Let’s fight the “war on science” (endorsed by Dr. Michio Kaku, Dr. Richard Dawkins, and Richard Dawkins)
The “war on science” occurs when a handful of people take issue with their community’s research and academic ways of doing things. When scientist-advocates and their vocal support base (usually made up of industrial and political interests) decide to tell everyone else that the prevailing scientific opinion is wrong, it’s often because they’re trying to change the status quo. At its worst, this can include denying scientific findings that are proven, or forcing researchers and scientists to conform to incorrect preferences, or callously shutting down research. This is why the “war on science” isn’t just a political hoax, but an issue of religion as well.
Thus, it makes sense that the current push by Dr. Michio Kaku and his ilk has a religious character. Kaku and his followers take the role of religious prophets; their target is to influence public opinion by using a medium of which their constituency is already so familiar, namely TV. In this view, TV is the medium that must be used to coerce public opinion (just as a theologian is called upon to proselytize through his or her church).
Equally important, it’s the most easy to use TV and radio, because it’s the most accessible medium. Unlike a priest or a rabbi, the target audience for this campaign is parents and their children. That is, they’re primarily concerned with the opinions and beliefs of children, rather than whether the information conveyed is accurate and correct. They therefore don’t see the value of supporting a conversation with their children about science, which is why this argument has become so common.
Of course, while there’s nothing wrong with repeating science teachers’ information to their kids (if it’s being delivered in the proper way), it’s almost certainly unnecessary, because the scientific message they present to their students is correct. Their particular way of doing so, though, is not.
It’s worth remembering that any time a teaching tool is used incorrectly, it has an effect on students. For that reason, the temptation to correct students by erroneous repetition is always present, and trying to insert one’s own “belief” into science is being coached, therefore using the teaching tool wrong is damaging to the students it’s supposed to help. Instead, the message conveyed to students should be authoritative and provided on the basis of good scholarship.
Besides, according to most scientists, there’s no need to correct students’ wrong beliefs because that’s the kind of faith they’ve inherited. In fact, while believers might have believed that they’re all created by God, scientists believe that science, at least as it’s known now, has proved the opposite.
The reason it’s unreasonable to expect students to have an accurate idea of what God is when they’re six years old is because of the highly selective nature of the understanding God seeks in life. No single God will know all that’s in our brains. (Many may have developed their own understanding of God; Jesus didn’t have anything like God. Likewise, Krishnas don’t have the clarity of the mind of the Buddha.) Moreover, God wants to create only the mind that’s on the other side of perfect consciousness. (There’s no such thing as perfect awareness, only awareness that’s created through distinct systems.)
Once a God-self is determined, it’s a matter of removing all the extraneous qualities from the mind that interfere with creating that perfect consciousness. Only then will the mind be free of any extraneous influences so that the user can become closer to God. To repeat, God isn’t looking for that which exists inside the mind; instead, he’s seeking that which creates. A six-year-old child is hardly qualified to understand this.
In short, in order to ensure accuracy, scientists need to educate their teachers, not their students. In the interest of educating their students, scientists have to make mistakes. In order to make the mistakes productive, they need to be recognized as such, and can’t be confused with the negative phenomena that are occurring between the teacher and student.
Nevertheless, when it comes to so-called war on science, the teachers, not the students, are the victims of the theological agenda.