having been mentioned in class (I never heard a word about evolution in high school), I was ready to pounce at the merest mention of the topic as false and godless, two of the favorite creationist talking-points. I look back at this self in amazement, at how ignorant and proud of that ignorance I was, how I failed to ...

What Creationists Don't Understand

There are quite a number of concepts that one could successfully argue that creationists fail to understand; whether this is out of a simple lack of knowledge or willful ignorance is hard to say and certainly can't be generalized to every creationist. Some, the everyday creationist, I would like to think simply haven't been exposed to the evidence. Others, the holders of Ph.D's in various fields, especially in the sciences, who happily reject evolutionary theory are willfully ignorant (John Whitmore comes to mind). But I think there is one idea that creationists of all stripes simply fail to understand; evolution is based on solid, visible evidence. Evolution is not some tenant of a "science religion" that descended down to Darwin from on high, it is an explanatory framework based on quite a lot of facts and mountains of evidence. It is evidence that leads to the conclusions of evolution, that life changes over time and, given the long history of the earth, all ...