<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New giant prehistoric fish found in Kansas museums</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/4835/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/4835</link>
	<description>History fetish? What history fetish?</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:54:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gayle M</title>
		<link>http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/4835/comment-page-1#comment-43847</link>
		<dc:creator>Gayle M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 14:13:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thehistoryblog.com/?p=4835#comment-43847</guid>
		<description>Yes, thank you. I apologize for my sweeping generalization. My family is from neighboring Missouri, where crazy legislative agendas often run roughshod over the public will, also.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, thank you. I apologize for my sweeping generalization. My family is from neighboring Missouri, where crazy legislative agendas often run roughshod over the public will, also.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: livius drusus</title>
		<link>http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/4835/comment-page-1#comment-43823</link>
		<dc:creator>livius drusus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 05:33:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thehistoryblog.com/?p=4835#comment-43823</guid>
		<description>Thank you for the nuanced explanation, Null. That was enlightening.  :thanks:</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for the nuanced explanation, Null. That was enlightening.  <img src='http://www.thehistoryblog.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/thanks.gif' alt=':thanks:' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nullifidian</title>
		<link>http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/4835/comment-page-1#comment-43822</link>
		<dc:creator>Nullifidian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 05:25:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thehistoryblog.com/?p=4835#comment-43822</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve got to stand up for my old home state, as I used to live, work, and study in Kansas (at the U of Kansas in Lawrence, in the NE of the state just about half an hour&#039;s drive from Topeka and 45 minutes from Kansas City).

The creationism in Kansas stories came about because of a well-known tactic that opponents have come to call &quot;stealth creationism&quot;. This is especially true of the second time they tried to push a creationist agenda on the state. The first time, it took a couple of years, but in 2001 challengers in the state Republican primaries replaced the pro-creationism stealth candidates and voted in a curriculum that explicitly included evolution and the origin and age of the earth again.

In 2004, there was a stealth creationist majority again that ran candidates and basically existed only to push the creationist agenda. I was actually in Kansas for this one, just 30 minutes&#039; drive from the state capital, as I noted above. From this proximity, I was able to attend the state BoE hearings and see how much the creationist majority simply ran roughshod over popular opinion, not just from the professors and teachers in the area, but also from parents and the general public at every hearing. The new pro-IDC standards were approved in 2005, and the following year everyone who was up for re-election who voted for that was defeated in primary challenges by other Republicans.

The only reason these situations came about is because Kansas is a heavily Republican state, so any Republican candidate for state BoE who wins the primary election is practically guaranteed a seat. But if the general public wanted creationism in its schools then it wouldn&#039;t be necessary to run stealth campaigns, nor would the candidates constantly be defeated at the primary stage as soon as their terms were up. If Kansans wanted creationism, then they&#039;d just brave the public ridicule, which didn&#039;t have any affect on anybody at the time, even the supporters of proper science, and keep their creationist BoE members.

And on a happier topic, there was a book that came out while I was living in Kansas called &lt;i&gt;Oceans of Kansas: A Natural History of the Western Interior Sea&lt;/i&gt; by Michael J. Everhart of the Sternberg Natural History Museum. It&#039;s a book I can recommend highly. :yes:</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve got to stand up for my old home state, as I used to live, work, and study in Kansas (at the U of Kansas in Lawrence, in the NE of the state just about half an hour&#8217;s drive from Topeka and 45 minutes from Kansas City).</p>
<p>The creationism in Kansas stories came about because of a well-known tactic that opponents have come to call &#8220;stealth creationism&#8221;. This is especially true of the second time they tried to push a creationist agenda on the state. The first time, it took a couple of years, but in 2001 challengers in the state Republican primaries replaced the pro-creationism stealth candidates and voted in a curriculum that explicitly included evolution and the origin and age of the earth again.</p>
<p>In 2004, there was a stealth creationist majority again that ran candidates and basically existed only to push the creationist agenda. I was actually in Kansas for this one, just 30 minutes&#8217; drive from the state capital, as I noted above. From this proximity, I was able to attend the state BoE hearings and see how much the creationist majority simply ran roughshod over popular opinion, not just from the professors and teachers in the area, but also from parents and the general public at every hearing. The new pro-IDC standards were approved in 2005, and the following year everyone who was up for re-election who voted for that was defeated in primary challenges by other Republicans.</p>
<p>The only reason these situations came about is because Kansas is a heavily Republican state, so any Republican candidate for state BoE who wins the primary election is practically guaranteed a seat. But if the general public wanted creationism in its schools then it wouldn&#8217;t be necessary to run stealth campaigns, nor would the candidates constantly be defeated at the primary stage as soon as their terms were up. If Kansans wanted creationism, then they&#8217;d just brave the public ridicule, which didn&#8217;t have any affect on anybody at the time, even the supporters of proper science, and keep their creationist BoE members.</p>
<p>And on a happier topic, there was a book that came out while I was living in Kansas called <i>Oceans of Kansas: A Natural History of the Western Interior Sea</i> by Michael J. Everhart of the Sternberg Natural History Museum. It&#8217;s a book I can recommend highly. <img src='http://www.thehistoryblog.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/nod.gif' alt=':yes:' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: livius drusus</title>
		<link>http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/4835/comment-page-1#comment-43816</link>
		<dc:creator>livius drusus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 20:56:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thehistoryblog.com/?p=4835#comment-43816</guid>
		<description>:lol:  All you need is one extraordinarily fertile family to pwn 60% of the state.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> <img src='http://www.thehistoryblog.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/laugh.gif' alt=':lol:' class='wp-smiley' />  All you need is one extraordinarily fertile family to pwn 60% of the state.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gayle M</title>
		<link>http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/4835/comment-page-1#comment-43815</link>
		<dc:creator>Gayle M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 20:01:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thehistoryblog.com/?p=4835#comment-43815</guid>
		<description>Ironic, given the fact that Kansas is one of those states where like 80% of the population thinks the earth is 6,000 years old.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ironic, given the fact that Kansas is one of those states where like 80% of the population thinks the earth is 6,000 years old.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

