New Tennessee Monkey Law!

Yeah, because that is so what the Discovery Institute and 'Focus on the Family' are all about, the science.The legislation was drafted by Derek Fowler who heads up a non-profit lobbying organisation called Family Action Council of Tennessee (FACT) started up by Focus on the Family ministries. Fowler was helped in drawing it up by Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute (Source).Anyone who thinks this is good legislation not intended simply to offer an opening for the DI's infamous wedge is monumentally naive.An example of some of the material FACT promotes as part of the Truth Project DVDs it distributes ... Then again NWR you yourself used to have, and still may have, some sympathy for that attitude so maybe you do consider the source of this legislation to be reliable, you've swallowed the DI's nonsense (or Behe's at least) before after all.TTFN,WK

Are all high school science teachers scientists where you come from? In what respect? Do they all have PhD's? Are they all performing ongoing research?TTFN,WK

I asked you a question and suggested two possible criteria and rather than addressing my question you dodged it and responded with this obfuscatory dance?Yes the principal criteria I would expect for someone to have some basis for calling themselves a scientist would be either to have done some serious research sufficient to have gained a higher degree such as a PhD or to be engaged in ongoing research. I know many technicians and research assistants who don't have PhDs that I would certainly consider scientists as they are still conducting research. Seriously? You think that people's names on a forum must rigorously represent their true status. It may shock you but I am not in fact a king and I have a strong suspicion that Artemis Entreri is not your real name.That aside I'm quite prepared to believe that CS is a research scientist. There are corner cases where things are more vague, such as technicians who are masters of a specific set of techniques but only really use them to further others' research rather than being part of a coherent research program themselves. Say someone with expertise on producing histological sections who spends all day mounting, sectioning and staining specimens from whatever lab provides them but never does any analysis.What criteria do you have for being a scientist? Mine are based around people actually doing or having done scientific research.So to return to the actual question; how many High school science teachers do you think fit your criteria, whatever they may be?Here in the UK nowadays most science teachers probably have a BSc in their specific field, Chemistry, Biology or Physics, but a couple of decades ago it was much more common to have people who had gone through specific teaching degrees that didn't do much more than cover the subjects to the level required to teach the curriculum. Even graduating with a BSc one is unlikely to have done any substantial research beyond a few months on and off in a lab on a fairly limited project. So I would say that most UK science teachers probably aren't what I would consider scientists.TTFN,WKEdited by Wounded King, : Grammar