Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Biology textbook hearings prompt science disputes [Texas]
Knight Ridder Newspapers ^ | 08 July 2003 | MATT FRAZIER

Posted on 07/09/2003 12:08:32 PM PDT by PatrickHenry

FORT WORTH, Texas - (KRT) -
The long-running debate over the origins of mankind continues Wednesday before the Texas State Board of Education, and the result could change the way science is taught here and across the nation.

Local and out-of-state lobbying groups will try to convince the board that the next generation of biology books should contain new scientific evidence that reportedly pokes holes in Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

Many of those groups say that they are not pushing to place a divine creator back into science books, but to show that Darwin's theory is far from a perfect explanation of the origin of mankind.

"It has become a battle ground," said Eugenie Scott, executive director of theNational Center of Science Education, which is dedicated to defending the teaching of evolution in the classroom.

Almost 45 scientists, educators and special interest groups from across the state will testify at the state's first public hearing this year on the next generation of textbooks for the courses of biology, family and career studies and English as a Second Language.

Approved textbooks will be available for classrooms for the 2004-05 school year. And because Texas is the second largest textbook buyer in the nation, the outcome could affect education nationwide.

The Texas Freedom Network and a handful of educators held a conference call last week to warn that conservative Christians and special interest organizations will try to twist textbook content to further their own views.

"We are seeing the wave of the future of religious right's attack on basic scientific principles," said Samantha Smoot, executive director of the network, an anti-censorship group and opponent of the radical right.

Those named by the network disagree with the claim, including the Discovery Institute and its Science and Culture Center of Seattle.

"Instead of wasting time looking at motivations, we wish people would look at the facts," said John West, associate director of the center.

"Our goal nationally is to encourage schools and educators to include more about evolution, including controversies about various parts of Darwinian theory that exists between even evolutionary scientists," West said. "We are a secular think tank."

The institute also is perhaps the nation's leading proponent of intelligent design - the idea that life is too complex to have occurred without the help of an unknown, intelligent being.

It pushed this view through grants to teachers and scientists, including Michael J. Behe, professor of biological sciences at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. The Institute receives millions of dollars from philanthropists and foundations dedicated to discrediting Darwin's theory.

The center sent the state board a 55-page report that graded 11 high school biology textbooks submitted for adoption. None earned a grade above a C minus. The report also includes four arguments it says show that evolutionary theory is not as solid as presented in biology textbooks.

Discovery Institute Fellow Raymond Bohlin, who also is executive director of Probe Ministries, based in Richardson, Texas, will deliver that message in person Wednesday before the State Board of Education. Bohlin has a doctorate degree in molecular cell biology from the University of Texas at Dallas.

"If we can simply allow students to see that evolution is not an established fact, that leaves freedom for students to pursue other ideas," Bohlin said. "All I can do is continue to point these things out and hopefully get a group that hears and sees relevant data and insist on some changes."

The executive director of Texas Citizens for Science, Steven Schafersman, calls the institute's information "pseudoscience nonsense." Schafersman is an evolutionary scientist who, for more than two decades, taught biology, geology, paleontology and environmental science at a number of universities, including the University of Houston and the University of Texas of the Permian Basin.

"It sounds plausible to people who are not scientifically informed," Schafersman said. "But they are fraudulently trying to deceive board members. They might succeed, but it will be over the public protests of scientists."

The last time Texas looked at biology books, in 1997, the State Board of Education considered replacing them all with new ones that did not mention evolution. The board voted down the proposal by a slim margin.

The state requires that evolution be in textbooks. But arguments against evolution have been successful over the last decade in other states. Alabama, New Mexico and Nebraska made changes that, to varying degrees, challenge the pre-eminence of evolution in the scientific curriculum.

In 1999, the Kansas Board of Education voted to wash the concepts of evolution from the state's science curricula. A new state board has since put evolution back in. Last year, the Cobb County school board in Georgia voted to include creationism in science classes.

Texas education requirements demand that textbooks include arguments for and against evolution, said Neal Frey, an analyst working with perhaps Texas' most famous textbook reviewers, Mel and Norma Gabler.

The Gablers, of Longview, have been reviewing Texas textbooks for almost four decades. They describe themselves as conservative Christians. Some of their priorities include making sure textbooks include scientific flaws in arguments for evolution.

"None of the texts truly conform to the state's requirements that the strengths and weaknesses of scientific theories be presented to students," Frey said.

The Texas textbook proclamation of 2001, which is part of the standard for the state's curriculum, Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, requires that biology textbooks instruct students so they may "analyze, review and critique scientific explanations, including hypotheses and theories, as to their strengths and weakness using scientific evidence and information."

The state board is empowered to reject books only for factual errors or for not meeting the state's curriculum requirements. If speakers convince the state board that their evidence is scientifically sound, members may see little choice but to demand its presence in schoolbooks.

Proposed books already have been reviewed and approved by Texas Tech University. After a public hearing Wednesday and another Sept. 10, the state board is scheduled to adopt the new textbooks in November.

Satisfying the state board is only half the battle for textbook publishers. Individual school districts choose which books to use and are reimbursed by the state unless they buy texts rejected by the state board.

Districts can opt not to use books with passages they find objectionable. So when speakers at the public hearings criticize what they perceived as flaws in various books - such as failing to portray the United States or Christianity in a positive light - many publishers listen.

New books will be distributed next summer.

State Board member Terri Leo said the Discovery Institute works with esteemed scientists and that their evidence should be heard.

"You cannot teach students how to think if you don't present both sides of a scientific issue," Leo said. "Wouldn't you think that the body that has the responsibility of what's in the classroom would look at all scientific arguments?"

State board member Bob Craig said he had heard of the Intelligent Design theory.

"I'm going in with an open mind about everybody's presentation," Craig said. "I need to hear their presentation before I make any decisions or comments.

State board member Mary Helen Berlanga said she wanted to hear from local scientists.

"If we are going to discuss scientific information in the textbooks, the discussion will have to remain scientific," Berlanga said. "I'd like to hear from some of our scientists in the field on the subject."


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,581-1,6001,601-1,6201,621-1,640 ... 4,381-4,387 next last
To: ALS
Limited government is one of the central tenets of the Republican party.

Theocracy is not. Not a central tenet, not a tenet, period.
1,601 posted on 07/12/2003 11:49:33 AM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1597 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
You realize that the current head of our party is a fundamentalist who actually reads the Bible for himself.
1,602 posted on 07/12/2003 11:49:49 AM PDT by bondserv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1580 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
"Theocracy is not."

then stop claiming it is
1,603 posted on 07/12/2003 11:51:02 AM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1601 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Reality is our friend ...

people who reject - deny it ---

take on weird esoteric personae - role playing (( ego - bias whacks )) !

Like evolution ...

delusians of grandeur - science - truth - royalty - priests - popes - martyrs (( ph )) ---

zealots - hyper patriots - pc bots - NAZIS !

Liberal with fantasy ... and cheap with reality --- evolutionists !
1,604 posted on 07/12/2003 11:51:03 AM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1592 | View Replies]

To: bondserv
HORRORS!
1,605 posted on 07/12/2003 11:51:30 AM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1602 | View Replies]

To: ALS
ah2 ... reverse (( botched )) evolution // time travel --- the ' fly ' !
1,606 posted on 07/12/2003 11:53:04 AM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1595 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
A reminder!
1,607 posted on 07/12/2003 11:53:09 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1593 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
You were going great this far:

Reality is our friend ... people who reject - deny it --- take on weird esoteric personae - role playing (( ego - bias whacks )) !
... but then you lost your way.
1,608 posted on 07/12/2003 11:54:33 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1604 | View Replies]

To: bondserv
Thanks bondserv. That will go nicely with Ann Coulter's statement:

======
"Conservatives, by and large believe in God, and liberals believe they

are gods," came the reply.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33427


You realize that the current head of our party is a fundamentalist who actually reads the Bible for himself.
Bondserv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/943130/posts?page=1602#1602
1,609 posted on 07/12/2003 11:54:46 AM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1602 | View Replies]

To: ALS
>>then stop claiming it is<<

I disagree with your argument that evolution is a religion but let's examine your premise.

If evolution is a religion, in what way is the Republican party theocratic? In what way is Congress theocratic? In what way are state legislators and governors theocratic?

I understand that you are disappointed that your religious beliefs do not control what others think.

However, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Not the Bible.

God is ultimately in charge but if God favors fundamentalists over the rest of us, He's not telling.
1,610 posted on 07/12/2003 11:55:20 AM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1603 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
We'll just put vaderetro down as bashing Bush as well.

any others?
1,611 posted on 07/12/2003 11:55:46 AM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1606 | View Replies]

To: bondserv
Dubya, bless his heart, isn't a theocrat. He's a Constitutional Republican.
1,612 posted on 07/12/2003 11:57:22 AM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1602 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
" in what way is the Republican party theocratic?"

You tell us. You are the whackjob paranoidial that keeps making the claim.
1,613 posted on 07/12/2003 11:58:14 AM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1610 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
Are you hear to learn anything ... don't have to --- know it all already ...

... OR ... just prosyletize your unexamined bias - bs ?
1,614 posted on 07/12/2003 11:58:18 AM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1610 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
"Conservatives, by and large believe in God, and liberals believe they are gods," came the reply.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33427


You realize that the current head of our party is a fundamentalist who actually reads the Bible for himself.
Bondserv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/943130/posts?page=1602#1602
1,615 posted on 07/12/2003 11:58:52 AM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1612 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
Placemarker.
1,616 posted on 07/12/2003 11:59:47 AM PDT by Junior ("Eat recycled food. It's good for the environment and okay for you...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1612 | View Replies]

To: ALS
The Republican party is not theocratic.

I believe that extremist fundamentalists would like to turn America into a theocracy.

Not all fundamentalists are extremists.
1,617 posted on 07/12/2003 12:03:09 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1613 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
"The Republican party is not theocratic."

I'm glad we finally cleared that up

now you may move on to your next conspiracy theory
1,618 posted on 07/12/2003 12:04:20 PM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1617 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
If I could see certain posts, I'd have the feeling I was being false-witnessed again.

Nah!
1,619 posted on 07/12/2003 12:05:27 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1617 | View Replies]

To: ALS
<here's another gem!

Re #1600: We see their silly double standards as contradictions. They see it as proper. After all, they are superior (like Congress) and don't have to abide by their own rules. What is wrong for us is usually OK for them. That is called hypocrisy, the same kind illustrated by the Muslims who gang raped a woman that was accused of adultery.

1,620 posted on 07/12/2003 12:05:58 PM PDT by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1600 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,581-1,6001,601-1,6201,621-1,640 ... 4,381-4,387 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson