Biology textbook hearings prompt science disputes [Texas]

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.

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."

Since you believe that the Universe is about 15 billion years old, is it possible that some Young Earth Creationists are simply being stubborn?

I did not realize until researching the issue yesterday the doctrine of inerrancy of the Bible is relatively new. I find this very interesting because the Catholic doctrine of Papal infallibility is also relatively new.

Could they both be rear-guard actions attempting to ward off the erosion of turf due to scientific advancement?

Put another way, is Creationism really so important to religion? Didn't Christianity get along fairly well for 1900 years or so without worrying about Creationism?

I think it's well documented that the 1869-1870 decrees on Papal infallibility were intended as a response to rationalism, deism, and 19th century liberalism (which is not what we call liberalism today).

Could the same be said about Fundamentalism and the belief in the inerrancy of the Bible? It was never there before, why is it here now?

You're comfortable with accepting scientific advancement and able to say that God does what God does and mankind attempts to comprehend as best as we can. You don't feel a need to explain away what's as plain as the nose on your face.

I think this is healthy.

Without naming names, I trust it is apparent to you that some of your fellow fundamentalists here on FreeRepublic are mentally unstable and/or suffer from sadistic personality disorder, which is not healthy.

Just some thoughts.

I see that you have no interest in having a civil debate, therefore you will go onto the virtual ignore list as well.

Too bad, I was hoping for better from you.

You are the same as the rest of the creationists here.

Interested in only disrupting and criticizing the posters that disagree with you.

That's too bad.

Well, if you wish to be associated with such as ALS, that is your problem, not mine.

I do feel that it is too bad though.

Onto virtual ignore for you as well, you are obviously not worth the time to type a post to.

Since you failed to understand the post that I took the time, out of respect for your post, to post for you, that again is too bad.

And you sir are the opinionater and critic, and ALS is JUST as much a disrupter as he ever was, just as you seem to be.

If you want evidence, then keep the threads civil so that the threads do NOT get pulled, then maybe I will take the time to post evidence etc. Until then, I will continue to criticize you and others for your disruptive behavior.

You can object all you want, you still have no authority over anyone's children but your own.

And you do? Or are you objecting to the very existence of this thread, a national discussion of a supposedly local Texan issue? But who are these big money men funding the Discovery Institute to go into Texas and stir up this issue? Are they from Texas? Have you checked?

By the way, you are too late - the schools are already dumbed down.

To my own knowledge, I'm not fighting to make the problem worse. You want to keep the kids as confused and ignorant as yourself. Creationism, being religion, dare not speak its name in a discussion of school textbooks. Thus it fights for ID, a militant ignorance of any evidence that creationism is ridiculous as science.

Easy big guy, no need to get defensive. I am looking for real answers.

Those were hypotheticals, I wasn't quoting anyone. I have taken geology in college (Late 80's) and felt that these questions were never answered. (At the time I was more open to the possibility of evolution and assumed an old Earth).

My question is what are the modern geologic explanations for how the various sediments were laid?

There is no reason to play games here.

Patrick Henry HAD to be a believer, there was NO Theory of evolution at that time, everyone of that time was a creationist, it's ALL there was.

I love hjow you guys have such an interesting memory and historical perspective.

To ignore facts and evidence seems to be a widespread phenomonon with you guys.

But, the fact is that ALS does present a lot of evidence to support his beliefs, whether you believe it or not, he uses specific references that go beyond editorializing on someone else's post's. But, the fact is that ALS does present a lot of evidence to support his beliefs, whether you believe it or not, he uses specific references that go beyond editorializing on someone else's post's.

And what might those beliefs be? Would you care to summarize The ALS position on any scientific issue and characterize his evidence for that position?

RIGHTWHALE WROTE: "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."

ONELIFETOGIVE RESPONDED: "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."

THEN, SAID CONCERNED: BINGO!

Perhaps you can address my (admittedly hastily written) response to Onelifetogive.

The diversity of life arose through the interaction of three mechanisms--

Now, which of these are driving a political agenda and should be questioned?
257 posted on 07/09/2003 6:59 PM EDT by Condorman

I know people who homeschool, have for many years, never any problem.

Coming to a community near you! There are plenty of examples in the news from all over the country. Parents have been unjustly charged with truancy, told that they required to have teaching credentials to quality as a home-schooling parent, etc. etc., yet homeschoolers BURY govt school students in every single academic category! Those creationists sure are dumb! (/sarcasm off) The govt schools feel THREATENED by home-schoolers and the day is coming when it will be outlawed if you darwinists and your curriculum gestapo have any say.

"But no one's going to convince me that those books need some "different" science until I see something besides arguments recycled from the grab-bag of creationist screeches at evolution."

Seems the school board is having meetings on the issue. Attend some.

HalfFull: Evolution cannot be tested (although the has been no lack of trying...witness what's been done to the unfortunate fruit fly). The fact that fossils exist in no way proves evolution is the best explanation of the bone yard. Proof is the issue.

Stultis: Make up your mind. Which is the issue, "testing" or "proof"? If the later, please cite an example of a scientific theory, preferably (for purposes of comparison) a biological one, that you consider to have been "proven".

HalfFull: < -- Insert Response Here -- >

I have authority over my own kids (you don't have any legitimate say over my kids) and if there were any justice in this nation, I would have a say over what is taught IN MY COMMUNITY SCHOOLS. If the majority of parents in any given community anwywhere want the curriculum changed, who are you to say they can't? It's their community.

"Didn't Christianity get along fairly well for 1900 years or so without worrying about Creationism?"

There was no other theory. Evolutionary theory is 'fairly new'. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? (Your post seemed to indicate it wasn't a good thing, but perhaps I misunderstood your intent.)

Ahhh, anti-Christian bigotry rears its ugly head again. Atheism is also religion - I demand that you stop teaching it in govt. schools. For an ignoramus, I sure seem to know more about the intent of our founders and the Constitution of the United States than any of you evolutionists. And we all know that most home-schoolers are Christians - yet they outperform govt. schoolers. So, if homeschoolers are ignoramuses becuase they are taught creationism, what does that make govt. school kids? Buffoons? Nitwits? Victims of educational oppression?

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.