Thursday, October 27, 2005

In which I copy-edit the Times (Jodi Wilgoren shouldn't write about evolution edition)

Kansas Fight on Evolution Escalates (so far so good, I suppose):
Two leading science organizations have denied the Kansas Board of Education permission to use their copyrighted materials as part of the state's proposed new science standards because of the standards' critical approach to evolution.
No. If you look at the explanation offered by the NAS or the joint NAS/NSTA statement, you'll see that the complaint is not with a critical approach to evolution, but with inaccurate and misleading statements in the proposed standards. The accurate ending to that sentence would be
…because of the standards' inaccurate approach to evolution.
While the Board might whine that asserting that the standards are inaccurate grants their opponents' premise, that would only be true if one had a weak grasp of grammar.

The sentence refers not to the standards but to the motivation behind the actions of the National Academies of Science and National Science Teachers Association. They are not unhappy because of critical thinking, but because of inaccuracies, and the opening sentence of the article should reflect that.

Plus, closet creationists shouldn't write about evolution.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,