Posted on 12/11/2002 6:28:08 AM PST by A2J
By WILL SENTELL
wsentell@theadvocate.com
Capitol news bureau
High school biology textbooks would include a disclaimer that evolution is only a theory under a change approved Tuesday by a committee of the state's top school board.
If the disclaimer wins final approval, it would apparently make Louisiana just the second state in the nation with such a provision. The other is Alabama, which is the model for the disclaimer backers want in Louisiana.
Alabama approved its policy six or seven years ago after extensive controversy that included questions over the religious overtones of the issue.
The change approved Tuesday requires Louisiana education officials to check on details for getting publishers to add the disclaimer to biology textbooks.
It won approval in the board's Student and School Standards/ Instruction Committee after a sometimes contentious session.
"I don't believe I evolved from some primate," said Jim Stafford, a board member from Monroe. Stafford said evolution should be offered as a theory, not fact.
Whether the proposal will win approval by the full state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education on Thursday is unclear.
Paul Pastorek of New Orleans, president of the board, said he will oppose the addition.
"I am not prepared to go back to the Dark Ages," Pastorek said.
"I don't think state boards should dictate editorial content of school textbooks," he said. "We shouldn't be involved with that."
Donna Contois of Metairie, chairwoman of the committee that approved the change, said afterward she could not say whether it will win approval by the full board.
The disclaimer under consideration says the theory of evolution "still leaves many unanswered questions about the origin of life.
"Study hard and keep an open mind," it says. "Someday you may contribute to the theories of how living things appeared on earth."
Backers say the addition would be inserted in the front of biology textbooks used by students in grades 9-12, possibly next fall.
The issue surfaced when a committee of the board prepared to approve dozens of textbooks used by both public and nonpublic schools. The list was recommended by a separate panel that reviews textbooks every seven years.
A handful of citizens, one armed with a copy of Charles Darwin's "Origin of the Species," complained that biology textbooks used now are one-sided in promoting evolution uncritically and are riddled with factual errors.
"If we give them all the facts to make up their mind, we have educated them," Darrell White of Baton Rouge said of students. "Otherwise we have indoctrinated them."
Darwin wrote that individuals with certain characteristics enjoy an edge over their peers and life forms developed gradually millions of years ago.
Backers bristled at suggestions that they favor the teaching of creationism, which says that life began about 6,000 years ago in a process described in the Bible's Book of Genesis.
White said he is the father of seven children, including a 10th-grader at a public high school in Baton Rouge.
He said he reviewed 21 science textbooks for use by middle and high school students. White called Darwin's book "racist and sexist" and said students are entitled to know more about controversy that swirls around the theory.
"If nothing else, put a disclaimer in the front of the textbooks," White said.
John Oller Jr., a professor at the University of Louisiana-Lafayette, also criticized the accuracy of science textbooks under review. Oller said he was appearing on behalf of the Louisiana Family Forum, a Christian lobbying group.
Oller said the state should force publishers to offer alternatives, correct mistakes in textbooks and fill in gaps in science teachings. "We are talking about major falsehoods that should be addressed," he said.
Linda Johnson of Plaquemine, a member of the board, said she supports the change. Johnson said the new message of evolution "will encourage students to go after the facts."
Definition: varve (____). [ad. Sw. varv layer, turn.] A pair of thin layers of clay and silt of contrasting colour and texture which represent the deposit of a single year (summer and winter) in still water at some time in the past (usu. in a lake formed by a retreating ice-sheet); they have been used to establish a chronology of the late glacial and post-glacial period. Also attrib. and Comb. Hence varved (_____) a., characterized by such layers. [1887 Encycl. Brit. XXII. 740/1 The glacial clay consists generally of..darker and lighter coloured layers, which give it a striped appearance, for which reason it has often been called hvarfvig lera (striped clay).] 1912 G. De Geer in Compt. Rend. XI Session Congrès Géol. Internat. 253 The Swedish word varv, subst. (old spelling: hvarf), means as well a circle as a periodical iteration of layers. An international term for the last sense being wanted it seems suitable to use the transcription varve, pl. -s, in Engl. and Fr. 1929 C. R. Longwell Pirsson’s Textbk. Geol. (ed. 3) I. v. 126 Lake Deposits.–Remarkably banded clays have been formed in patches within the glaciated regions... The Swedish geologists call them varved clays. 1936 Times Lit. Suppl. 9 May 392/2 Varve~variation in its general features is a function of solar radiation. 1948 Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer. LIX. 646 In this basin (Fossil, Wyo.) hundreds of thousands of beautifully preserved fish are entombed in the varved sediments. 1953 Antiquity XXVII. 35 What we most need now, apart from archaeology, is a study of the post-glacial climatic fluctuations in the Tigris and Euphrates valleys. Here the techniques of Western Europe, such as pollen analysis and varve-counting, seem unlikely to be of any use. 1957 G. E. Hutchinson Treat. Limnology I. i. 8 The dating of the events, based primarily on the varve chronology, is in fair accord with the radiocarbon chronology. 1974 Nature 15 Nov. 182/1 The thickness of the varves..provide [sic] a guide to the year-by-year changes in mean climate; but that is at best a crude measure.
What about this definition, other than one cited exception to the usefulness of pollen analysis in the Tigris and Euphrates valleys, actually supports your assertions that varves do not represent seasonal deposition?
More commentary, including descriptions of several different rapid means of creating varves.
Please use correct terminology. Rapidly emplaced banded sediments are NOT varves. Implicit in the definition you cited above is the ability to demonstrate that couplets represent seasonal deposition.
‘Listen, listen to me, and eat what is good, and your soul will... delight(link)--in the richest of fare’ (Isaiah 55:2)
"People have to eat. This fact is far from a sorrowful necessity. So much so that many, rejoicing at the sight of a grand repast, remark: "I live to eat." For as long as history, eating has been seen as much more than mere grazing. Personality and sociology enter in to it. A meal eaten in solitude is only partly a meal. Eating is more, when bread is broken together."
"The food is on the table. It delights the eyes and nose, tantalizing the palate. As you eat, you remark on the food to those with you. Together you enjoy the life-giving substances. It is a celebration of your shared life, and humanity."
"Our Scripture has God likening himself to a feast. To listen to God, to delight in him, to seek him, and call on him; in short, to include God as the sustaining, and joyous necessity on which one's very existence depends, is to eat, drink and be satisfied in an unequaled, and decisive way."
"May your meat and drink be God, and may you be satisfied."
Well now, fine sediments being deposited seasonally in a quiet lake environment wouldn't demonstrate erosion, now would they? I believe erosion requires some external input of energy...yes, I read about that somewhere. Let's see, oh here's a definition:
Erosion - 1. the part of the overall process of denudation that includes the physical breaking down, chemical solution and transportation of material. 2. Movement of soil and rock material by agents such as running water, wind, moving ice, and gravitational creep. (from the Concise Oxford Dictionary of Earth Sciences, 1991)
Now, on to liquifaction:
Liquifaction - The process of becoming or making a liquid by heating, cooling, or a change in pressure. In soils, the temporary transformation of material to a fluid state due to the sudden decrease in shearing resistance caused by a collapse of the structure associated with a temporary increase in pore fluid pressure. (from the Concise Oxford Dictionary of Earth Sciences, 1991)
Please provide geological evidence that varves are always found in regions that have undergone structural collapse.
That's the normal definition of liquifaction. Sorry you weren't able to pick up on that, it seemed obvious enough at the time. In the context in question, "liquifaction" meant the covering of large areas of the Earth with water.
Decay methods appear to be the chief nail on which geologists hang their hats in proclaiming the ages of the Earth and geological formations which they do.
David Plaisted notes the following:
I found the following statement in an on-line (non creationist) reference, as follows:
“This is possible in potassium-argon (K-Ar) dating, for example, because most minerals do not take argon into their structures initially. In rubidium-strontium dating, micas exclude strontium when they form, but accept much rubidium. In uranium-lead (U-Pb) dating of zircon, the zircon is found to exclude initial lead almost completely.”
[from the Britannica Online, article “Geochronology: The Interpretation and Dating of the Geologic Record.”] So because of this, one can do Rb-Sr dating on micas because they exclude strontium when the micas form. Thus one would know that any strontium that is present had to come from the parent rubidium, so by computing the ratio and knowing the half life, one can compute the age.
In general, when lava cools, various minerals crystallize out at different temperatures, and these minerals preferentially include and exclude various elements in their crystal structures. So one obtains a series of minerals crystallizing out of the lava. Thus the composition of the lava continues to change, and later minerals can form having significantly different compositions than earlier ones. Lava that cools on the surface of the earth is called extrusive. This type of lava cools quickly, leaving little time for crystals to form, and forms basalt. Lava that cools underground cools much more slowly, and can form large crystals. This type of lava typically forms granite or quartz.
A good general introduction to radiometric dating from an evolutionary perspective can be found at http://asa.calvin.edu/ASA/resources/Wiens.html.
I admit this is a very beautiful theory. This would seem to imply that the problem of radiometric dating has been solved, and that there are no anomalies. So if we take a lava flow and date several minerals for which one knows the daughter element is excluded, we should always get the exact same date, and it should agree with the accepted age of the geological period. Is this true? I doubt it very much. If the radiometric dating problem has been solved in this manner, then why do we need isochrons, which are claimed to be more accurate?
The same question could be asked in general of minerals that are thought to yield good dates. Mica is thought to exclude Sr, so it should yield good Rb-Sr dates. But are dates from mica always accepted, and do they always agree with the age of their geologic period? I suspect not.
Indeed, there are a number of conditions on the reliability of radiometric dating. For example, for K-Ar dating, we have the following requirements:
For this system to work as a clock, the following 4 criteria must be fulfilled:
1. The decay constant and the abundance of K40 must be known accurately.
2. There must have been no incorporation of Ar40 into the mineral at the time of crystallization or a leak of Ar40 from the mineral following crystallization.
3. The system must have remained closed for both K40 and Ar40 since the time of crystallization.
4. The relationship between the data obtained and a specific event must be known.
The requirements for radiometric dating are stated in another way, at the web site http://hubcap.clemson.edu/spurgeon/books/apology/Chapter7.html:
“But what about the radiometric dating methods? The earth is supposed to be nearly 5 billion years old, and some of these methods seem to verify ancient dates for many of earth’s igneous rocks. The answer is that these methods, are far from infallible and are based on three arbitrary assumptions (a constant rate of decay, an isolated system in which no parent or daughter element can be added or lost, and a known amount of the daughter element present initially).”
Here are more quotes about radiometric dating from http://www.parentcompany.com/handy_dandy/hder12.htm:
“All of the parent and daughter atoms can move through the rocks. Heating and deformation of rocks can cause these atoms to migrate, and water percolating through the rocks can transport these substances and redeposit them. These processes correspond to changing the setting of the clock hands. Not infrequently such resetting of the radiometric clocks is assumed in order to explain disagreements between different measurements of rock ages. The assumed resettings are referred to as `metamorphic events’ or `second’ or `third events.’ ”
And again,
“It is also possible that exposure to neutrino, neutron, or cosmic radiation could have greatly changed isotopic ratios or the rates at some time in the past.”
It is known that neutrinos interact with atomic nucleii, so a larger density of neutrinos could have sped up radioactive decay and made matter look old in a hurry. Some more quotes from the same source:
a. In the lead-uranium systems both uranium and lead can migrate easily in some rocks, and lead volatilizes and escapes as a vapor at relatively low temperatures. It has been suggested that free neutrons could transform Pb-206 first to Pb-207 and then to Pb-208, thus tending to reset the clocks and throw thorium-lead and uranium-lead clocks completely off, even to the point of wiping out geological time. Furthermore, there is still disagreement of 15 percent between the two preferred values for the U-238 decay constant.
b. In the potassium/argon system argon is a gas which can escape from or migrate through the rocks. Potassium volatilizes easily, is easily leached by water, and can migrate through the rocks under certain conditions. Furthermore, the value of the decay constant is still disputed, although the scientific community seems to be approaching agreement. Historically, the decay constants used for the various radiometric dating systems have been adjusted to obtain agreement between the results obtained. In the potassium/argon system another adjustable “constant” called the branching ratio is also not accurately known and is adjusted to give acceptable results.
Argon-40, the daughter substance, makes up about one percent of the atmosphere, which is therefore a possible source of contamination. This is corrected for by comparing the ratio argon-40/argon-36 in the rock with that in the atmosphere. However, since it is possible for argon-36 to be formed in the rocks by cosmic radiation, the correction may also be in error. Argon from the environment may be trapped in magma by pressure and rapid cooling to give very high erroneous age results. In view of these and other problems it is hardly surprising that the potassium/argon method can yield highly variable results, even among different minerals in the same rock.
c. In the strontium/rubidium system the strontium-87 daughter atoms are very plentiful in the earth’s crust. Rubidium-87 parent atoms can be leached out of the rock by water or volatilized by heat.
All of these special problems as well as others can produce contradictory and erroneous results for the various radiometric dating systems.
So the passages that say slavery is OK are still applicable? And the dietary laws -- they still apply? All the rules in Leviticus are still in effect?
A deceitful corruption of the word, "liquifaction". Why not simply use the term, "flood"...simply more evidence of the spurious nature of Creationist arguments.
And yet as noted many times already we have a convergence upon a value of 4.5 billion years for the age of the solar system from many different "error-prone" methods, many studies, and many source samples. Such is statistically inexplicable in itself if there's nothing really special about 4.5 billion years ago, especially when you consider that no comparable data bias exists for any other answer.
Again, the convergence of many methods, many samples, many studies. Plaisted pretends not to see the issue. He runs down the catalog of mantras. ("This is an issue!" "This is a problem!" "This is frequently unknown!")
It's all a big head-fake, frauds trolling for idiots. Various sources of error have been identified, yes. They can be allowed for. There's more than one test for most purposes. Most of the pitfalls have been identified decades ago. Plaisted is simply pretending that the pitfalls are known only to creationists and that all the published results are spurious.
Again, the real skinny: Radiometric Dating, A Christian Perspective.
Creation by divine design: Not proven (and cannot be) but also widely assumed to be true based on available evidence.
...
Universal gravitation: Not proven (and cannot be)
Continental Drift: Not proven (and cannot be)
...
Why don't we just abandon science teaching altogether, and teach our children something practical, like astrology?
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.