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."
"Enter" from where? Did God made Satan? In any event, where does this God chap come from?
I don't expect you to know, of course. I'm just hoping you realize that keeping everything anthropic doesn't really answer any more questions than any other approach.
But I appreciate your sharing of your thoughts (and your generally calming influence). Hugs!
Most scripture has plain meaning and obvious interpretation - it's not rocket science. The bible clearly says Jesus Christ is the creator. It's not ambiguous, unless you are Clintonesque in your confusion over the meaning of "is".
Did Vade write bad?
I think we have to convince people that it's too late to barf up the apple.
That is the answer I always get.
What if the book is wrong? Is it right just because "it" says it's right?
So again I would be curious how you discern that it is correct as apposed to say; Norse mythology?
That was joke in the South Park movie & show where the tour guide/welcome host in Hell reveals that all religions got it wrong except the Mormons and everybody else is in Hell.
That is, of course, why there is only one church, why there is no such thing as Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, Protestant sects, Mormonism, Adventism, Islam; the Inquisition never happened, Galileo published in peace, and so forth.
So when people shoplifted Steal this Book the author and publisher were happy. Right?
Eric the Red placemarker
By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.
Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.
Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee. – Ezekiel 28:14-18
Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; - John 5:25-26
I wonder if this is an honest question or if you are just being argumentative. If the latter, then there is no point in discussing the topic with you as it is a waste of my time. For this initial question, however, I will assume you are an objective truth seeker and answer your question.
The bible is reliable for the following reasons:
1. Manuscript evidence: There are over 15,000 manuscripts of the OT and NT which prove that the bible has been preserved over the centuries (compare that to manuscripts for any other ancient work, yet the veracity and historicity of these works is not in doubt). Some fragments of the gospels date back to within 1 generation of the events described; Paul's epistles are undisputable dated to the early 50s A.D. The Isaiah scroll from Dead Sea Scrolls matches almost precisely the book of Isaiah from the masoretic text (1000 A.D.)
2. Archeology: Over 5,000 artifacts and finds have confirmed the truth of biblical passages but not one find has conclusively controverted any bible passage. The true Mt. Sinai (Mt. Jabal Al-Waz) was found in Saudi Arabia recently (interestingly, the top 3rd of the mtn is scorched black).
3. Prophecy: Hundreds of prophecies written before the birth of Christ (e.g. Isaiah, Micah, Psalms) were 100% literally fulfilled in Christ (e.g. place of birth, virgin birth, manner of death, atonement, resurrection, etc.). In fact, Paul and the other apostles preached Christ from the Scriptures BEFORE there was a New Testament. He preached Christ from the Old Testament - the jewish scriptures which foretold of the events.
4. The life of Jesus Christ Himself: Jesus Christ claimed He was the Son of God come to take away the sins of the world and rise again from the dead. He made the wildest claims possible, yet is considered to be a "good man and wise teacher" even by skeptics. No one who makes the claims He made can be considered a good man or wise teacher. He was either who He claimed to be, or he was a liar, or he was a lunatic. Those are the only options.
5. Witnesses to the Ressurrection: The disciples were cowards one day (they ran when Jesus was arrested) and lions of faith the very next (after seeing the risen Savior) and all died for their faith. Who would die for a lie knowing it is a lie? One might die for a lie believing it is the truth but no one would die for a lie knowing it is a lie. One day Paul was the chief persecutor of Christians, the next day he became perhaps the most notable Christian in history. The disciples are exposed for their mistakes and fallibility which also lends to the veracity of the passages. How to adequately explain these things if the Resurrection isn't true?
Can you name any other religious text that can make any of these claims?
Yes, I believe you have analyzed it correctly as a component of free will. The reference from Isaiah also gives the reason.
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.
I rejoice if we are closing in on the issue which divides us!!!
Indeed, the question of why God created evil along with good may be troubling to many others as well. It gave me pause long ago.
But after a great deal of prayerful meditation and reading the Word - for me - it clarified why His kingdom is yet to come - and the meaning and purpose of our existence.
Most times, there's nothing about the approach that strikes me as either likely or intellectually satisfying as an answer to the real origin of the universe. This doesn't mean that I can prove it wrong or that I'm sure it is. Thus, I call myself an agnostic. I marvel that people not only think they know absurd details of the God story, but that they imagine the answers as obvious.
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.