TX Board Gives Final Approval to Biology Books {Darwinist Theory}

Laredo, TX, Morning Times ^ | 11-08-03 | Castro, April, AP

[Theodore R.]

Board gives final approval to biology books

BY APRIL CASTRO Associated Press Writer

AUSTIN - Biology books in Texas will continue to present the origin of life according to the theories of Charles Darwin.

The State Board of Education gave final approval Friday to 11 biology books, among others, despite a major campaign to poke holes in Darwin's theory of evolution as presented in the textbooks.

School districts in Texas will be able to purchase books from the approved list for use beginning in the 2004-2005 school year.

Texas Education Agency Director Robert Scott said any factual errors in the books would be addressed by publishers before the books become available.

The decision could impact dozens of states because books sold in Texas, the nation's second-largest buyer of textbooks, are often marketed elsewhere. Texas, California and Florida account for more than 30 percent of the nation's $4 billion public school book market. Three dozen publishers invest millions of dollars in Texas.

Some alternative science groups had argued that weaknesses in the theory of evolution weren't adequately presented in the books. But scientists and educators argued that the theory is widely believed and is a cornerstone of modern scientific research.

The Seattle-based Discovery Institute was one of the most vocal opponents of including criticisms of evolution in the book.

"We were also hoping that the Board would require textbooks to include coverage of the peer-reviewed scientific weaknesses of evolutionary theory," said Bruce Chapman, president of the Discovery Institute. "Unfortunately, there wasn't a majority on the Board that was willing to enforce that."

Institute officials said they will continue to publicize what they call errors and weaknesses in Darwin's theory as presented in some books.

Board member David Bradley made an unsuccessful attempt to amend the adoption measure Friday to place all but two of the items on a "non-conforming" list. School districts would still have the option of purchasing the books, but use of non-conforming books in Texas is rare.

Bradley maintained that criticisms of the theory of evolution weren't religious. Bradley voted against preliminary approval Thursday, which passed in an 11-4 vote. Final approval came on a voice vote.

Despite the religious implications of evolution, several churches and ministers throughout Texas signed a letter to the board in opposition of "attempts dilute, distort or censor the teaching of evolution in biology textbooks."

"We believe religious convictions about the origin of life are sacred and should be cultivated and strengthened in homes and houses of worship," the statement said. "We further believe that efforts to insert religious beliefs into science textbooks misunderstand and demean both faith and science."

11/08/03

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Back

[Theodore R.]

This is a heavily Republican board that has approved the Darwinist-based biology textbooks.

[WackyKat]

Good. I would hate to see "Republican" become synonymous with "scientifically illiterate"

[PatrickHenry]

Very similar thread posted yesterday: HERE.

[Lunatic Fringe]

Amen. In my opinion, Evolution and Creationism do not conflict. God is the missing link.

[deport]

This is a heavily Republican board that has approved the Darwinist-based biology textbooks.

---

Guess the wingers aren't in control now..........

[Theodore R.]

I believe this board is 10-5 Republican. I suspect that voters who chose the ten members would not approve of their textbook selections. Darwinism is as much political and cultural as scientific. Many scientists have challenged its premises from a scientific standpoint.

[Birdwatcher]

Who are the four nuts who voted against the textbooks? I hope that they were democrats.

[Theodore R.]

The article did not list the four dissenters, but I would think that they would be Republicans, 4 of the 10 Republican members. Democrats are strongly in favor of evolution as the sole explanation of the origin of human life.

[Ben Chad]

Que horror! </sarcasm>

[Theodore R.]

The notion that evolution is "scientific" is at the heart of the liberal movement. Evolution does not regard man in the image of a supreme Creator. Yet, evolutinists admit that there will be no "evolution" past man himself. Evolutionists have not even found fossils showing how a "lower" species "evolved" into a higher form of life.

It would seem to me that the liberal side-philosophies are tied to the notion that man is soulless: abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, disarmament, gun control, communism, socialism, softness on crime, even animal rights. Animals rights activists frequently elevate the "lower animals" over the "higest" form of creation: man.

It sounds to me like the Republican members of this board did not vote as their constituents would have wanted. Most people don't want evolution taught as the sole explanation for the origin of life. It is obviously NOT the sole explanation for the origin of life.

[Theodore R.]

A followup in regard to evolution as the sole explanation for the origin of life in biology textbooks:

Introducing "The Battle for the Beginning" by Dr. John MacArthur

Do you know what you believe about creation? Could you defend your views to those who deny the Genesis account? In this highly acclaimed book, you will find
answers to the tough questions. Learn what the Bible really says about how the
universe began.

Indeed, as author Dr. John MacArthur says, the battle for a true view of the beginning of the universe and of life is not optional. Our faith and the future of our world hang on the truth about creation. Dr. MacArthur insists that when naturalistic and atheistic presuppositions are being aggressively peddled as if they were established scientific fact, Bible-believing Christians "ought to
expose such lies for what they are and oppose them vigorously."

"The Battle for the Beginning: Creation, Evolution and the Bible" will show you how. Available now at WND's online store, ShopNetDaily.

http://www.shopnetdaily.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=1398

[deport]

Who are the four nuts who voted against the textbooks? I hope that they were democrats.

---

Nope.... four wingers are at least that's my guess. I know Bradley fits that mold to some extent. He has children school age but home schools rather than send to public schools....

Bradley and three other board members — Terri Leo, Gail Lowe and Don McLeroy — were outnumbered. “It’s like the Aggies football team,” Bradley said, referring to the Texas A&M University team’s lackluster season. “You already know going in what the outcome will be.”

[Theodore R.]

The members of this board are almost anonymous. Hardly any are known by name. People just vote for the candidate that coincides with their party in most of these state school board races. It's pretty much the same for the judicial races in TX too -- they vote by party. Newspapers do not as a rule cover anything about state school board or judicial candidates.

[rustbucket]

It sounds to me like the Republican members of this board did not vote as their constituents would have wanted.

Perhaps, perhaps not. They certainly voted they way I wanted them to. But then again, I'm a scientifically trained, life-long, Texas conservative. Being conservative doesn't mean being scientifically illiterate or wanting religion inserted into science courses.

[Ben Chad]

Were they your ancestors, those who condemed Galileo? Hate to be the one to tell you, but the earth is round and it is not the center of the universe. But we probably agree that the Clintons, Streisands, Moyers, etc. all suck. :-)

[Theodore R.]

Well, Ben Chad, I don't know if my ancestors condemned Galileo or not, but I do not. I have been unable to trace my ancestry prior to 1793. Opposing "scientific" evolution is not necessarily a point of religion. Did you explain where the "missing links" are found? I don't think they have turned up.

[Theodore R.]

What happened to the "missing link"?

As scientific hoaxes go, few have matched it. Sometime early in the 20th century, someone -- it is still unclear who -- "salted" a gravel pit near the town of Piltdown, England, with what were purported to be the 500,000-year-old fossil remains of a human ancestor -- half human, half ape.

The timing couldn't have been better. Darwin's "Origin of Species" was barely 50 years old, the French and Germans had found Neanderthals, and the race was on to discover the storied "missing link" in the evolution from apes to humans.

"In Britain we had some early modern humans, but nothing really old," paleoanthropologist Chris Stringer said in a telephone interview from his office in Britain's Natural History Museum. "There were stone tools, though, so there was almost a national expectation that we should have something."

And suddenly, there it was. Piltdown Man made his appearance in 1912 and held a place of honor in the museum until Nov. 21, 1953, when a new generation of scientists announced that the famous fossil was a fraud.

[See the original article for the rest: HERE.]


Excerpted - click for full article ^

[Theodore R.]

Actually, no one knows, Ben Chad, if the earth is the center of the universe. All we "know" is that the earth is NOT the center of the solar system. Is that right? We don't know how many solar systems exist in the universe. I learned that in the fifth grade. Is that still current?

[Ben Chad]

Well by your own admission, how can you trust what you learned in the 5th grade, Theodore.

[Theodore R.]

My, you are hard to convince. I learned a lot in the fifth grade. Way back then, I remember learning about the Black Hole of Calcutta in the fifth grade. Now that kind of history detail is taught no more. We also learned the nine planets and a lot of intersting facts about the solar system. I am sure some of that has since been disproved. But evolution is a theory, not a scientific fact, no matter how many "scientists" want it stated as a fact. That is the issue, not my fifth grade year of schooling.