Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Biology textbook hearings prompt science disputes [Texas]
Knight Ridder Newspapers ^ | 08 July 2003 | MATT FRAZIER

Posted on 07/09/2003 12:08:32 PM PDT by 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."


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 4,101-4,1204,121-4,1404,141-4,160 ... 4,381-4,387 next last
To: CobaltBlue
Fundamentalists reject authority other than their own. They reject scientific authority that conflicts with fundamentalism, they reject governmental authority that conflicts with fundamentalism, and they reject religious authority that conflicts with fundamentalism.

Fundamentalist have scripture as their authority, and when theories conflict with scripture, they are false theories; when govt. authority conflicts with God-given rights or lifestyle, govt. is to be defied (as Bonhofer defied the Nazis); when a church rejects scripture as the ultimate authority, we expose that church for its heresy. Any questions?

4,121 posted on 07/18/2003 6:48:51 AM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4116 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
You know, there is some off-and-on theoretical discussion being done over at ARN about Multiple-Designer Theory (MDT). This is where multiple designers are posited, each one designing organisms that are inherently in opposition to each other: flagellar bacteria vs. humans, wasps vs. caterpillars, infectious agents in general vs. hosts with immune systems, predators vs. prey, etc.

I'm pretty sure that we will get some fancy footwork about who designed diseases that kill infants. Satan?

Actually dysentery is rather pleasant compared to some parasites.

4,122 posted on 07/18/2003 6:54:07 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4105 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
Astonishing clinical progress in one who has seemed hopeless. Apparently, public concessions are impossible but private concessions are concievable.

Now he needs to realize that whether the discussion is public or private, if you're going to continue to argue a position, you've got to stay as square with all the pertinent facts as you possibly can. That means eating the crow while it's warm.

4,123 posted on 07/18/2003 6:55:37 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4104 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
Any questions?

You got a mouse in your pocket? Who is "we"?

4,124 posted on 07/18/2003 6:55:52 AM PDT by balrog666 (Universe inexorably winding down - women and children hardest hit! Film at 11.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4121 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
Meant to add you on 4123.
4,125 posted on 07/18/2003 6:56:24 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4123 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
If I'm getting the drift from the Witch Doctors correctly, the flagellum, that poster child of Design, should not be attributed to God. To do so is "disgusting."

I'll never get anywhere in Theology.
4,126 posted on 07/18/2003 7:01:43 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4105 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Although the disputants here will never agree with each other, I have notice some progress recently. There has been a significant decline in the rate of posting bogus, manufactured, out-of-context quotes (I should keep a spreadsheet on this one). We will eventually see a drop in the frequency of posts claiming that Darwin was not a scientist. I'm holding my breath on the vitamin c thing.
4,127 posted on 07/18/2003 7:02:47 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4123 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I'll never get anywhere in Theology.

Platypus yes; flagellum no. What's so difficult about that?

4,128 posted on 07/18/2003 7:04:34 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Idiots are on "virtual ignore," and you know exactly who you are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4126 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
If not God, then who? Does Satan have the necessary level of omniscience to tap into the ecosystem and create hundreds of millions of separate, distinct kinds of organisms, all perfectly tuned to the preditor/prey, parasite/host relationship? Inquiring minds want to know just how one goes about designing living things.
4,129 posted on 07/18/2003 7:08:04 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4126 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Isa 45:5 I [am] the LORD, and [there is] none else, [there is] no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
Isa 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that [there is] none beside me. I [am] the LORD, and [there is] none else.
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these [things].
Isa 45:8 Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it.
Isa 45:9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! [Let] the potsherd [strive] with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?
4,130 posted on 07/18/2003 7:08:15 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4126 | View Replies]

To: js1138
I have notice some progress recently. There has been a significant decline in the rate of posting bogus, manufactured, out-of-context quotes ...

No letup in bogus claims about the imaginary Karl Marx connection. Hitler references seem to be slowing down -- since I found that creationist-oriented quote in Mein Kampf. I don't think this stuff will ever really end. It's like the predictable re-appearances of the Protocals of Zion. Some moron stumbles onto some tossed-away junk, and imagines that he's really discovered something.

4,131 posted on 07/18/2003 7:09:23 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Idiots are on "virtual ignore," and you know exactly who you are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4127 | View Replies]

To: js1138
Inquiring minds want to know just how one goes about designing living things.

The important thing, as the Demo-greenies have explained, is the Environmental Impact Assessment.

4,132 posted on 07/18/2003 7:13:12 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4129 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Your detailed, insightful posts are welcome relief to the noise level that sometimes dominates these threads, and serve as an excellent Troll repellent.

Thanks! :-)

4,133 posted on 07/18/2003 7:17:31 AM PDT by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4042 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
I guess the key section was this:

I make peace, and create evil.
A surprisingly bland admission. Does He know He's undercutting ALS?
4,134 posted on 07/18/2003 7:23:25 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4130 | View Replies]

To: NewLand
Thank you so much for your reply and agreement!
4,135 posted on 07/18/2003 7:23:39 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4111 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these

I was aware of this sentiment from Job. It does have a nice consistency to it.

I guess the question should be, is the creation of evil a deliberate act, or a side effect? An theistic evolutionist would argue that evil happens because the structure of reality includes enough freedom for unplanned things to evolve, not necessarily because E. coli seemed like a good idea.

Since these things are beyond our capacity to understand, I approach them intutitively. I believe God and we are alive, meaning capable of change, not crystalized in some predetermined, static image.

4,136 posted on 07/18/2003 7:25:15 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4130 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
Fundamentalist have scripture as their authority, and when theories conflict with scripture, they are false theories

How do you discern what is the correct scripture (or interpretation)?

Wouldn't you be embarrassed to find some obscure tribe in Africa actually has it right and all these others including Christianity has missed the mark.

4,137 posted on 07/18/2003 7:25:59 AM PDT by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4121 | View Replies]

To: gore3000; Stultis
Gentlemen. I am truly impressed and inspired. Thank you for ending my week on a high note.
4,138 posted on 07/18/2003 7:26:14 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4115 | View Replies]

To: js1138; VadeRetro; AndrewC; ALS
I know y'all didn’t ask me, but I’ve pondered at length on the subject of why creation includes good and evil and I do have a few ideas I’d like to share for the discussion. This is an excerpt from my larger article, Evolution Through the Back Door

One of the words used to describe God at creation is Ayn Sof which roughly translated from Hebrew means infinite and nothing. The scientific term for such a state at the beginning of this universe, is singularity - in which there are no physical laws, no space, no time, no particles, no geometry, no energy, nothing - and yet everything. It has a parallel in math as well, the number zero - nothing can be divided by it, anything multiplied by it is it, it is in between all positive and negative numbers. Infinite and not at the same time.

I pondered on this state at length and deduced that God must have wanted to reveal Himself and thus there was a beginning.

Then I pondered how God would go about revealing Himself. I deduced He would create beings who could think to whom He would reveal Himself and would commune. I further deduced how He would go about communicating Himself to these beings, i.e. that He is good and truth and so forth.

These attributes would have no meaning in any language unless they were set in contrast to what they are not. (How would you know if you are happy if you have never been sad?) Thus, I pondered that He would create good and evil, love and hate, et al so that a language could be formed, the Word.

I then pondered He would communicate His will to the thinking beings so they would know Him. I also pondered that, for the words to have meaning, He would give them numerous manifestations of all these contrasts - space/time, geometry, particles, energy, matter, creatures.

One of the ideas of the Jewish Kabbalah that rings true to my spirit is that the Scriptures are another name for God, i.e. it reveals who He is. So I see all of creation - spiritual and material - and the Word as God revealing Himself.

Enter Satan, beautiful and thinking being as he is, decided he ought to exalted. He became "aware" of his beauty and self and thus was at odds with God's will for him.

Likewise, Adam and Eve became "aware" of themselves and sought to be more by gaining the knowledge of good and evil. So likewise, they were at odds with God's will for them and were banished to mortality (the frog view [in Tegmark’s article].)

When it is all said and done [His kingdom come] I see us restored to what was intended at the beginning, we will be the thinking beings to whom God reveals Himself and with whom He communes. His will is what matters over all else. The Lord's Prayer reveals as much, the meaning of life and the purpose of our existence:

Our Father which art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done in earth, as [it is] in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil:
For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

IMHO, every believer ought to meditate deeply, every day, on the Lord's Prayer - phrase by phrase and word by word. Our place is sandwiched between God's purpose and His dominion.

My two cents...

4,139 posted on 07/18/2003 7:28:21 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4129 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I do wonder sometimes why the design folks like to post pictures of raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens, but seldom take time to smell the leish-maniasis. I have no hostility towards creation, provided we are free actors on the stage, able to rearrange the props.

Healing is one of the approved calls, but it requires knowledge, and knowledge requires curiosity, and curiosity requires fearlessness about what will be found. One of the great tragedies of Western religion is the conflation of knowledge with sin, curiosity with heresy and atheism.

4,140 posted on 07/18/2003 7:37:11 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4134 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 4,101-4,1204,121-4,1404,141-4,160 ... 4,381-4,387 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson