Biology textbook hearings prompt science disputes [Texas]

Knight Ridder Newspapers ^ | 08 July 2003 | MATT FRAZIER

[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."

[gore3000]

thread went downhill from that post

And of course 'downhill' to you means that the truth which none of you folk can refute gets posted. You make lots of insults, but the one thing you cannot do is back them up or refute my statements.

[Nebullis]

if primates closely related to humans have the SAME crippling mutations in their LGGLO pseudogenes as we see in the human pseudogenes, this finding would support the evolutionary model.

And they do. They share the same frameshift mutation (the mutation that makes the gene non-functional) at position 97 compared to the functional rat gene. The guinea pig, on the other hand, has different mutations. This indicates a separate lineage. Just as evolution predicts!

[Aric2000]

Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world.

Are you really this bigoted?

He was stating what he saw happening in the future, his personal opinion is that it is going to happen, NOT that he liked it.

Please try to read it in context, INSTEAD of how you WISH it would read.

Your antiscience bigotry is showing, AGAIN.

[CobaltBlue]

I think I've had an epiphany.

I've been puzzling and puzzling over the assertion that Christ created the Universe.

Finally, this evening I realized that it was completely contrary to the Apostle's Creed, to wit:

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
    the Creator of heaven and earth,
    and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:
Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit,
    born of the Virgin Mary,
    suffered under Pontius Pilate,
    was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended into hell. [see Calvin]
The third day He arose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven
    and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty,
    whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic church,
    the communion of saints,
    the forgiveness of sins,
    the resurrection of the body,
    and life everlasting.
Amen.

Peeling it back, I think the stumbling block is how one translates the prologue in the Gospel of John. I propose to use the Tyndale translation:

1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde was with God: and the worde was God.

2 The same was in the beginnynge with God.

3 All thinges were made by it and with out it was made nothinge that was made.

4 In it was lyfe and the lyfe was ye lyght of men

5 and the lyght shyneth in the darcknes but the darcknes comprehended it not.

The King James Version uses the Latin Vulgate, but Tyndale used the Greek, admittedly from Erasmus' version, not the earliest versions. Still, all the translations from the Greek seem to track Tyndale, not the King James version.

Going back to the ancient Greek, the strongest assertion you can make about Christ vis-a-vis the creation is that God the Father created though Christ. And that's only if you believe that Logos is identical to Christ, which isn't apparent from the plain language of John.

[gore3000]

My placemarker is nicer than your placemaker.

[js1138]

I am neither a theologian nor a philosopher, but the trinity seems analogous to quantum duality. Whichever manifestation we experience depends on what we are lookng for at the time. It is our mental limitations that cause the apparent paradox.

[I got the rope]

My oldest is 4 and he knows how to read. He also does simple math...2+2...and such. My wife works with him. I am seriously considering homeschool, because I know he is more advanced than most 4 year olds.
I am sick and tired of all the sodomites and they are pro-abortion, mullah-loving, pseudo-scientific reprobates.
We have "Christians" that argue like children rather than use the good sense that God gave them. They would rather argue the wonders of science with false interpretations and childish ridicule than do as the Lord commanded of them...which is to witness.

[f.Christian]

Witness what ... evolution ?

[f.Christian]

Do you think God sent a surrogate to save me ?

[gore3000]

if primates closely related to humans have the SAME crippling mutations in their LGGLO pseudogenes as we see in the human pseudogenes, this finding would support the evolutionary model. - NOT ME!-

And they do.

Excuse me, but the words at the top are not mine - in fact they are not even in the post you are responding to. To imply as you do by using quotes and directing your answer to me - without noting that it was not made by me or in the post being responded to is utterly dishonest.

Further, as the quoted article showed (and you show no substantiation at all for any of your statements - as is usual with evolutionists) the evolutionist writer HAD NO EVIDENCE OF WHERE THE MUTATION OCCURRED, HE JUST ASSUMED IT as is the case with 99% of the stuff in TalkOrigins and the stuff put out by evolutionists.

[HalfFull]

The 'little dipper' and other constellations are results of an attempt by humans to find a pattern in a more-or-less random arrangement of the visible stars. Other cultures have entirely different sets of constellations. So much for your order

looks like its just not you, but other of your evolutionist pals also have gone of the deep end. Even when new names are assigned to the stars, they are still in the same place...no matter how much the earth tilts. Perhaps you need to get your brain ordered so you can see the orderly Universe your pal Carl Sagan termed "cosmos" .

[longshadow]

"apoplectic Tractionless Trolls" placemarker

[Aric2000]

Well, they have a bit of a problem, they claim that because Genesis has the story of the original sin, which actually wasn't all that sinful, (if I tell my daughter not to touch something, and she does, I am not going to kick her out of my house) and that is what made us all sinners, if it cannot be taken literally, then Jesus had NO reason to come and save them.

Therefore, Genesis literally=Jesus was here for a purpose

Genesis as myth=Jesus had NO reason to be here and therefore what he did was in vain.

Pretty sad if you ask me.

If their faith is that shallow, that they cannot understand the underlying message of genesis without haveing to take it literally, they have a huge problem.

Because the evidence is piling up, and evolution is right now so high and deep with confirmed and tested evidence, that when they finally realize that they are wrong, their faith will fail and they will become whatever fundamentalist christians become when their main tenet is gone.

To base your ENTIRE faith and belief on one chapter of the bible is a sad situation, and you just gotta feel bad for them.

Jesus did not come to save a few men from original sin, he came to save all of mankind from ALL sin.

They have a real hard time figuring that out.

I have it figured out, and I'm not even a christian.

Now I shall get ready for the Fundamentalists to come back and say that I am a Christian basher, their MO is just so predictable.

[f.Christian]

science mashed potato placemaker !

[HalfFull]

vast right-ordered universe placemarker

[gore3000]

Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world.-DARWIN-

Are you really this bigoted?

More outright implications that I made a statement that was not made by me - it was made by Darwin and it was I who was attacking it and the evolutionists who are defending it. The full text which was posted by js1138 shows exactly that he meant mass murder and the extermination of whole races - IN ACCORDANCE WITH HIS EVOLUTIONARY THEORY. No degeneracy is beyond his advocacy so long as it is in accordance with his theory.

[CobaltBlue]

>>Do you think God sent a surrogate to save me ?<<

Do you think of Christ, the Son of God, as a surrogate for God the Father? Is He somehow a second class citizen in your eyes?

God the Father created the Universe.

Christ was both fully God and fully human. He had a dual nature, divine and human.

You are only human. You only have human nature, nothing of the divine.

You are 100% creation, zero percent creator. Sorry if that bugs you.

[Aric2000]

Compared to where we are,the stars are hardly moving, but they do move, as a matter of fact, they are moving away from each other at thousands of miles per hour.

The big dipper, let's see, http://www.space.com/spacewatch/big_dipper_020621.html

[snip]

Of the seven stars that make up this pattern, five apparently belong to a loosely joined swarm of stars, all hurtling through space at roughly the same speed and the same direction. These five stars range in distances from 78 to 84 light years from the Earth.

Two of the stars, however - Dubhe (the northern Pointer) and Alkaid (the star at the end of the handle) - are not part of the swarm and appear to be rushing at even greater speeds in the opposite direction. Alkaid is 101 light years away, while Dubhe is 124 light years distant.

These opposing motions will slowly alter the form of the Big Dipper. In short, the Dipper is slowly going to pieces.

The bent handle will bend still more as time wears on, while the bowl will spread. Granted, it will still remain a fairly convincing dipper for about the next 25,000 years, but 50,000 years from now it will be hopelessly out of shape.

[end]

These stars will slowly separate to a point that the big dipper will NOT be recognizable as the big dipper anymore, not in our lifetimes of course, but all the constellations will change over time, because the stars are ALL moving in relationship to each other.

They will NOT remain in the same place, sorry, no order at all.

The socalled order came from our human ancestors imaginations.

[general_re]

Even when new names are assigned to the stars, they are still in the same place...no matter how much the earth tilts.

Who was that Edwin Hubble guy anyway? ;)

[f.Christian]

Maybe somebody might think He found Jesus in the yellow pages ... couldn't (( God ? )) do the job himself --- surrogate means hired !

Jesus said ... " the hired // surrogate shepherd wouldn't lay his life down for the flock --- he would flee " .