Evolution Disclaimer Supported

The Advocate (Baton Rouge) ^ | 12/11/02 | WILL SENTELL

[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."

[Tribune7]

First proof of all is Pasteur's that life does not come from inert matter

That's right. According to modern biology abiogenesis is axiomatically impossible.

[Tribune7]

LOL :-)

[Tribune7]

It wouldn't be me wrong. It would be Hoyle, Morowitz, Yockey et al wrong.

Here's the ultimate refutation of your refutation.

[f.Christian]

You prosyletize, and what You do continues to show everyone that EVOLUTION is indeed on a circular tack, that your main engines are slave driven and people will be leaving greatly in the years to come.

You remind me of the bismark...stuck rudder---SLAUGHTER!

[MattAMiller]

OK so if speciation happens in a lab then you can't really count that. And if it occurs in nature then we can't really count that either since it might just be some species we never found before.

OK fine. But why fulminate over the lack of proof for something that you don't think can be proved?

[F16Fighter]

In any case, I predict that intelligent design at first cause will be underscored since there is no origin for the minimal necessary information content whether or not opportunistic (Yockey seventh message).

And simply put, therein lies the basis for Creationism.

[Alamo-Girl]

And simply put, therein lies the basis for Creationism.

Could be, F16Fighter! Thank you so much for your post!

For lurkers, there is considerable angst in the use of the terms creationism and intelligent design. For a description of some of the issues: Creationism and Intelligent Design

[whattajoke]

You say there are instances of Speciation? I say not. To quote G3K: "Science is about observations and no one has ever seen a species transform itself into another more complex species."
_______________________________________________________

Good example of G3K's kindergarten science training. Despite the -- it must be thousands by now -- links, explanations, posts, and examples given to Mr. Blue, he still demands the impossible from scientists. (Discounting, of course, the simple fact that we CAN indeed show him speciation on micro organisms and plants in a lab situation... but oh yeah, creationists have that one covered since that doesn't really count. Touche).

So let me get this straight... if we were to take you and Gore3K to, say... Irian Java where Island Bio Speciation is quite prevalent, presented you the fossil record of the species in question, presented you two with geologic evidence that a recent (in geologic terms) event caused a population shift and separation, and then presented you with proof that the similar looking current populations do not reproduce, and then we did some DNA tests to show you the similarities and new (in evolutionary terms) disparity... a simple, "well, thats just 2 different species that just happen to be very similar that used to mate but don't any more b/c god made it so, both of which just happen to populate 2 distinctly different geographic areas, one on this side of the new (geologically speaking) volcano, and one on the other. (Again, because god made it so.) OK, I got it now... makes perfect sense (/sarcasm)

Imagine if we were to hold up christianity to 1% of the rigors evolution is? Methinks the church coffers would shrink a bit... perhaps I'm the one fantasizing now, though.

[nightdriver]

"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."

They SHOULD bristle at that because the Bible doesn't teach that. In fact, it alludes to man being present (and going extinct) long before Adam.

[F16Fighter]

"For lurkers, there is considerable angst in the use of the terms 'creationism' and 'intelligent design'."

"Angst"?? Are they prescribed any medication for their fragile conditions? ;-)

[Dimensio]

You're forgetting, that when it comes to the Theories regarding relativity or physical laws then the creationists resort to the traditional scientific definition of a theory. It is only with the Theory of Evolution that the word 'theory' becomes synonymous with 'blind guess'.

[Alamo-Girl]

"Angst"?? Are they prescribed any medication for their fragile conditions?

LOL! Thanks for your post!

[Dimensio]

If *I* am right, what then happens to you? In my scenario, there is a ZERO percent chance of sorrow. In your scenario, there is a 50% chance of sorrow.

Pascal's Wager is a tired old canard that proves nothing except that you are incapable of seeing past the false duality that you've set up. You neglect alternate possibilities wherein a "Creator" who does not care for followers of false gods but doesn't mind people who don't worship any gods at all (in which case you lose and he wins) or a god who punishes you both for your lack of belief (in which case you both lose).

[whattajoke]

Don't forget about the OT christian god (the one who dictated the oft discussed 10 Commmandments) who may punish his followers for things like showing their hair or sodomy or any number of currently ridiculous things. If that's the case, they lose too since they purport to be followers, whereas maybe we get a free pass b/c we don't.

The Pascal's Wager issue is silly in many ways.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Among other things, it doesn't give any method of telling which of the One True Religions to follow.

[f.Christian]

'blind guess'

Too kind...more like 'bias grab bag'----hoax/theft(hijack)!

[js1138]

Among other things, it doesn't give any method of telling which of the One True Religions to follow.

And we all know what happens to people who guess wrong...

[PatrickHenry]

And we all know what happens to people who guess wrong...

[js1138]

Yup, that's what you get if you honor your father and mother, and they guessed wrong.

[PatrickHenry]

Even numbered post.