Honestly, there are times when I think satire is superfluous when talking about energy and enviro issues.
The latest case in point? Try the brain-bender, Steven Newton: Denying Science, Legislating Reality:
Last week, the South Dakota House of Representatives passed HCR 1009, a resolution calling for the “balanced teaching of global warming in the public schools of South Dakota.”
HCR 1009 is so egregiously inaccurate, so appalling wrong in its contemptuous dismissal of established science, so mind-numbing in its appeals to long-debunked pseudoscience, that it is hard not to entertain the thought that perhaps it was meant as an elaborate parody. However, HCR 1009 was not a jest, but rather a serious attempt to influence the science South Dakota students learn. It is the latest volley in a broader assault on science itself.
…
Instead of taking the time to understand the science, South Dakota legislators submit as proof against climate change this remarkable list: “[T]here are a variety of climatological, meteorological, astrological [sic], thermological, cosmological, and ecological dynamics…”
No, that isn’t a misprint. South Dakota legislators actually proposed astrology as evidence against climate change. Do they think glaciers melt slower when Virgo is ascending?
South Dakota legislators probably meant to say “astronomical,” but that also makes no sense. The astronomical influences on climate are well-understood by scientists. Recent climate changes are occurring independently of astronomical influences.
…
Even more disturbing than these errors is the underlying premise of HCR 1009: the assumption that political bodies, rather than scientists, should have the final say over scientific issues. We have recently seen this kind of thinking in Louisiana, where a 2008 law opened the door to non-scientific attacks on evolution and climate change. Last year, the Texas State Board of Education rewrote science standards to remove the age of the universe, mandate “different views” on global warming, and include standard creationist talking points against evolution.
Science cannot be legislated. Science is not determined by opinion polls and petitions. South Dakota can outlaw global warming if it wishes, but such decisions mean as much to science as arguments among ornithologists mean to birds.
This political interference in science education is a problem that extends beyond merely getting the facts wrong. Students deserve better than to be pawns of science denialists.
Since this does not appear to be a joke (as much as I would like to see it turn out to be just that), I can only conclude that the good people of South Dakota have decided to compete with the voters of Oklahoma (the ones who keep sending James Inhofe back to the US Senate) for the Truckload of Monkeys on PCP and Crack Award.
If you were expecting a serious piece of commentary from me on this one, sorry to disappoint you. This is so far over the freakin’ edge that all I have is outrage and snark.
