Go sign this petition, too: it asks Obama to recognize Darwin Day on 12 February. Who knows, he might be willing!
A Proclamation
Charles Darwin was the first to propose the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection. On Darwin Day, celebrated on the anniversary of Darwin’s birth on February 12, 1809, we celebrate the life and discoveries of Charles Darwin and express gratitude for the enormous benefits that scientific knowledge, acquired through human curiosity and ingenuity, has contributed to the advancement of humanity.
It is sobering to imagine where the human race would be today without advances in science. Science has helped us to live longer by enabling us to find cures for diseases and alleviating pain and suffering. It has allowed us to travel before unimaginable distances, to interact with and understand people of other cultures and recognize what makes us similar as well as what makes us unique. It has allowed us to understand and maneuver in our world and has provided us insight into the complexities of life.
Charles Darwin recognized the importance and power of scientific discovery, and perhaps no one has influenced our understanding about life on earth as much as he. Darwin was an English naturalist, who on his legendary five-year voyage on the HMS Beagle made important observations about the geological and zoological diversity of the lands he visited, which helped spark his theory of evolution by natural selection. Most of what we understand about the diversity of life and the process by which it has adapted and changed has come from his profound insights, and his contribution to the canons of science cannot be overstated.
On this anniversary of Darwin’s birthday, it is important to recognize the contributions he has made to the advancement of science. It is also important that we continue to educate future generations about evolution by natural selection in our science classrooms. We must not water down the significance of Darwin’s theory, nor the breadth of evidence supporting it, and we must at every turn challenge efforts to undermine science so that we can keep alive in our children and grandchildren the wonder of discovery and the eagerness to obtain knowledge.
Now, Therefore, I, Barack Obama, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim February 12, 2010, as Darwin Day. I call on all Americans to recognize the importance of Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution by natural selection, to endeavor to preserve scientific discovery and human curiosity as bedrocks of American society, and to commemorate this day with appropriate events and activities.
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this twelfth day of February, two thousand ten, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth.
Done and I worked on his campaign in Colorado thus all my Democratic leaders now know this is important to many of us in America. I also reminded them I worked so hard for them they sent me to there convention:)
As much as I respect CD and all he accomplished, I don’t know why he deserves his own day… as far as I can tell, this would only serve to piss off creationists more and generally disturb the shit. A day to honor science? Call it Science Day. Or honor one of the founders of the Scientific Method. I’m all for this idea, but using CD as the idol isn’t exactly tactful, and would probably be counter-productive in the long-run.
I don’t really know what to make of this petition. On the one hand, it is good to recognize the legacy of Darwin by giving him his own day. On the other hand, why Darwin? Why not petition Obama for (Newton|Einstein|Hubble|Mendeleyev|Curie|Galileo|Turing|Wegener) Day instead? All of these people made contributions to science as important as Darwin’s.
I also want to express my disagreement with Torontian’s comment that “this would only serve to piss off creationists more and generally disturb the shit”. If creationists get pissed by the rest of the world not being as insane as them, that’s their problem, not ours.
Charles Darwin? hmmm….. Good start! Next I would be willing to help you get your favorite scientist day next! If you love science why stop at one day?
While Darwin day is certainly very important to me personally and I will be attending events here in South Florida. I would also hope that all rational Americans would take a moment and sign this open letter.
BAU, in my opinion, is the antithesis of rationality.
Best wishes for a new paradigm and a sustainable future.
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/51400
I agree with Koldito and John Sven.
What about a national science week ?
There’s one in Britain, Ireland, Australia, Canada, France, Norway, China, India, South Africa…
About time the US gets one.
How interesting to see comments along the line of why Darwin why not so and so or why not just science week. I mean this is Charles Darwin we are talking about, easerly arguably the most influentional scientist in human histoy. Sure you can argue for Galileo or Eienstien or whoever but Mr Charles Darwin set us free from the priests with Origin and put us on the path to the world we live in today. If anything Darwin should be posthumastly made a Knight of England, something he was denied in life.
If you can’t see how important Darwin is then you don’t understand.
If folks do not recognise why Charles Darwin should not be honoured, then one can only surmise they fail to realise the importance of his research and conclusion which has since been the bed rock of the modern synthesis.
It was not just another discovery…it was an insight that revolutionised science.
That you don’t get it is fine…that you prefer to down play it in the interest of creationists is a fucking insult.
Wow, so many naysayers, so little thiinking.
We gave MLK an entire national holiday for fighting for the civil rights of African-Americans. Since he didn’t fight so hard for the rights of women or GLBTs, unlike, say Gloria Steinem or Harvey Milk, then what kind of civil rights leader was he, anyway if he only had influence within one sphere? Why honor him, when those people deserve recognition too?
This is what the “why not honor Newton/Einstein/Galileo/Kepler/whothefuckever sounds so silly.
Look, folks, if we can get Congress to have a national day of prayer or a day to honor Michael Moore’s TV Nation, what does it hurt to have a day for Darwin, who did, after all, put together one of the greatest ideas in science? Why not have our most prominent national leader stand up for evolution, no matter in how small a way, just one goddamned time?
Besides, just think of how it will make creobot heads explode. That alone would make the proclamation worth it.
Why? Surely by advocating a state proclamation in favour of Darwin, we leave ourselves open to accusations of hypocrisy? I thought we were taking the moral high ground by NOT trying to advance our cause by government fiat.
Don’t get me wrong, if Darwin had been an American I’d be all for a day to recognise his achievements. If there isn’t one in Britain, there should be. But as far as I know, Darwin never so much as visited America, so for the President of the United States to make such a proclamation can only be considered a political gimmick, and we’re better than that.
I’m not an US-citizen, so i have no hand in anything either way. But CD was an Englishman, why should the US honor him?
I am NOT a statist, i try to see what these petitioners want and how others might react.
On Darwin’s bicentenial birthday Obama did mention him, in his speech for Lincolns bicentenial birthday. Asking americans to choose between Darwin and Lincoln is just setting yourself up for failure imnho.
If one wants to promote science, one could better hang it on Einsteins birthday, who, after all, was an “american”.
dumb. we already celebrate darwin’s birthday and legacy, we don’t need a govt sanction. what’s the point? just more ammo for the culture wars. Leave the government out of this one.
Absolutely do not celebrate Darwin’s irrelevant birthday. Celebrate the day his famous book came out (and was sold out).
(And isn’t Lincoln’s identical birthday already celebrated?)
According to wikipedia:
National Ice Cream Month is celebrated by the US every July. This month was designated as national ice cream month by Ronald Reagan in 1984. He also appointed the third Sunday in July as National Ice Cream Day. Reagan recognized the popularity of ice cream in the United States (90% of the nation’s population consumes ice cream) and stated that these two events should be observed with “appropriate ceremonies and activities.”
Bad idea. I respect Darwin’s accomplishments as much as anybody, but why should we ask Obama to commit political suicide?
A majority of Americans believe Darwin was, at the very least, wrong. Many believe he was evil.
Obama’s popularity is teetering around the 50% mark right now, with a huge percentage of Americans convinced, according to a recent poll, that he is not a citizen and ought to be impeached. Let’s not give the knuckle-draggers another reason to hate him. Besides, as others have pointed out, he wasn’t an American. Let the Brits pass a Darwin Day.
The biggest problem with this proposal is that Darwin’s birthday is also Abraham Lincoln’s birthday. Before President’s day, Lincoln’s birthday was actually celebrated on his birthday. I just don’t think a move to recognize Darwin’s birthday will fly given the significance of Lincoln.
Aquaria:
I know that you said this with a different purpose in mind, but I think it highlights one of the things that I consider is wrong with Darwin Day, namely, that we are going to end up identifying the day in question with Darwin, rather than with his science. If you don’t believe me, go out and start asking random people what is it we celebrate on MLK Day, and see how many reply “Civil Rights at large” as opposed to “the birthday of MLK” or “equal rights for black people”. If MLK Day had been named Civil Rights Day from the beginning, it would be clear for everybody what we celebrate, and more importantly, that this is something important. For this reason alone, we should have Science Day (or Evolution Day, if you prefer), or otherwise in a few years down the road, people will think that Darwin Day is there to celebrate the birthday of an English guy.
No, that is absolutely the wrong attitude. It’s like saying that you want Kobe Bryant to be named MVP only to be able to laugh in the faces of LeBron James fans. Look, if we are going to celebrate anything, then it is going to be because we recognize it as an achievement, not because we know it’s going to sting with some people we don’t like.
Although I love the idea of celebrating Darwin’s birthday, I think the fact that it’s also Lincoln’s birthday is a loser for our cause. No way the US is officially going to call it Darwin Day or Lincoln/Darwin Day instead of just Lincoln’s birthday. I can’t see that ever happening.
Such “tact” could only come from a fellow Torontonian. The merits of this can be debated on a few fronts, but “it might result in a few frowny faces” isn’t one.
In the UK Charles Darwin appears on the 10 pound note.
It’s just a shame that certain religious elements in the US would freak out if he were accorded any kind of honour.
Me? Not an American, but if I had my way I’d have something more than Darwin Day. I’d go for the 24th of November as “Species Day” and start by celebrating the contributions of Darwin and Wallace to the theory of evolution by natural selection. Then, as it would be the start of “science week”, I’d go hippety hoppety hog wild and celebrate a slew of science acheivements past and present, making of course special mention of the modern synthesis and subsequent developments.
But then I’m a dreamer! ;-)
Louis
Make it a national holiday and it could be a win-win for both creationists and rationalists. Rationalists would get the satisfaction of having Darwin officially recognized, and since it’s a holiday and schools would be closed, creationists could claim to have finally gotten Darwin out of school.
#16-
And a significant part of that loss is liberals who don’t think he’s doing enough. He never had the support of the creotards.
Koldito@18-
No it’s not. There are reasonable arguments on both sides of the MVP issue, but there are not reasonable arguments on both sides of science vs. superstition. Religions deserve to be laughed at.
Torontonian @2
Chris Mooney, is that you?
BS
I agree with #22 that if the US gov’t is going to recognize a scientist, it should probably be an American.
It would be interesting to remind some folks in our country how much they need immigrants by pointing to Manhattan Project scientists.
I signed, but I wish I could take it off, because one of the posters had a good point. Call it National Science Week and put it where other major holidays won’t drown it out.
Since when should any policy or recognition of important historical figures by the US government be dictated by what pisses off religious shitstains?
This is as ludicrous as the argument some asswipe made this morning on the Bill Press show about “don’t ask don’t tell”… he was arguing that we shouldn’t allow gays to openly serve because we have to be sensitive to how it might piss off the muslims in the areas of the world our military currently occupies.
Give me a fucking break.
Because, as Strangest Brew pointed out at #9, Darwin’s works and discoveries transcend simple scientific discovery. His accomplishments were the most direct and damaging challenge to an entire world of established religious dogma… not just christian religion, but all religion with creation myths. No single person in the history of science (including, in my opinion, Galileo) has had his works more scrutinized… no single person has had so many attempts at being attacked and discredited, no single theory has been more scrutinized and put to the test than the one he championed… and yet his theory has stood the test of time… it has been improved upon and refined to become the bedrock of all modern biology, and in the process taught us what we are and whence we come.
No, you can not diminish the accomplishments of this man, nor compare them to other scientists in terms of the impact on not only our knowledge but our culture. And devoting a single day to his recognition is a slight, in my opinion, but at the very least is a good start.
I don’t know what people think Obama’s being asked to do. It’s just a kind of official acknowledgement of a great scientist, not some national holiday he’d be declaring. The government has recognized many “important days” through various declarations, a good many have been quite trivial.
There’s no reason Obama shouldn’t just endorse “Darwin Day”. Why it’d be political suicide I don’t know, since he was hardly voted in by evangelicals and that sort.
At worst, asking brings some attention to Darwin and the importance of evolution. My one concern is that I don’t like tying evolution too closely to Darwin, but since that’s how people often know about scientific ideas, and IDiots trash Darwin, why not just go ahead and say that Darwin was one of the greatest scientists?
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
I’m totally playa-hatin’ here, but I’m against it. We should have National Science Day/Week/Month etc., but Darwin isn’t THAT much more special than many other scientists who receive less recognition. First, the idea that evolution happens was not Darwin’s, although he is often credited with that idea in the popular media. Limiting ourselves to evolutionary theory, Hutton published an idea that was very natural selectionish long before Darwin, and Wallace had the same idea contemporaneously with CD. Ronald Fisher really made the important leap in devising a mathematical framework to marry Mendelian genetics with Darwinian selection.
Don’t get me wrong…Darwin was a great scientist. I just don’t see why he should get so much credit.
I signed, and used the automated notice generator to invite several non-Pharynguloids to sign as well.
Regarding those who wonder why just Darwin, I’d say I’m not averse to the idea of a Science Day (or Science Week) that would celebrate science generally via honoring a small group of science greats (Galileo, Newton, Einstein… who else?1) in the same way that Presidents Day celebrates the U.S. presidency via honoring Washington and Lincoln. Nobody suggests they were the only great presidents; they just represent great presidents.
All that said, lots of people feel the Presidents Day construct waters down our remembrance of both Washington and Lincoln, and would prefer to return to honoring them separately. Personally, I’m perfectly happy with Darwin as the international symbol of science: Darwinian science really does seem to mark a significant divide between faith-based understandings of the world and those based on evidence and reason. And what branch of science could be more intimately connected to people than the branch that explains how we came to be people?
???
First, it’s not clear to me what you intend by we? Pharynguloids? Atheists? Pro-evolutionists/anti-creationists (regardless of personal religious belief)? Lots of overlap between these, of course, but when a stranger talks to me about what “we” want, I’m always curious what s/he has in mind.
Next, since when are atheists or secularists are opposed to “government fiat”? I don’t think you’ll find a lot of anti-government fervor here: note that right next to godless in the masthead of this august publication is liberal, which in an American context rarely translates into some sort of libertarian revulsion of “government fiat.” “Our” commitment to the separation of church and state, if that’s what you’re referring to, is not anti-state; it’s about preventing the state from endorsing/enforcing one particular system of supernatural beliefs. There’s no contradiction whatsoever between that position and supporting government endorsement of facts and reason.
Finally, where’s the “fiat”? Note that the petition doesn’t ask Obama to create a new holiday (we already have a holiday — the aforementioned Presidents Day — at essentially exactly the same time); it only asks him to make a ceremonial proclamation. Hardly seems like a big statist power grab to me!
1 I’m curious: To my fellow American Pharyngularians, what one American scientist (by which I mean preferably someone born here, but at least someone who did his/her major work here… so don’t give me Einstein) would you nominate to join this scientific Mount Rushmore as an emblematically seminal figure?
People are asking Obama to recognize Save the Frogs Day.
While I don’t intend to put down saving frogs or that day, it’s not the kind of day that’s going to become highly popular, nor a kind of holiday.
If they’re unapologetically asking for recognition of “Save the Frogs Day,” there should be no hesitation in asking for such a small favor for Darwin Day.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
an online petition….I’m sure that will work.
Let’s try that address again:
http://www.savethefrogs/action/index.html
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
I had written a long and scathing retort to this remark, but I looked up and saw Bill Dauphin had already addressed it in #31, and far better than I did…
So… ya know… what he said…
I keep screwing up because I’m in a hurry (and for some reason, “paste” isn’t working). Previewed this time:
http://www.savethefrogs.com/actions/index.html
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Antiochus Epiphanes –
This I agree with…
This I do not…
Bill #31:
Again, I’m not of the American persuasion, but Feynman would get my vote.
If I had to nominate a chemist I’d be exceedingly biased and go for R B Woodward.
Louis
No. No, no, no.
Honestly, I believe that there is no one more enthusiastic about teaching evolution and natural selection than yours truly. I have tremendous admiration for Charles Darwin, and look forward to Darwin Day every year as something to be celebrated.
But, seeking the imprimatur of an elected official, yea, verily, who holds the highest office in these United States? Not an especially good idea.
After all, we don’t have presidential proclamations regarding Newton, Maxwell or Einstein. Why single out Darwin, the wingnut crowd will immediately want to know? This will feed the (false) perception that those of us who champion evolutionary biology are engaged in something like religion, with St. Charlie as our prophet.
And, since so many creationists are also global warming skeptics…well, you connect the dots. This will just give them another talking point to bash the scientific profession at large. Any feeling of warm fuzzies and pro-science sentiment that the above endorsement might generate will be swamped by the wave of ‘anti-Darwinist’ propaganda it will provoke.
Here’s my recommendation: ask all politicians, everywhere, to sign a petition strongly supporting science and science education, and specifically mention evolutionary biology as one of those items deserving our support. But let’s not give our elected officials an easy ‘out’ by explicitly linking the former to a scientific hagiography. That just plays into the rhetorical hands of our enemies.
Glen Davidson@32
I doubt that. I have a general rule to only drink on holidays, so I, for one, will be celebrating Save the Frogs Day. Along with Waitangi Day in New Zealand, Moroccan Labor Day, Larry Storch’s Birthday, and the ever popular Hero’s Day in Mozambique, which just happens to be today. Cheers, everybody!
Heroes’ Day.
What about Edison?
OK, it’s not necessarily Edison per se, but it falls on Edison’s birthday.
Is invention somehow above science? I don’t think so.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Bill,
I’m completely opposed to the notion of “the greatest scientist of all time”, or “pick one scientist as the international symbol of Science”, or “what branch of Science or what discovery is the most important”.
There isn’t even a coherent way to define it, to test it, it’s purely non-scientific populist bullshit. It goes against the very essence of what constitutes the scientific process.
And I don’t agree with you that Darwin “marks a significant divide between faith-based understandings of the world and those based on evidence and reason”. It was a gradual process, and Darwin played a very significant part, but it’s not as if “before Darwin our understanding of the world was based on faith”, and after “it was based on reason”.
It was a gradual process, and Darwin played a very significant part, but it’s not as if “before Darwin our understanding of the world was based on faith”, and after “it was based on reason”.
Yeah, people are still talking to invisible friends who tell them they were specially “evolved” (read: created) and the entire universe was uhhhhhhh “sparked” just for them so’s they can worship the invisible “thingies”. Same ol’ same ol’.
No, but we do have one regarding Leif Erikson. I think Darwin rates that high, personally…
It’s clear why Newton day, Dec. 25, hasn’t been recognized by a President.
The real question is, why hasn’t a day been proclaimed for a scientist, or at least none of us can think of such a day? I rather suspect that the science types aren’t especially passionate for it.
We do have a chance to try to rectify the situation, though, and “Darwin Day” is already recognized by many people. And it’s an issue on the edge of science appreciation vs. the ignorance pushed by creationists.
If Obama were to declare Feb. 12 “Science Day,” I’d go for that. But I don’t think the IDiots would be any happier for that.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Signed. As for why CD deserves his special day as opposed to Newton et al, well you have to start somewhere. CD’s ideas and discoveries were revolutionary not only within biology but to science itself. Plus it makes the IDiots mad which is always a good thing. If this effort succeeds we can start with other scientists: Hubble, Dawkins, Hawking, etc.
How about a petition to retain current levels of science funding despite proposed budget slashing? Getting federal funding has become increasingly difficult over the last decade; yet, federal funding in the US is the primary source of money for basic research*.
Bill #31:
How about Benjamin Franklin…founding father, irrascible skeptic, and world-renowned scientist?
Also: Linus Pauling, Norman Borlaug, Seymour Benzer, Sewell Wright, Stanley Miller, Edward Michelson + Albert Morley, ditto on Feynman, Edwin Hubble…just off the top of my head.
*In other words…c’mon! I need some money!
No no no, you’re going about it all wrong…
Make it something you can commercialise, sell it to Hallmark, and before you know it it will be a holiday. :p
If Jewish people are allowed to take holidays for their religion, why can’t we also claim holidays significant to our lack thereof?
You wanna see some heads explode and woo splatter all over the walls?
Start a campaign for Salk/Sabin Day!
Ok, I’ve read many comments and still no one has explained why the US should have a Darwin Day instead of Britain. Hello?
Just show me where to sign!
Long thought he should be officially recognized…
Actually, there has never been a time when our “understanding of the world” (however limited it was and is) was not based on reason.
It is our misunderstanding of the world that was and still is based on faith.
Dare I suggest Ben Franklin? He may not have been the greatest scientist, but he certainly is emblamatically an American (and like Darwin is already memorialized on money).
J. Robert Oppenheimer also comes to mind but is pretty controversial to both sides of the nuclear weapon debate.
Edison was not a scientist. A great inventor, yes, but not a scientist.
If Jewish people are allowed to take holidays for their religion, …
What the hell does that mean?
Wow. Every time a religious nut makes a comment along the line of “those atheists/scientists/skeptics/humanists” as if we are of one cloth, they should be pointed to this thread.
I mean, our Fearless Leader actually gets called dumb (#13) by his own minions.
Herding cats, indeed…
C_E (@35):
Thanks for the shout-out!
Louis (@38):
Feynman is a great suggestion. The names I had in mind were Murray Gell-Mann and Edwin Hubble. I know the latter has a less-than-stellar personal reputation, but he was a seminal figure in the dawning of our modern understanding of the true scope and scale of the universe.
And that gets me to…
neg (@41):
There’s a great deal of sense in what you say, but I’m not sure how well it maps to how people celebrate things… or even how human minds organize their understanding of history.
Of course the changes in scientific understanding are gradual and continuous (though I’m not entirely persuaded there aren’t truly distinct moments1 at which our understanding changes in Really Big Ways® more-or-less suddenly), just as the evolutionary changes in life itself are gradual and continuous. But nobody’s ever going to proclaim Gradual Change In Scientific Understanding Day; that’s just not how people understand and celebrate things.
I’m no cognitive scientist, but it’s my intuitive observation that people generally and naturally divide continuous processes into milestones they can point to, and associate key figures with those milestones. Darwin was a key figure in a period in the history of science during which we began to have both evidence of, and systems for understanding, the truth that the Earth and the universe it exists within are very old, and that they’re governed by physical laws, and that humanity is part of nature rather than divinely separate. Prior to this era, even the most progressive “natural philosophers” were often devout believers in biblical truth, apt to discount or try to explain away evidence that contradicted the Old Testament origin story; after this era, “scientists” broadly followed evidence and observation, and it was left to nonscientists to argue for the biblical narrative.
You could point to other names — Lyell, Hutton, Wegener, many more, some of whom may be unknown to the general public — whose work was also critical to this dawning… but for good or ill, it’s Darwin who’s come to symbolize this transitional era. Similarly many would claim that others — Henrietta Swan Leavitt, Vesto Slipher, Harlow Shapley, et al.2 — deserve more credit than Hubble for the dawning understanding that the universe is both vast and expanding, but it’s Hubble who’s become the public emblem for that moment.
You can call it “populist bullshit,” and I might even agree that, from an insider’s perspective, you’re correct. But if we care about getting the general public to respect and celebrate science (this is perhaps a more urgent public policy concern in the demon-haunted USA than it is in your native Europe), we need to organize what we say to them in ways that match the way their own understanding of the world is organized.
1 Understanding that moment here can mean a scientist’s entire career, or an entire generation of scientists’ careers, and not merely a single tick of the clock.
2 Or even George Ellery Hale, who was a key figure in the development of modern astrophysics, including, vitally to the work of Hubble, et al., the application of spectrography to solar and stellar science. But Hale is hardly known to the public at all, and those who do know him think of him as a Builder of Giant Telescopes™ rather than as a scientist per se.
#46,
Indeed, no scientist so far.
The only individuals who have their “national observance day as proclaimed by the PotUS” are :
MLK
Columbus
General Pulaski
Leif Erikson
the Wright brothers
If I had to pick a few (dead) American scientists for their contribution to the advancement of Science, I’d list :
Murray Gell-Mann
Thomas Hunt Morgan
Richard Feynman
I’m one of the “no” contingent. It’s not like everyone in this country who isn’t a fundie is one of us, and therefore Obama would have nothing to lose. What we need to do is erode the country’s “belief in belief”, then we can start legally honoring what will be no-longer-controversial science. Right now, the numbers just aren’t good enough.
Plus, I like Obama too much to increase the odds of his getting shot, mmmkay? When it comes to the whole “recognition of nonbelief” thing, I think he’s done a laudable amount, in terms of symbolic gestures (which is all this would be anyway). What needs to happen is a slow rise of rationalism from the bottom up, including more nonbelieving congresscritters, so as to truly freak out the fundies, rather than (in the fundie mind) an imposition from the Secret Muslim Atheist Dictator at the Top.
Oh and now that I read Bill’s comment, I forgot Edwin Hubble ! How could I ?
TVS (@51):
If you click through the link PZ provided, you’ll see the petition is hosted by the International Darwin Day Foundation. AFAIK, they’re trying to get similar proclamations or designations in as many countries as they can.
@various:
Re Edison: Yah. Bell, too, and the Wright Bros and Eli Whitney and…. Per Glen’s information, there’s already a proclaimed Inventors’ Day. Invention is distinct from science, of course, but IMHO both are worthy of pubic celebration; indeed, celebrating the distinction might well be an import aspect of educating the public about science and technology. In fact, I’d be in favor of an Inventors’ Day holiday, as opposed to just a proclaimed observance. Maybe it could replace Columbus Day: IMHO the American tradition of invention is a far more formative part of our national history than anything Columbus did.
Re Franklin: I always thought of Franklin as a mere kite-flying dabbler, but recently I read Steven Johnson’s The Invention of Air, which is nominally about Priestly, but really about that whole era, and I was surprised to learn how serious a scientist Franklin truly was. That said, I think the public will always think of Franklin as a Founding Father® first and foremost, and history will likely continue to regard his scientific career as an aside.
Argument from irrational fear of consequence? No thanks.
Sadly, his libertine lifestyle is almost completely forgotten.
Question: why do we care whether or not Einstein was born here? Seriously? Last I checked, we’re supposed to favor legal immigration…
I like the national science month idea. Each week of that month would be dedicated to a particular scientific field or idea and these could be changed on a yearly basis.
How would creobots corrupt Darwin’s day, why D-day of course.
neg (@58):
This just in: Murray Gell-Mann is still not dead! </GarretMorris>
(Sorry for addressing an SNL reference to a European; let me know if you need it ‘splained.)
SteveM I meant that people of a “faith” can nominate to take their Holy Days off. If I have no faith, why can’t I nominate for more days off in line with my non-belief and acceptance of evidence based approximations of phenomena. :D
Rutee, SHoD (@63):
I don’t… but since his most important scientific work was done in Europe, before he emigrated to the U.S., celebrating him as an American scientist would be a stretch.
Why care? Well, since the subject was a proclamation by the U.S. president, it seemed reasonable to suggest that someone characteristically American be included.
Bill,
I see no problem in proclaiming a national science week, nor a national Evolution day.
No, we need to organize what we say to them in ways that they can understand and that match the way things are in reality. If it doesn’t match their own understanding of the way the world is organized, tough luck for them.
If you want to start a holiday, I don’t think the first step is government recognition. It first has to be widely celebrated by people and then maybe it will percolate up to the government. Mother’s Day didn’t start out by an official proclamation. People celebrated it for a while until a few states recognized it until finally the government proclaimed it a holiday. You don’t need the government to celebrate something. The LGBT pride day parade isn’t something started by the government.
My second issue is with the day itself. IMO it just isn’t a very fun holiday. I think most people could care less about Darwin. Everyone loves their mothers and would take work off their hands in a sign of appreciation. LGBT pride parade is trying to fight for their rights and show pride. The people on this blog may appreciate Darwin but think of the general population. Why would I care about some guy who discovered evolution. What does that matter to me?
I would make a holiday called just Science Day. I think people appreciate science in general if it pertains to them. Celebrate technological achievements like the progress from the telegraph to rotary phones to touch tone phones to cell phones to smart phones. Celebrate the car by having a parade of horse drawn carts rolling down the street and showing the progress of science.
Evolution is more of an academic discussion. I love talking about World War I but I can’t expect everyone to share my interest in it. The discovery of evolution could be shown on Science Day but making it the focus point is a non-starter.
I think a Darwin Day in America would be a pointless gesture, misrepresenting to the world what America believes, because a significant number of Americans (44% according to Wiki) believe that the universe, the world, and man were all created in a one week period six thousand or so years ago. Don’t imagine America to be smarter than it is just because you guys have a handle on reality. Creationism is a good fit for American exceptionalism, both stemming from an arrogant, self-centered, self-righteous grandiosity.
jojame@69-
You’re fucking kidding, right? I’m pretty sure evolution was discovered and accepted well before Darwin’s time.
Well, I happen to think that the criteria for celebrating a person’s life and contributions should least of all be based on what ignorant assholes like you care about…
But hey, that’s just me…
@daveau #71
If we had to go into every caveat of our statements we wouldn’t get anywhere. There may have been some dude before Darwin that put the pieces together but was never heard of. Regardless, evolution was hardly accepted widely until Darwin accumulated the evidence and spelled out the theory in detail.
Unlike El Generalissimo. Oooops… Apologies to Mr Gell-Mann !
I actually find it hard to care about it. There are too many special days enough as it it.
@Celtic #72
From the context of that statement you would see that I was voicing a view that would be common from someone off the street when told about Darwin Day. I appreciate Darwin but I could understand people not caring about him. There are many things in this world should care about but I wouldn’t put Darwin at the top.
jojame#73
This is the goddamned problem. Darwin didn’t discover evolution and he wasn’t the first person to write about it. The others are far from obscure. Buffon? Hutton? LaMarck? De Saussure? Erasmus Darwin? Wallace?
Darwin presented the first mechanism by which evolution occurs that is now widely accepted.
Antiochus Epiphanes@77
Thank you. You took the words right out of my mouth. I should have known jojame wasn’t kidding.
You really don’t think that there is a very positive effect in correlating important scientific progress with the well-known scientists that advanced such progress? If a lay-person goes to a museum, is he more likely to be intrigued by an exhibit on theoretical physics and relativity, or an exhibit on the incredible works and accomplishments of Albert Einstein?
We have a tendency to better connect with people than we do with concepts and data. Celebrating Darwin alongside evolution and biology in general adds an element of humanity… it personifies the science, which is a draw for most people. Not only do we know how species evolve over time, but this man laid the foundation for that knowledge (along with others, yes), and he did so in this way… I’m sorry, but I think removing the personification from the science reduces it to boring knowledge and encyclopedic information for the layperson. Celebrating the human responsible for the knowledge adds a more tangible, relatable element. That, in my opinion, is why it’s important to celebrate the individuals and not simply the science.
OK… as I can do occasionally, I may have jumped the gun with my “asshole” comment… retracted.
So isn’t that the very point? To increase awareness and actually have a catalyst for spending the time to find out more about the person being recognized, and his work as it pertains to science.
Exactly! That evolution occured was pretty well accepted before Darwin, but the mechanism of how it occurred was unknown. Darwin was the first to propose a coherent theory.
Trolls like Jojame suffer the fallacy that what they think means anything to us. They have proven by their prior posts to be idjit trolls, so all we see is more idjit trolling. If they really think they something cogent to say, they should stop trolling. That may mean they need to go away for a while to change their approach.
This fact and the others like it that many of you have posted are all very true… but technicality aside, in the general population the name most commonly associated with evolution is Darwin. And I do not think this should be discouraged, nor do I think it is wholly inaccurate to portray him as a “founding father” of modern evolutionary biology, and celebrating him for it.
CE- Good points.
I signed because I think it’s at least a decent start, even though I think a national science week would be more beneficial. Not that I think the petition will do anything, but what the hell. It gives me something to do instead of work. =)
As for those who question why a non-American should be given an American holiday, who cares where they were born? We have Columbus Day, and he wasn’t American. I don’t think a person’s nationality has anything to do with being recognized for an important achievement. Besides, Christmas is a national holiday, too, and that guy certainly wasn’t American. I’m just sayin’…
I say go for it!
If nothing else, the mere proposal to this holiday (and subsequent reaction) should make for a great, large-scale study to see if spontaneous human combustion is a real phenomenon.
My hypothesis is that Sen. John Boehner and his collegues will instantly melt into steaming piles of angry white goo on the Senate floor, but I’d like to see this assertion empirically verified.
@Celtic #79
That’s a good point. A lot of my appreciation comes from Darwin having a idea that made sense and working very hard accumulating evidence and publishing his arguments to persuade dissenters (both legitimate and illegitimate). But then I’m still asking myself, why Darwin specifically? There are tons of stories similar to Darwin who revolutionized scientific thought. We should ask ourselves what this holiday’s actual purpose is. Is it to celebrate Darwin? atheism? science and reason? technology?
If it’s for Darwin then there’s no better day then Darwin Day. But it’s unreasonable to expect a layperson to like him. People like different things. Unless it’s something more or less universally liked (Mother’s Day) then I don’t expect it to happen.
If it’s for atheism then Darwin Day would also be good since Darwin opened the door for atheism for many.
If it’s science and reasoning or technology then I don’t see how Darwin should be it’s image. Celebrating science and the scientists themselves seems like a better choice.
@Nerd #82
I try very hard to not come off as a troll. If you could point out what is so wrong with my post I would appreciate it. As it is, I don’t know what I’m doing wrong so I can’t correct it.
Jojame appears to be asking: why should he care about commemorating the guy who had one of the smartest ideas in human history?
I guess it depends on whether you value ideas or not. If you don’t, go live in a cave and eat your food raw like a good little chimp.
neg (@68):
I don’t mean to get all deep ‘n’ shit, but I don’t really think it’s a matter of there being one correct way that “the world is organized.” The world is; understanding the world is a cognitive task that involves imposing some sort of organization on it. Evolution, for instance, involves a cognitively infinite number of cognitively infinitesimal changes… but if you simply say that’s the Truth of it, and it’s wrong to divvy it up beyond that, then you’ve left yourself nothing else to say about it. I gather from comments in another recent thread that the very concept of species is troublesome for evolutionary scientists, yet we continue to talk about species because it’s useful to be able to understand that a cat is different from a Pekingese in a different way than a Pekingese is different from a greyhound. We have to impose some sort of categorical scheme upon all the world’s living things, and all their infinite ancestors, in order to even be able to talk about it.
And so we must, too, about history, including the history of science. Some of those categorical schemes may be misleading or outright fraudulent, of course, and even with the best we must be mindful of the inherent biases of each… but a large variety of different schemes, each with its own perspective and level of granularity, may be valid for different purposes; what’s critical is whether a particular way of understanding is useful.
I mentioned recently that my daughter stage-managed a Yale student production of The History Boys. In that play, one of the students declares that “history is just one fucking thing after another”… which is, of course, true as far as it goes. But it doesn’t go far enough to allow meaningful discussion of/argument about what’s important in history. If we fail to tell the public something more structured about the history of science than that it’s just one fucking thing after another, we can only blame ourselves when the public ignores science.
IMHO, of course; YMM, as ever, V.
@74:
I see I should’ve had more confidence in your multicultural-fu! ;^)
Jojame, you have so much baggage that individual posts just will not cut it. Statements like Evolution is more of an academic discussion. does not help your cause. Evolution is as much of a game changer as the steam engine or the idea that the Earth revolves around the Sun as opposed to the Universe revolving around the Earth.
If you don’t, go live in a cave and eat your food raw like a good little chimp.
How dare you disparage our good and benevolent King Of All Typos.
jojame –
Exactly… this is the very point… early on, and at a very basic level, people don’t always relate to the science… but they do relate to the people.
Hawking is another example of this… given his physical challenges, and his life, he’s an interesting person… and oh, by the way… here’s the science you can learn that was important to him and what he was able to accomplish despite his limitations.
I’m not sure the goal has to be to get people to like Darwin… rather to expose them to his methods and accomplishments… and in the process learn exactly why Darwin’s “Origin” is just one piece of a much larger puzzle that is evolution. Recognize the man, understand exactly what he did and where it really fits in the world of science and why it was, and is, so important and now you’ve not only learned about Darwin and Natural Selection… you’ve learned about evolution and science in general. But without the name to catch your attention, you may never bother.
But you’re not thinking as a layperson.. you’re thinking as a person who already understands and accepts the scientific method and evolution in general… to the layperson, Darwin has a name recognition that goes beyond the simple science… to the layperson, Darwin is “that evolution guy”… sometimes that’s all it takes to spark a person into finding out more…
“Ya know, I’ve been meaning to learn more about this Darwin and evolution thing… I hear about it from time to time but I really don’t quite understand it… but if they’re celebrating this guy nationally maybe I should look into it a bit more”.
Yeah. That.
I mean, I’m not much for cults of personality myself. But you could write essays–and good ones–and good ones have been written–on Darwin. And upon the synthesis that has grown from his initial work.
I’ve said it before, will say it again: there’s a section in Cosmos on Kepler, about how perhaps the most fitting epitaph should at least mention that he preferred what the evidence was telling him about reality to his fondest preconceptions. Darwin’s work is another lovely illustration of this, in my opinion. Look at the world, ask yourself, what is this telling you, where does it lead? And go from there.
There’s a related and very relevant human drama in Darwin’s personal story, too. At the intersection of what his own observations are telling him and the complicated social world in which he lives is one man, with a wife and family and a place in society–a man who’ll delay for years, therefore, before finally committing what he has seen to print. Who finally has to be spurred by rivalry, apparently, to get the job done.
I love the old guy’s story, oddly enough, ever much the more for that. Hardly the silver-plated hero, so much as one complicated man in the mess the age and the world made for him, trying to figure out what the hell to do with it, and when. There’s a lot to identify with, there. And a lot to learn from.
Then you are failing. Try harder, starting with less posts. Your premises are bad, your logic is bad, and your conclusions are abysmal. This has been pointed out to you time and time again, not only by me, but by almost anyone responding to you. We aren’t going to learn anything from you because of this. You need to learn from us. So spend more time listening, less trying to preach the inane gospel according to Jojame.
Bill,
Of course we need something structured, with key milestones, scientists, and discoveries. But we don’t need to super-impose some kind of artificial hierarchy, with the most important scientist, the second best, etc… I’d rather think of layers of inquiry, like an onion, and encourage people who want to learn more to go deeper and deeper.
You gotta be outta your goddamn mind to think Barry “expand the office of faith-based initiatives” Obama will enact this as written, or in any other way. Darwin is the bestest evar, I agree. But this country hasn’t come far enough yet. If there is a Rational Thought Movement analogous to the Civil Rights Movement, we’re in the fifties and MLK day won’t be enacted for at least 30 more years.
–
Is it just me, or in a post-birther world does anyone else automatically discount anything said by someone who refers to the president as “Barry”?
It’s not just you…
Ah, Don’t call me a birther, please. I can understand the association. Actually, I was calling him Barry before those freaksacks started to. It’s just a fun nickname. I caucused for the dude. I will thank the birthers for giving me a bitchin’ idea for a band name. Maybe someday you will see it in lights: “Barry Soetoro-Ng and the Homobortionist Jewspiracy.” I’ll make a mint, I tell ya!
neg (@96):
We may be fast approaching the philosophical deep end, but…
…I’m not sure I can grok the distinction between identifying certain moments, people, and ideas as key, on the one hand, and creating “some kind of artificial hierarchy” on the other. At some level, it seems to me that the very definition of thinking involves imposing an “artificial” construction on the miasma of facts that is the world as it is
Mind you, I don’t necessarily consider “artificial” pejorative.
All that said, I think this…
…is not to far from what I was talking about when I mentioned levels of granularity. Do you doubt that there’s some level of granularity — maybe optical resolution is a better metaphor — at which the only figure clearly visible in the realm of evolutionary science looks like Darwin? Doesn’t mean the picture doesn’t look different at higher resolutions….
Bill Dauphin @ 65, don’t you mean either [/Chevy Chase] or [/Garrett Morris presenting news for the hard of hearing]? [/showing my age]
jojame @ 69, “it isn’t a very fun holiday” — WTF?? Do you think Memorial Day started out as a fun holiday? And if I were to make a list of the one thousand people most appreciated in this (perishing?) republic, I doubt I would name Leif Ericson.
I signed the petition, although I do agree with Louis that a Species Day would be preferable. Too bad the petition didn’t provide for individual comments, as in, “Mr. President, I voted for you in 2008. When is the guy I voted for going to show up?”
Yeah- another holiday right up there with the easter bunny and santa claus…
My earlier comment about the potential for presidential assassination was certainly exagerrated — but by how much? I didn’t mean “If Obama signs this, he shall surely die.” (I’m not Elohim… ;) I just meant that it would somewhat up the already not-great odds. When LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he increased his risk of assassination. I’m just saying that in this case, it wouldn’t be worth it. Something like repealing DADT would be worth the additional ire of crazies, but not this. Not until evolution becomes more widely acceptable in the public consciousness, and the evidence is that it gradually is (much of it, I’m sure, due to the steadfastness of all those New Atheists).
Suppose that in 2013, a reelected Obama publicly declared himself to be an atheist. I would be ecstatic (hey, two milestones for the price of one!), but I’m sure at least one of the Secret Service, believer or no, would groan and smack her forehead. In the minds of many, a Darwin Day in 2010 wouldn’t be that far.
Indeed, many of us here, including myself, have argued for the irreconcilability of science and religion. Well, in what sense then would Darwin Day (or any Science Day) not be an atheist (or at least agnostic) holiday?
I’ll answer my own question. Religion is irreconcilable with science just as it is with politics — for why bother to govern effectively if the Lord is just going to restore all to justice and send us good guys to paradise anyway? I’d much rather have a President (and a governor, and a congressional representative) who believed that this life is the only one we get, no do-overs possible. Someday, maybe, we’ll get there. Such as it is, politicians seem to live with the cognitive dissonance.
Oh, me and my not previewing. The end italic tag after “somewhat” wasn’t closed. Here’s the “correct” paragraph:
My earlier comment about the potential for presidential assassination was certainly exagerrated — but by how much? I didn’t mean “If Obama signs this, he shall surely die.” (I’m not Elohim… ;) I just meant that it would somewhat up the already not-great odds. When LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he increased his risk of assassination. I’m just saying that in this case, it wouldn’t be worth it. Something like repealing DADT would be worth the additional ire of crazies, but not this. Not until evolution becomes more widely acceptable in the public consciousness, and the evidence is that it gradually is (much of it, I’m sure, due to the steadfastness of all those New Atheists).
Which is still a piss-poor reason for action or inaction on a given issue…
That all sounds good and fine but we already have Presidents Day in February. It is Black History month, do you really think that celebrating yet another White man in this month, would fly in this day of extreme political correctness?
How about we move it to March.
Bill Dauphin OM #61
During the American Revolution Franklin went to France as the American ambassador because he was the only American most Europeans had ever heard of. He was named chairman of the Royal Commission investigating Franz Mesmer’s “animal magnetism” because Franklin was a noted scientist.*
*Antoine Lavoisier and astronomer Jean-Sylvain Bailly were also commission members. Another commission member was physician Joseph-Ignace Guillotin, after whom is named the cause of death for both Lavoisier and Bailly.
I’m fairly sure chimps don’t live in caves. I have cousins who live in trees, though. The family tries not to talk about them.
I don’t worship Darwin, so why would I petition to have the president recognize his “Day”? I don’t care if anyone else celebrates it. As far as I am concerned, every day is Darwin day because every day I get to see the products of evolution. Anyway, this is going to be taken as a political nod to the atheists of Obama does it, and it’s only going to further cement the idea in our society that darwin==evolution==atheism. I happen to be an atheist, but I say don’t give the loons anymore obvious ammo.
Bill,
No because I don’t think we should ever teach the history of biology with only Darwin on the basic, first layer. Nor should we teach the history of Physics with only Newton on the basic layer. Nor should we teach the history of France with only Napoleon on the first layer.
If we do this, we shouldn’t be surprised if people end up with a completely warped vision of history or Science.
Who was more “important” : Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Maxwell, or Bohr ? The question doesn’t make any sense.
What is more “important” : Physics, Chemistry, Biology, or Geology ? The question doesn’t make any sense either.
So I recognize that there needs to be a certain structure, for instance a basic layer with only a few key milestones and scientists and discoveries and how they relate to each other. But if people aren’t even willing to do that basic effort of understanding and knowledge building, we shouldn’t attempt to reduce it even further just to please them because they are too lazy or disinterested to learn the very basics. Then it becomes a farce. And a nation of ignorants.
This is first order fuckwittery. No one, as far as I’m aware, worships Washington, Lincoln, or MLK either, and we recognize their days. Darwin’s theory has had at least as much impact (think medicine) and so, should be recognized as such. At least once in a hundred years.
Celebrating Charles Darwin’s birthday is like celebrating the anniversary of a toothache. I was too busy aborting all the other fetuses while his mother was pregnant and forgot about him. I can’t get that old-time respect any more. It’s so depressing I now need to think up a new plague or something to cheer up Myself a bit.
That swine flu was no picnic but really didn’t kill all that many people. I was only sick for two days.
You aren’t losing your touch are you?
I have signed and think it is an excellent idea. It brings into stark recognition a subject that often has numerous lies spread about it and it might well help people to investigate a bit further into the science. I agree with Celtic_Evolution’s reasoning about having a figure that people can engage with rather than just the science behind it, the one can lead to the other.
@56- “Every time a religious nut makes a comment along the line of ‘those atheists/scientists/skeptics/humanists’ as if we are of one cloth, they should be pointed to this thread.”
Then they’d use it as proof of “schisms” which render us irrelevant to public discourse. We just can’t win. :-P
Which strikes me as rather laughable – the entire concept of declaring a Something Day without making that day a national holiday seems exclusively American to me.
Not really. In the UK, I can think of several days which have some sort of national recognition but which are not public holidays. The Queen’s official birthday,* for instance, is recognised by government and marked by official ceremonies in London, but is not a public holiday in the UK (though it is in many of the other Commonwealth realms).
*Not Her Majesty’s actual date of birth. The monarch’s official birthday is fixed at the same date for every monarch, regardless of when he or she was actually born.
@ 42What about Edison?!
According to several people alive at the time Edison was an asshole and a thug. Famous for reverse-engineering and then appropriating patents. Tried to do it to Alexander Graham Bell and would have if Bell’s Daddy-in-Law hadn’t hired some sharp-toothed lawyers to protect his telephone patents. (Electric Universe, David Bodanis Feb,’O5)
Meanwhile, president Obama will speak at the National Prayer Breakfast on thursday…
#106 Celtic Evolution: Which is still a piss-poor reason for action or inaction on a given issue…
I don’t really disagree, but note what I said about LBJ — very often, increasing those odds is totally worth it for the sake of a greater good. (To use another, maybe less controversial example, Lincoln’s risking his own assassination by his abolitionist actions was worth it for this country.) My point is that if nobody’s going to lose their rights or their life because Darwin Day is not recognized, riling up evangelicals might not be worth it. It’s not like the ERA or same-sex marriage.
All that said, if something like this went to Congress for approval, I’d be largely for it. When things pass Congress, people feel more like they happened democratically — and there’s no clear single target for the haters to hate, save the mild-mannered English naturalist they’ve always hated anyway.
Meh, you know what? I completely take back my stupid depressing point about presidential murder. I mean, PZ got death threats for the incredibly trivial act of throwing away a cookie; that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t have done it.
Viz Obama, a more relevant argument relates to his political capital. Right now, he’s got a very good chance at 2012; I don’t want him to (needlessly) become the Darwin President without the country having undergone a major paradigm shift first.
But that’s just me. If we have a Darwin Day, I promise to celebrate it to my utmost. Hmm, all these comments and no one’s even brought up the question of how Darwin Day ought to be celebrated!
A Sourdough Darwin Fish… I can easily imagine how to make one… Hollow the top and fill it with something yummy. How do Galapagos Finches taste? JKs…
neg (@111):
Despite our (IMHO slighter than it seems) disagreement about approach, I grok we’re fundamentally on the same side, so I won’t belabor this much longer. That said…
All of ’em.
Of course. But each of those names is more “important,” at least in the sense of being an iconic figure in his particular field of work, that any of his colleagues. Are the presidents on Mount Rushmore more important than each other? No, that’s why all four of them are there. Are they more important than the other presidents? Depends on what value of “important” you apply: Some might prefer Wilson up there; some of us who yearn for what our political enemies demonize as socialism might replace Teddy Roosevelt with Franklin… but those who love the national parks and conservationism wouldn’t make that swap. Nobody suggests they’re the only great presidents, or necessarily even the greatest; what’s clear, though, is that they’re iconic figures.
Galileo is by no means the greatest figure in the history of astronomy: He used a crappy telescope to observe things any child could see today with a cheap pair of binoculars or a Wal-Mart scope… but say “astronomy” to someone who knows nothing about it, and the first name they’ll come up with is Galileo. Is Einstein really more important to the history of physics than Planck or Heisenberg or Gell-Mann or Feynman or Hawking? Depends on what you’re looking into…. but say “theoretical physics” and Einstein’s will be the first name out of every mouth.
Evidently, you see this focus on iconic figures as a Bug, Not a Feature©…
…but I’m not so sure. First, I think focus on key individuals is a normal aspect of how humans think about things, and the farther in the past, or the more distant from a person’s immediate daily concerns, a thing is, the more immensely key the figure needs to be to command attention. The fact that a person might be able to name half the starting quarterbacks in the NFL but the only biologist s/he can name is Darwin does not mean that person is stupid or lazy; it only means that sports is part of his/her daily life. Making evolutionary biology — and science generally — part of the lives of people like that is our project, not theirs, so it’s up to us to meet them where they are.
Evolution = Darwin is where most people are; celebrating Darwin’s life is a way of engaging them, and an essential starting point if we want to lead them to some deeper understanding of science and its impact on their lives.
David M (@117):
As I read the International Darwin Day Foundation website, what they’re trying to accomplish is to make Darwin Day a global celebration. It is, in fact, an American project (managed by the American Humanist Association), but at least according to most prevailing stereotypes about us Yanks, it seems like a degree of internationalism that’s the polar opposite of an “exclusively American” idea.
raven (@114):
FTW!!1! Effin’ hilarious!
I have signed but think it will not be accepted as a resolution by Obama. That being said, I think that what’s importance here is to keep hammering on not only the goal of Darwin and evolution but solid science education, in general, here in the US.
If I’m reading some commenters correctly, it seems as though they want to only cautiously push at the buttons of education change in the US. To which I say simply, “damn the torpedoes full speed ahead!”
IMHO, one need look only at how the religious and “flat-earth” believers have achieved their status of ignorance czars to date. For our issues to be heard above their foul din of drooling ignorance we must be willing to do almost anything. So to me, signing the Darwin petition is but one tool in the toolkit to help overcome ignorance and further the goal of solid science education here in the US.
Re: An american scientist we can honor in lieu of CD.
Ummm. James D. Watson?
“Your premises are bad, your logic is bad, and your conclusions are abysmal.”
You Dr. Venkman, are a poor scientist.
:P
Er…
@123, by…
…I meant…
And yes, I know Ben Franklin was never president, but because we’d been talking about him earlier in the thread, I thought that might be confusing. If not, well… <emily_litella>never mind!</emily_litella>
This would be too good if he actually acknowledged Darwin day.
Re: An american scientist we can honor in lieu of CD.
Jane Lubchenco
Come on! I agree that Darwin Day is a good idea. But let’s not give Obama another headache at this time. Why don’t we wait on this until he takes care of some of the serious problems facing his administration and our country.
Like: health care, don’t ask don’t tell, same sex marriage, the two wars, the banks, the recession, the deficit, the Texas textbooks situation, network neutrality, the separation of church and state, runaway unemployment, an uninspiring democratic party, and and a republican party trying to stop him at every turn, who called in the filibuster more times this last year than it’s been used in the last 20 years, and whose next goal is to try to impeach him, or prove he is either a terrorist or not born in the US.
Why don’t we roll up our sleeves lend our collective energy and intelligence to help tackle those major issues first. Then when Obama is a lame duck president, we can hit him with this kind of stuff.
That is the problem with us lefties, Obama is up against the wall and we want to throw in a wrench? The fight for a Darwin day is not worth the setbacks at this point in time. Let’s cut the guy some slack!
The Problem with “(Insert Person)” Days is that you take the skeletons with the good. I know that Columbus day isn’t without it’s controversy for example. And old Chucky boy wasn’t perfect.
If it’s really the science part of it one likes, then maybe that’s what should be honoured. In fact, turning Columbus day into a general Discovery day would probably kill two stones with one bird.
Frank. No one cares about your opinion. Go away.
KillJoy:Re:
I hope that was a snark.
sorry, that should say “two birds with one stone.” I’ll chalk that up to an overly long day.
mookiemu (@130):
I generally agree with you about setting priorities and marshalling resources (including political will and public goodwill) for fights we can actually win. I’m right there with you as far as that goes.
But signing a petition that asks the president to issue a purely ceremonial proclamation doesn’t strike me as a particular fight, nor as any real political risk.
I signed the petition not so much because I care whether Obama actually makes the proclamation — I think it’s a fine idea, and I hope he does it, but I won’t lose any sleep if he doesn’t — but because I want to help establish a base of data that says science has a real constituency. I see my signature as an investment in a future in which our leaders actually believe we care about science and reason. If I thought I were trading away action on healthcare or climate change or jobs creation by signing, I wouldn’t have signed… but I don’t believe I was making that trade, and that’s why I did sign.
I waited too long to respond to the people who failed to understand what I was saying, so I doubt anyone will bother to read this. But I’ll give it a go, anyway.
I’m not suggesting we all play down our opinions because it will upset the loud, obnoxious creationists. I’m only saying that by baiting them by idolizing Charles Darwin in a nationally recognized day, we’re just “fueling the culture wars” as another commenter said. It’s counter-productive. It’s NOT going to convert anyone to our way of thinking, it can ONLY serve to drive creationists in to a tighter, more extremist group.
Wait… what? Recognizing a great man for his extremely important contributions to his given field of science and its benefit to the world = idolatry???
And as far as not doing so for fear of “fueling the culture wars”… fuck that. What a ridiculous reason for doing or not doing something. Should we have chosen not to honor Martin Luther King for fear of “fueling the race wars”? Please… stop it with this argument…
@ Torontonian # 136
I agree that the Teapartyers will see a Darwin Day as a provocation, as anti-American, etc. and besides I think president Obama doesn’t want to antagonise the Right.
“I agree that the Teapartyers will see a Darwin Day as a provocation”
That’s half true. The other half is that having a “Darwin Day” probably is itself fairly reactionary, competing as it does with other holidays that hold different values.
This is a genuine question. What is the best way to promote reason, logic, discovery, all those good things? Is that to name a day after it? Being inspired with an idea is one of those things that often leads to muddled thinking in the long haul. (how does something like earth day get a bad wrap?). In fact, if I really wanted to promote something to disentangle the webs of superstition that hover above us in daily life, I’d probably do something like have just a regular holiday to quell the passions of prejudice. I think I would call it “civic holiday”
@ Frank O. Saurus # 139
What is the best way to promote reason, logic, discovery, all those good things?
I’d say through education at home and at school and by being reasonable in everyday life, think logically at least half the time, and being curious.