Posted on 10/17/2008 7:59:18 AM PDT by Soliton
Three antievolutionists have been appointed to a six-member committee to review the draft set of Texas state science standards, and defenders of the integrity of science education in the Lone Star state are livid. "The committee was chosen by 12 of the 15 members of the board of education, with each panel member receiving the support of two board members," as the Dallas Morning News (October 16, 2008) explains. Six members of the board "aligned with social conservative groups" chose Stephen C. Meyer, the director of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture, Ralph Seelke, a biology professor at the University of Wiconsin, Superior, and Charles Garner, a chemistry professor at Baylor University.
Meyer, Seelke, and Garner are all signatories of the Discovery Institute-sponsored "Dissent from Darwinism" statement. Meyer and Seelke are also coauthors of Explore Evolution: The Arguments For and Against Neo-Darwinism (Hill House, 2008), which, like Of Pandas and People, is a supplementary textbook that is intended to instill scientifically unwarranted doubts about evolution. A recent review by biologist John Timmer summarized, "But the book doesn't only promote stupidity, it demands it. In every way except its use of the actual term, this is a creationist book." Garner reportedly told the Houston Press (December 14, 2000) that he "criticizes evolutionary theory in class."
Meyer and Seelke also testified in the 2005 "kangaroo court" hearings held by three antievolutionist members of the Kansas state board of education, in which a parade of antievolutionist witnesses expressed their support for the so-called minority report version of the state science standards (written with the aid of a local "intelligent design" organization), complained of repression by a dogmatic evolutionary establishment, and claimed to have detected atheism lurking "between the lines" of the standards..
(Excerpt) Read more at ncseweb.org ...
“defenders of the integrity of science education”
Love that phrase!
Don’t believe it for a minute... but love it!
How many of those “defenders of the integrity of science education” also believe in Global Warming?
I don't know. You tell me.
Baloney...and you cite an article from a totally biased source. Ms Scott, the director of that organization, is anything but an objective source for this information.
It would be a scientific heresy not to.
Damn, I thought it said “Anti-revolutionists” - and thought maybe there was a movement toward revolution in the works....
I’ll start you out with the first “defenders of the integrity of science education” and you can do the other two “defenders of the integrity of science education” .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
© David M. Hillis
Professor, University of Texas at Austin
Fly Gap WildflowersOutstanding displays of wildflowers are typical after an El Niño winter and spring in Central Texas
This article discusses the long-term rainfall patterns at the Fly Gap Division of the Double Helix Ranch, and the relationship between El Niño cycles and the droughts and wet periods common to this area of central Texas.
This article addresses questions such as: What caused the recent drought of 2005-2006? Why did it end? How severe was this drought compared to other droughts of record? After a wet year first half of 2007, why did dry conditions return in late 2007? What are the long-term trends for rainfall in central Texas? How will global warming affect our rainfall patterns?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
go for it
Those poor Darwinists. They’re having a “Joe the Plumber” moment!
Most scientists recognize some global warming as does Sarah Palin. He doesn't suggest that it is anthropogenic does he?
It depends. If we have drought, it is because Global Warming causes less rain. If we have floods, it is because Global Warming causes more rain.
The three antievolution goobers worked with the Discovery Institute who previously brought you "creation science" and "Intelligent Design". And you talk about biased!
I wish!
Some scientists believe Alaska will be among the first to feel the impact of global warming, but Sarah Palin told voters there she wasn't sure climate change wasn't simply part of a natural warming cycle.http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/08/29/palin_not_convinced_on_global.html"I will not pretend to have all the answers," Palin said about global warming, according to the Anchorage Daily News. Her spokesman clarified at the time that "she's not totally convinced one way or the other. Science will tell us ... She thinks the jury's still out."
Try not to be so dishonest.
In a way, yes. Joe the Plumber isn't a licensed plumber, the creationists on the board aren't scientists. Joe the Plumber isn't close to buying his boss's business, creationists on the board aren't close to being interested in science. By now Joe the Plumber is probably wishing hadn't gotten all the limelight, and creationists on school boards tend to avoid publicity, too, preferring to screw up educational standards when people aren't watching. Yes, I see the parallels.
If the religious folk around here are so intent on injecting their false beliefs into Science, maybe the Churches should lose their tax exempt status unless they start teaching proper science in Church?
I will if you will. Your quote shows that she accepts global warming may be part of a natural cycle. She is unsure as to weather it is caused by humans or not.
That wouldn't solve anything. Their problem is they can't get their kids to go to church, so there is no one to teach. That's why they have to infiltrate public schools. They are too cheap to spend the extra money to send them to private schools like my poor, blue-collar inlaws did.
Which is heresy to you global warming cultists. You're busted.
Well, I have a Masters in chemistry, with a synthetic organic emphasis, and work in the pharmaceutical industry doing actual research. IIRC, a number of other FReepers who reject/question evolution hold similar or higher degrees in the physical sciences.
On the other hand, IIARC, you are a high school history teacher, with no background in science.
Hence, you have basically no credibility in making this sort of judgment.
Don't worry, the Darwinists are just having a hissy fit that their monopoly on the sources of information is steadily being broken, and that increasing (rather than decreasing) numbers of Americans reject/question evolution.
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.