Another year brings another Darwin Day, this time being the 201st birthday of the Bearded One. The Biological Sciences Club along with Dr. Kelly had a viewing of filmmaker Randy Olson's 2006 documentary "Flock of Dodos: The Evolution-Intelligent Design Circus", which is a film I've been wanting to see for a while since I saw its name tossed about last year in my browsing.
Olson uses humor and animated graphics to capture the attention of a general audience, and his interviews are conversational (in fact, one of his meetings with scientists is actually a poker game) He highlights both sides as potential (if not already) 'dodos'- ID populists who insist on 'teaching the controversy' as well as erudite scientists so far removed in their ivory towers that they've lost how to connect with the general public.
This being 2006, he takes his camera to Kansas to talk to the Kansas Board of Education members still reeling from Evolution War II (as opposed to Evolution War I which was a more obviously creationist attempt to wedge 'alternate views' in the 90s), one of whom coincidentally lives across the corner from his mother. He also talks to intellectuals around the country including Michael Behe (who despite his views I still regard as some kind of scientist, even if his 'theory' doesn't hold water).
Olson makes the interesting observation that the Intelligent Design movement is a more marketable approach, with buzz phrases 'Teach the Controversy', 'there are flaws', 'where's the proof?' etc. and friendly supporters you could easily have a beer with (or at least lemonade and brownies). The scientific establishment, however, can't seem to communicate effectively and are somewhat argumentative (or at least during a poker game with alcoholic lubrication).
The neighborly barmate analogy he borrowed and used from the 2004 Presidential campaigns, and unfortunately the same attraction seems to appear today in the form of the Tea Party movement along with its darling, Sarah Palin. Folksy populism and mild sex appeal are great advertising, shiny wrappers. However, Sarah, the Tea Party, and Intelligent Design all share the same lack of substance beneath the glitz and glamour. Intelligent design, as previously discussed in this blog lacks testable research and actually discourages finding natural explanations beyond 'somebody did it.' Likewise, for all the outrage and screaming they've been whipping up, the Tea Party is still largely that- angry people who misappropriated historical events for their outrage (the original Boston Tea Party was more in protest of the British East India Company becoming a monopoly on tea, etc. etc. like a nightmarish WalMart). But I digress.
My seemingly irrelevant tangent to modern politics merely restates the documentary's message- science needs to better communicate information, research, and models to the general public, educating them with interesting things to combat attractive anti-intellectuals with ad company slogans. In my personal opinion based on my background, I feel one step would be to better promote public television programs if children must be parked in front of the boob tube. Relatable icons like Bill Nye the Science Guy and the characters of The Magic School Bus captivate attention and effectively promote scientific literacy.
As a postscript, I'll sadly note that the majority of the audience for this viewing were students largely there for extra credit in their Biol 102 course, uninterested in a discussion afterwards. Olson's humor was appreciated though, and hopefully brought his points across. This was a much more digestible film than Ben Stein's Expelled last year.
No comments:
Post a Comment