An Eclectic Mind

Is it an excuse to teach religion instead of science?

I’ve always been concerned about the quality of education kids get these days. Underpaid teachers, peer pressure that rewards bad behavior, high drop-out rates. As I reported back in November 2008, kids are graduating the local high school without knowing how to tell time on an analog clock. It’s impossible to have an intelligent conversation with most teens; they seem absolutely clueless about anything that isn’t on television or the Internet — and I’m not talking about PBS or Wikipedia here. They can’t spell because they have spelling checkers that do that for them. They can’t do math without a calculator. While I’m obviously not talking about all young people here — there would be absolutely no hope for America’s future if the problem affected every kid — it’s certainly more than half of the ones I come in contact with.

And “No Child Left Behind” just made the situation worse. It forced teachers and schools to teach just so kids would pass exams. Teaching by rote rather than ensuring that kids understand what they’re being taught is not doing the next generation any good.

These days, concerned parents are taking an active role in their kids’ education. While I personally believe that working together at the end of the day on homework and even just discussing what was learned in school each day is enough, many parents are going the extra step: they’re home-schooling their kids.

I’ll admit that I don’t know much about home-schooling. I don’t have kids; I decided early in life not to take that path. I don’t regret it. I sometimes wonder how my kids would have turned out — whether they’d be smart or lazy or interesting or dull. I’d like to think that they’d know how to tell time by the age of 18 and aspire to something more substantial than stocking shelves at the local supermarket.

I do know that if my kids weren’t getting the education they needed at school and I couldn’t help them by being part of their nightly homework routine, I’d likely consider home-schooling. After all, if you want something done right, sometimes you have to do it yourself.

My neighbor home-schools her kids. She has four of them ranging in age from about 5 to 12. She and her husband are either Evangelical or Born-Again Christians. I don’t know which and I don’t care. The last thing I want to do is have a discussion about religion with people who scratched religious slogans into the wet concrete of their driveway.

And this brings up my concerns about home-schooling. While browsing the news with the Associated Press (AP) mobile application on my BlackBerry (while waiting for a notary public at the bank), I stumbled upon an article titled, “Top home-school texts dismiss Darwin, evolution.” It reported:

“The majority of home-schoolers self-identify as evangelical Christians,” said Ian Slatter, a spokesman for the Home School Legal Defense Association. “Most home-schoolers will definitely have a sort of creationist component to their home-school program.”

It went on to say that, “Two of the best-selling biology textbooks stack the deck against evolution,” according to educators who reviewed the books.

And this is the root of my concerns. I believe that science textbooks and science lessons should be about science. Evolution is a widely accepted component of the science of biology. The alternative — creationism or its disguised alter-ego, “intelligent design” — is not. There is a wealth of scientific evidence to back up evolution; there is no evidence to back up creationism.

Clearly, the failure to teach accepted science as that — accepted science — is a serious shortcoming in the home-schooling textbooks that shoot down evolution. The children being taught that evolution is “only a theory” are being given an inadequate education — one that could put them at a serious disadvantage if they go on to college or attempt to pursue careers in science or medicine.

One of the books doesn’t hide its intent:

“Those who do not believe that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God will find many points in this book puzzling,” says the introduction to “Biology: Third Edition” from Bob Jones University Press. “This book was not written for them.”

The textbook delivers a religious ultimatum to young readers and parents, warning in its “History of Life” chapter that a “Christian worldview … is the only correct view of reality; anyone who rejects it will not only fail to reach heaven but also fail to see the world as it truly is.”

The Christian worldview is the only correct view of reality? In whose world? I don’t think the millions of Jews, Muslims, or Hindus in the world would agree with that statement. I know the atheists wouldn’t. Does that mean that Christian children should be taught a different version of reality than the rest of the world? To what benefit? Certainly not the benefit of the children.

And what of the home-schooling parents that don’t want religion to be part of their children’s curriculum? The AP article discusses their struggle to find appropriate science textbooks.

(Might I suggest starting with Daniel Loxton’s excellent book, Evolution: How We and All Living Things Came to Be? It’s not a textbook, but it’s a great introduction to evolution for kids and parents.)

So here’s my question: if a school board has to approve textbooks that are used in public school classrooms and home-schooled students have to take and pass standardized exams, who is approving the textbooks used in home-school “classrooms”?

And then I recall this, a piece of “Hate Mail” that was sent to Bobby Henderson of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. You can find it here, but to save effort for the folks too lazy to click, I’ll repeat it here in all its glory, as an example of home-schooling gone terribly wrong:

wow you people are crazy i pray to my LORD jesus christ that you people wake up God created man in his own image and im sorry but if you look like noodles with meatballs growin out your BUTT you need to go back to SPACE or get back in the pan where you’ll be somebodys dinner!

people will believe anything!!

i am verryyy happy i was well homeschooled becuase i would be in jail for punching a teacher in the face when she tried to tell me about this so called spagetti monsterr!

i hate to be the breaker of bad news but when you look around when u die u wont be with your master meatball you’ll be burning in the pits of HELL and i am a REAL christian and that hurts to know that so many people are gonna be in hell! over a random guy that started a joke and has nothing better to do besides make up some god for fun then see how many people are loving this idea.

God bless you wacked out meatball loving freaks!

-christy

(I recommend Bobby’s site if you’re interested in seeing where reason and faith collide.)

Christy is right about one thing: People will believe anything. But is it right to teach it to their kids?

This just in... children, education, opinion, religion, science

Did you enjoy this post? If so, please comment on it or share a little link love:
 Add to Del.icio.us     Technorati This     Digg This     Stumble it!     Tweet This

Here are links I found interesting on March 9, 2010:

• Image Watermark Hijacking – Interesting example of how watermarking images may not be enough to protect them from theft — and what you can do about it. On PlagiarismToday.com
• Palin’s Canadian health care claim stuns critics – Can you say hypocrite? Thanks to Canadian @AprilMains for sharing this morning's laugh at Sarah Palin's expense.
• Photography Classes – Here's a list of photography classes at the Phoenix Desert Botanical Gardens. We went to a lecture last night and it was great.
• Reflections on Avatar Ray Kurzweil – Interesting review of Avatar by Ray Kurzweil. I agree with much of what he has to say, but I think he over-analyzed it. the movie simply wasn't as deep as he gives it credit for being. Thanks to @estherschindler for sharing the link.
• The Ad-Blocker’s Dilemma – Some interesting thoughts on blocking ads on Web sites. On PlagiarismToday.com.
• Copyright Issues: Photographer POV – A promotional video from Getty Images that includes an interview with two photographers. They explain their point of view on illegal use of their images, as well as the cost of being commercial photographers. On YouTube. Thanks to @plagiarismtoday for sharing the link.
• Top home-school texts dismiss Darwin, evolution – I find this news article on the AP Web site extremely disturbing. Does this mean that a subset of the U.S. population will be taught that evolution is wrong? On APNews.com.

This just in... advertising, copyright, education, health, images, Internet, irony, links, movies, opinion, photography, plants, politics, religion, review, science, videos

Did you enjoy this post? If so, please comment on it or share a little link love:
 Add to Del.icio.us     Technorati This     Digg This     Stumble it!     Tweet This

Want to make a difference? Get off your ass and do something.

Yesterday, I got an e-mail from an acquaintance who was spreading the word about Fair Tax and the Online Tax Revolt. It said, in part:

This email is for everyone who pays federal income tax. This is NOT about politics. High taxes affect EVERYONE. The tax system is broken – Help fix it! I have never sent such a large mass email, but this is so important for America that I hope you will forgive this one, short intrusion into your life.

I am doing these things
1)I am learning about the FairTax (See for yourself: http://www.fairtax.org/ )
2)I am showing my support by joining the April 15th online march to Washington; I can’t make it in person, but I can make it from my computer (See for yourself: www.OnlineTaxRevolt.com )
3)I am telling everyone that I know

I am asking your help. Please, please, please help. Learn about the FairTax, show your support for the online march and spread the word. Every American can help in this way.

In a way, I guess I’m helping him spread the word. But that’s not my purpose here. My purpose is to discuss slacktivism.

What is Slacktivism?

Slacktivism, as defined by Wikipedia, is:

Slacktivism (sometimes slactivism) is a portmanteau formed out of the words slacker and activism. The word is a pejorative term that describes “feel-good” measures, in support of an issue or social cause, that have little or no practical effect other than to make the person doing it feel satisfaction. The acts also tend to require little personal effort from the slacktivist.

I recommend reading the entire entry. It includes examples of what qualifies as slacktivism, just in case you’re not clear on it. It also includes several links to other resources that make good reading, if you’re interested in how words are created and come into our vocabulary.

Internet Petitions and Virtual Marches are Slacktivist Efforts

This isn’t the first time I’ve received an appeal to join an online effort in support or denial of some cause. I usually get petitions — I can’t tell you how many I’ve received over the years. Snopes.com has a great page about Internet petitions that uses the word slacktivism. If you read it, you’ll learn that “signing” something online is a complete waste of time — for you, anyway. What it does do is add your information to a mailing list that the person who started the petition can use for whatever he needs/wants to, which might include spam or selling to spammers.

Now I’m not saying that all people who start Internet petitions are spammers. I believe that some of these people really do think they’re making a difference. And I’m pretty sure the people who forward the petitions to me via e-mail think they’re making a difference, too.

But the brutal truth is that slacktivism does not get results. What gets results is repeatedly writing to legislators and sending it via snail mail (to start a paper trail), physically attending meetings and marches that get mainstream media attention, and volunteering your time and efforts at events that help spread the word and fire other people up to do the same. These are not slacktivist efforts. They take a real commitment to a cause that goes beyond five minutes of your time. They prove you’re serious and really want to make a difference.

Sending an e-mail message to everyone in your address book imploring them to submit their name, address, and zip code to a Web site to join a virtual march does nothing but make you feel as if you’re doing something — and possibly annoy the people in your address book who know better or don’t share your views.

I’ve Been There — I Know

I was a local activist here in Wickenburg for several years. I went to Town Council and Committee meetings and spoke up. I started petitions and got signatures. I wrote letters to the editor of the local paper and articles on my site about the town, wickenburg-az.com. I attended citizen action group meetings and helped them create materials to spread the word.

On some issues, we really did make a difference. When a developer tried to con the town into handing over our rodeo grounds so they could put a golf course on the land, I was one of about 100 people who attended a Planning and Zoning Meeting and spoke up against it. The developer was unprepared for the onslaught and didn’t have much to say in defense of his plan. Not only did the project stall, but the Town Manager and Town Planner who had considered the plan were subsequently fired. Now a For Sale sign stands at the frontage, offering some other developer the opportunity to build yet another subdivision we don’t need.

Although our petition to stop a housing development at the end of Wickenburg Airport’s runway was rejected on a technicality, we managed to stall the developer long enough so that he missed his window of opportunity. The housing bubble burst and demand for tract housing at the approach end of an airport runway dried up before the infrastructure was completely put in. Yes, he scraped the desert clean in his 40 or so acres of land, leaving an ugly scar on what was once pristine desert. But the project went bankrupt, leaving angry investors behind. I’ve heard the greedy bastard left town. Good riddance. I hope the same fate befalls the sardine-like housing project across the road and its developer.

Neither of these efforts would have succeeded if people like me had just sit on their asses, content to click a few buttons on their computer screens. It took a lot of real work, but in the end, it was worth it.

Don’t Be a Slacktivist!

Feel strongly about something? Isn’t it worth more than three minutes of your time? If so, get off your butt and do something about it. You can make a difference, but only if you really try.

Deep Thoughts advice, Internet, opinion, politics, slacktivism, spam

Did you enjoy this post? If so, please comment on it or share a little link love:
 Add to Del.icio.us     Technorati This     Digg This     Stumble it!     Tweet This

And I always assumed most helicopter magazine editors-in-chief were helicopter pilots.

Batten down the hatches and prepare for another rant. Not a big one, but one that needs to be shared with my fellow helicopter pilots.

Yesterday, I got around to reading the February 2010 issue of Rotor & Wing. Rotor & Wing used to be the premier helicopter industry magazine. Somewhere along the way, it turned into a monthly collection of press releases, advertisements, and columns about narrow segments of the helicopter population: North Sea, Military, etc. It improved a bit under the editorial guidance of Ernie Stephens, who added a Helicopter Training column and made some design changes. Now there’s some information of interest to mere mortal commercial operators like me who have absolutely no interest in the politics of the North Sea or unmanned reconnoissance aircraft.

When I read a magazine, I always start with the editor’s page up front. This one, by Editor-in-Chief Joy Finnegan, really stuck in my craw. Titled “Stay Proficient,” it wasn’t about practicing emergency procedures, flying with a CFI, or even staying current with night flight. Instead, it zeroed in on an accident that had been caused by a pilot’s attempt to fly VFR at night into IMC conditions. In other words, a stupid pilot trick.

That didn’t bother me. It’s always good to analyze the mistakes of other pilots and use their situations and decisions as learning tools to avoid the same mistakes in the future. I have done so on several occasions in this blog. (For examples, read “Not Ready for Solo?,” “What if You Crashed a Helicopter and Didn’t Tell Anyone?,” and “Chasing Race Cars Isn’t For Every Pilot.”)

What bothered me were the few revealing statements about her own experience that Ms. Finnegan made, starting with:

I was shocked to learn that many helicopter pilots not only rarely fly IFR, they don’t even bother to keep current.

Hello? Ms. Finnegan? I’d venture to guess that half the helicopter pilots out there — many of which are flying tour, charter, air-taxi, survey, and utility work — don’t even have instrument ratings. I can think of at least a dozen helicopter pilots I know personally who don’t — including me.

She goes on to relate how every flight she did as a commercial airplane pilot was flown IFR, regardless of the weather. She then goes on to make what I consider an insulting statement:

VFR was for amateurs, weekend puddle-jumper jockeys who were out for their $100 hamburger flight.

Nice attitude about your fellow pilots, Ms. Finnegan.

But here’s the paragraph that made me wonder why this woman is Editor-in-Chief of what may still be the best known and most widely read helicopter industry magazine:

But I understand that it’s just the opposite for helicopter operators and that the vast majority of flights conducted in helicopters are VFR. I have also heard that some operators even discourage operations under IFR (again I’m talking flight rules not IMC). This is so very contrary to the way the fixed-wing world works that I had to call around and make sure I understood the situation correctly. After many calls and e-mails, I’m still having difficulty with the concept.

Then why the hell are you editing a helicopter magazine?

I don’t know about the rest of the helicopter pilots out there, but when I turn to a magazine about helicopters and helicopter flight, I want the person responsible for the magazine’s content to be a helicopter pilot. I want that person to know at least what I know about flying helicopters, but preferably more.

And taking two paragraphs to share her own stupid airplane pilot trick — perhaps to show off her ability to follow the instructions of ATC or brag about her coolness in a tough situation — really doesn’t make me feel any better about her experience, capabilities, or connection to the helicopter world.

Instead, I’m left angry by being fed advice by someone who obviously doesn’t have a clue about what helicopter operations are all about.

Deep Thoughts, Flying airplanes, aviation, helicopters, ignorance, journalism, opinion

Did you enjoy this post? If so, please comment on it or share a little link love:
 Add to Del.icio.us     Technorati This     Digg This     Stumble it!     Tweet This

I had to try it.

This photo of San Xavier Mission is somewhat marred by three signs. (The third is very small and hard to see in this size.)

While at Saturday’s San Xavier Mission shoot, I commented to the other photographers about how unsightly some of the signs on the outside of the building were. (Whenever possible, I’d actually moved portable signs before pressing the shutter release.) All of the photographers I was with at the time agreed, but one of them went on to complain that they were a pain in the neck to remove in Photoshop. When I asked whether he actually did that, he replied that he always used Photoshop to remove signs he didn’t want in his photos.

Of course, I knew this was possible and, in all honesty, I’ve done my share of Photoshop editing. Still, I was amazed that someone would go to all that trouble to remove elements photograph of a photograph in post processing.

You see, I’m a bit of a “purist.” I believe that a photograph should be created in the camera. The photographer should photograph what’s there, carefully framing the shot to create his image of what’s in front of him. Creativity comes with exposure, depth of field, composition, choice of lens, point of view. What the camera records on digital media — or film, for that matter — is the photograph. Editing beyond the removal of specks and scratches or minor adjustments to exposure or color balance is — to me at least — not photography. It’s image editing.

You could argue that a real “purist” wouldn’t edit at all. I’d have to agree with you. I didn’t say I was an absolute purist — although I’d love to be one. My photos, unfortunately, sometimes need a little help. Like most other photographers these days, I turn to Photoshop or another image editing application to get that help.

I think the difference is how much help I get from Photoshop. I draw a line before a lot of other people do. Maybe it shows — for good or bad — in my photos. I don’t know. But I’d rather get it “right” in the camera than “fix it” in Photoshop.

After a little sign removal. The photo certainly looks cleaner, but is it a true representation of what I saw?

But after the shoot, when I went back to my camper to relax for the afternoon, I started wondering what kind of difference sign removal would make and how well I could pull it off. So starting with the photo you see above, I used the brush and clone tools to remove the three signs that were visible. You can see the end result here.

I’m not sure how this would hold up if printed as a large photo. I’m confident that the closest sign, which appeared on a stucco wall, was neatly removed. The far sign was too small to be noticeable in the first place. But that middle sign…well, who knows?

Would I do this all the time? No way. I’d rather find creative ways to keep the signs out of the shot in the first place.

What do you think? Use the Comments link or form to share your views.

About the Photos editing, opinion, photography, Photoshop

Did you enjoy this post? If so, please comment on it or share a little link love:
 Add to Del.icio.us     Technorati This     Digg This     Stumble it!     Tweet This