Biology textbook hearings prompt science disputes [Texas]

Knight Ridder Newspapers ^ | 08 July 2003 | MATT FRAZIER

[PatrickHenry]

PING. [This ping list is for the evolution side of evolution threads, and sometimes for other science topics. FReepmail me to be added or dropped.]

[Dimensio]

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.

I agree. If there is scientific evidence that creates problems for the Theory of Evolution, I'd like to hear it. I won't hold my breath waiting for someone to present what amounts to genuine scientific (as opposed to pseudoscientific or nonscientific or, as is most common, non-sequitur) evidence, though.

[jlogajan]

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.

What a bunch of liars. "Liars for Christ", I call 'em.

[Support Free Republic]

We're On A Mission From God

Help us make our 3rd quarter fundraising goal in record time!

[LiteKeeper]

INTREP

[PatrickHenry]

I noticed this in the article:

The institute [Discovery 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.

[RightWhale]

controversies about various parts of Darwinian theory that exists between even evolutionary scientists,"

There is disagreement on specifics, no doubt about that at all. But the number who question the basic idea are going the way of the dodo bird. Perhaps those who question the basic idea of evolution have a political agenda, and if so, they ought to be upfront about it because right now they simply appear to be irrational.

[Junior]

I don't understand the attitude around here that crevo threads add nothing to the purpose of this forum. This article is a case in point. Creationism is a religious/political movement which threatens to marginalize the conservative movement and is thus fair game for any political discussion.

That said, I am officially declaring certain posters herein (or soon to be herein) on my "virtual ignore" list. You know who you are; my not answering you has nothing to do with the accuracy of your arguments but rather with my desire to avoid flame wars which will can never result in any good.

[js1138]

But don't forget that communists like the theory of evolution because it supports laze-faire capitalism   supports Nazism   supports Marxism   supports whatever you want it to support.

[Servant of the Nine]

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.

They need to try keeping up.

"Darwin's Theory of Evolution" is as obsolete as "Newton's theory of Gravity".
Today science has moved on to much more precise theorums, Punctuated Equilibrium Evolution and General Relativity.

So9

[Onelifetogive]

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.

Only liberals and other evolutionists are allowed to do that!

[RightWhale]

communists like the theory of evolution

Nobody doesn't like Sarah Lee.

[Junior]

You must, one day, explain your codes. Curiosity is killing me...

[Onelifetogive]

Perhaps those who question the basic idea of evolution have a political agenda, and if so, they ought to be upfront about it because right now they simply appear to be irrational.

Perhaps those who refuse to question the basic idea of evolution have a political agenda, and if so, they ought to be upfront about it because right now they simply appear to be irrational

[RightWhale]

You must, one day, explain your codes.

He did a couple weeks ago. Just some kind of quasi-military jargon for bookmarks of an already awesome and still growing database.

[PatrickHenry]

A very few links from the famous "list-o-links" (so the creationists don't get to start each new thread from ground zero).

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense. From Scientific American
Project Steve (if you think scientists are abandoning evolution)
Arguments we think creationists should NOT use from Answers in Genesis.

The foregoing is just a tiny sample. So that everyone will have access to the accumulated Creationism vs. Evolution threads which have previously appeared on FreeRepublic, plus links to hundreds of sites with a vast amount of information on this topic, here's Junior's massive work, available for all to review:
The Ultimate Creation vs. Evolution Resource [ver 21].

[Right Wing Professor]

Alabama, New Mexico and Nebraska made changes that, to varying degrees, challenge the pre-eminence of evolution in the scientific curriculum.

This is untrue, at least as regards Nebraska. The Board of Education voted 5-3 last year to uphold evolution-only science teaching.

State science standards:

12.4.3  By the end of twelfth grade, students will develop an understanding of the theory of biological evolution.

Example Indicators

• Understand that the concept of biological evolution is a theory which explains the consequence of the interactions of: (1) the potential for a species to increase its numbers; (2) the genetic variability of offspring due to mutation and recombination of genes; (3) a finite supply of the resources of life; and (4) the ensuing selection by the environment of those offspring better able to survive and leave offspring.
• Investigate and use the theory of biological evolution to explain diversity of life.
• Investigate whether natural selection provides a scientific explanation of the fossil record and the molecular similarities among the diverse species of living organisms.
• Investigate and use biological classifications based on similarities.

[RightWhale]

Creato-rationalism serves no purpose. Many scientists would find their work impossible without a working hypothesis, and as a practical matter find creato-rationalism to be nonfunctional.

[Right Wing Professor]

We're On A Mission From God

Oh dear. Wrong fundraising slogan for a crevo thread!