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 ... 1,661-1,6801,681-1,7001,701-1,720 ... 4,381-4,387 next last
To: Quix
"Whatever will help you sleep better."

You are correct. Evolution is a religion. If that weren't the case, doubtful this thread would even exist.

1,681 posted on 07/12/2003 5:06:28 PM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1680 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Just wrong. What can be invented once can be invented again. (You need only look at flight in bats, birds, insects, and pterodactyls.)

Exactly what I am saying! Once an intelligent designer has invented something, it is easy to replicate the design with slight changes in anything totally unrelated. However, evolution is a theory of descent, gradual descent and its central theme is that functions are not invented, they do not arise miraculously, but they gradually descend through slight changes in their ancestors (that's the reason for the silly evolutionist tree of life).

Further you are taking this as if it was just one example disproving evolution. As I said, this is one, the fact that the genome is not in accord with evolutionist assumptions is another. The fact that Haeckel's 'philogony recapitulates ontogeny' was a fraud which has been thoroughly disproven by real science (not the joke science shown in post# 1532 ), shows quite well the falsity of evolution. In fact, note that 2 of the three 'proofs' of evolution claimed by evolutionists are frauds and the third, convergence, is not science in any way but pure rhetorical nonsense.

1,682 posted on 07/12/2003 5:43:24 PM PDT by gore3000 (Intelligent people do not believe in evolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1598 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
Not sure I get your point. I thought you were arguing that creation could be taught in schools if Christians would get their act together? Are you thinking of theistic evolution? Because the fundamentalists on this thread think that's as bad as athestic evolution.

I think I was starting to wander all over the place. I was trying to say that in a Democratic Republic, the majority can bring about pretty much anything they want by voting for it persistently over time. If it's true as the polls say, that 73% of Americans are regular Christian church-goers, we should be able to get whatever we want. If we wished to have a class specifically devoted to Bible Education, we could.

So I'm saying 2 things:

1) If we Christians could put our petty differences aside, we could have Bible class. We can't seem to do that.

2) The sciences could then be left alone to do their thing.

Maybe we could even go back to the notion of separate schools depending on the educational requirements of the customers. Religious schools for those so inclined and technical schools for others. I can't say that the current schools are very good at anything other than supporting marketing aimed at kids and taking money out of our pockets.

1,683 posted on 07/12/2003 5:43:42 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1565 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
Once an intelligent designer has invented something, it is easy to replicate the design with slight changes in anything totally unrelated.

So why does your designer sometimes use a whole limb (birds) to invent flight, sometimes just the hand (bats), and sometimes just a finger (pterodactyl)? It's not a replication at all.

And I guess the neanderthals might be the ancestors of humans after all, right? Seeing that you don't accept mtDNA studies at all.

1,684 posted on 07/12/2003 5:47:55 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1682 | View Replies]

To: ALS
OF COURSE!

RIGHT YOU ARE! No one on that side would bother.
1,685 posted on 07/12/2003 5:49:57 PM PDT by Quix (LIVE THREAD NOW STARTED. UFO special Tues eve & share opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1681 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
Religious schools for those so inclined and technical schools for others.

They have this setup in radical Islamic countries. In Pakistan, they're called madrassas, and are used to radicalize school aged boys into unflinching, unquestioning devotion.

The bottom line is that an omnipotent deity does not require government support in schools.

1,686 posted on 07/12/2003 5:56:48 PM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine (the preview button is my friend...the preview button is my friend...the preview button is my friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1683 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
Said with precision, as usual.
1,687 posted on 07/12/2003 5:57:03 PM PDT by bondserv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1682 | View Replies]

To: gore3000; Dataman; f.Christian; JesseShurun; NewLand; Alamo-Girl; bondserv; unspun; LiteKeeper; ...
And the personal attacks by the desperado crowd never cease..

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/944716/posts?page=324#324
1,688 posted on 07/12/2003 5:59:37 PM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1687 | View Replies]

To: ALS
poor squirts are taking the usual beating..
1,689 posted on 07/12/2003 6:32:02 PM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1688 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
If we Christians could put our petty differences aside, we could have Bible class. We can't seem to do that.

That was always a hopeless dream.

1,690 posted on 07/12/2003 6:34:06 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1683 | View Replies]

To: js1138
free will tends to do that, but you should see the gordian knot the evos spin amongst themselves. You have everything from foam at the mouth darwood stooping atheists to "self-professing christians", whose sole reason for being seems to be to bash real christians. In all cases, the motis is jealousy.

a weird lot they be

1,691 posted on 07/12/2003 6:38:02 PM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1690 | View Replies]

P L A C E M A R K E R
1,692 posted on 07/12/2003 6:48:31 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1691 | View Replies]

To: ALS
And the personal attacks by the desperado crowd never cease..

Pot meet kettle.

1,693 posted on 07/12/2003 6:50:48 PM PDT by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1688 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
kettle meet french fries
1,694 posted on 07/12/2003 6:51:58 PM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1693 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
No, no, don't get me wrong, I value their input as well.

I have NO problem with Christian conservatives, it is the fundamentalists that I am afraid of, and as you can see, we have our unfair share here.

They are trying to take over this website and make it their own. THe old assimilate or perish Borg trick.

They Are WAY right wing and will push this website that direction as well, as the constitutionalist conservatives, meaning myself and others, Libertarian constitutionalists, and just plain old conservatives will be chased off this site because of the abuse brought on to them by the fundamentalists that have NO tolerance for anyone that does not agree 100% with what they believe.

It's sad, and I don't believe that JimRob is gonna do a thing about it, but I will stick it out for the duration until the static gets so loud that I can't stand it anymore, and it's a long way from that.

Virtual Ignore is Very MUCH my friend!!
1,695 posted on 07/12/2003 7:22:00 PM PDT by Aric2000 (If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1648 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Would you say the anti-abortion crowd are fundamentalist christians?
1,696 posted on 07/12/2003 7:29:13 PM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1695 | View Replies]

To: ALS
Let me give you some more Ammo here ALS, to try and beat me with.

I want Roe Vs Wade overturned BIG time, why? Because it is a state issue, NOT a federal issue. The constitution says nothing about Privacy, therefore the fed's have NO power there.

The states should make the decision for themselves, Utah should be able to oulaw it and Oregon should be allowed to have abortion, but it is a STATE issue and the fed's have NO place to be involved in it.
1,697 posted on 07/12/2003 7:41:51 PM PDT by Aric2000 (If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1696 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
That's not ammo. We agree on that, but would you say the anti-abortion crowd are fundamentalist christians?
1,698 posted on 07/12/2003 7:43:05 PM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1697 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Well this is kinda odd. You evos don't have any problem assigning all sorts of imagined hoboblins on "fundies".
I'm just curious how you evos view abortion and how "fundamentalist christians" deal with that. Isn't that clear proof we want to "ram our beliefs" down someone's throat?

Why the silence? You would think that your concern for abortion would be primarily the babies aborted, but it seems to be just a legal issue to you.
1,699 posted on 07/12/2003 8:13:12 PM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1697 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
Limited government is one of the central tenets of the Republican party.

As opposed to the Central Intelligence Agency Tentet who was appointed by Clinton (I think.)

1,700 posted on 07/12/2003 8:14:20 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1601 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,661-1,6801,681-1,7001,701-1,720 ... 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