Biology textbook hearings prompt science disputes [Texas]

Knight Ridder Newspapers ^ | 08 July 2003 | MATT FRAZIER

[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."

[Stultis]

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.

At least you realize "it's a long way from that," and CobaltBlue makes similiar provisos. Otherwise I'd have to lump you in with Jesse "I'm goin' to a gulag" Shurun. :)

But I still think you're overly paranoid, and give JR too little credit. It's a woulda, coulda situation. Like I mentioned before, Christian conservatives tried to take over the Republican Party, but they couldn't. They just don't have the numbers. They have the numbers to be a significant influence there, and they have the numbers to be a significant influence here, but they aren't gonna "take over," so quite worrying. Just keep representing for your own convinctions, and don't let a few crazies and off-their-meds types (no names!) skew your perspective. Bear in mind that their real influence is generally inversely proportional to the volume and temperature of their rants.

[ALS]

better reach for the panic button then...

Ann Coulter:
"Conservatives, by and large believe in God, and liberals believe they are gods," came the reply.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33427

---

Bondserv:
You realize that the current head of our party is a fundamentalist who actually reads the Bible for himself.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/943130/posts?page=1602#1602

[ALS]

and if that isn't enough...

Thank you very much, Dr. Bob. I want to thank each of you for investing yourselves in the mission of Christ — in redemption and forgiveness, and for preparing yourselves in the way that you have.
A slogan of the American Revolution which was so distressing to the emissaries of the king that it was found in correspondence sent back to England was the line, "We have no king but Jesus." Tax collectors came, asking for that which belonged to the king, and colonists frequently said, "We have no king but Jesus." It found its way into the fundamental documents of this great country. You could quote the Declaration with me. "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights." Unique among the nations, America recognized the source of our character as being godly and eternal, not being civic and temporal. And because we have understood that our source is eternal, America has been different. We have no king but Jesus.

My mind thinking about that once raced back a couple of thousand years when Pilate stepped before the people in Jerusalem and said, "Whom would ye that I release unto you? Barabas? Or Jesus, which is called the Christ?" And when they said "Barabas," he said, "But what about Jesus? King of the Jews?" And the outcry was, "We have no king but Caesar."

There's a difference between a culture that has no king but Caesar, no standard but the civil authority, and a culture that has no king but Jesus, no standard but the eternal authority. When you have no king but Caesar, you release Barabas — criminality, destruction, thievery, the lowest and the least. When you have no king but Jesus, you release the eternal, you release the highest and the best.

It is not accidental that America has been the home of the brave and the land of the free, the place where mankind has has the greatest of all opportunities, to approach the potential that God has placed within us. It has been because we knew that we were endowed not by the king, but by the Creator, with certain inalienable rights. If America is to be great in the future, it will be if we understand that our source is not civic and temporal, but our source is godly and eternal. Endowed by the Creator with rights of life, liberty and the pursuit if happiness. I thank God for this institution and for you, who recognize and commit yourselves to the proposition that we were so created, and that to live with respect to the Creator promises us the greatest potential as a nation and as individuals. And for such we must reacquaint ourselves daily with His call upon our lives.

John Ashcroft May 8, 1999
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/ashcroft_bjutranscript010112.html

[Stultis]

"so quite worrying"

ARRG!

[longshadow]

"Tractionless Troll alert" placemarker

[Alamo-Girl]

Er, I beg to differ. You said at 1666:

Catholics outnumber Protestants in America

According to this website the Pew Research Council reports Protestants at 52% and Catholics at 24% in a 2002 poll. The website includes a variety of other interesting statistics about the largest religious groups in the United States.

[ALS]

more horrors..

Throughout the world, people of all religions recognize Jesus Christ as an example of love, compassion, sacrifice and service. Reaching out to the poor, the suffering and the marginalized, he provided moral leadership that continues to inspire countless men, women and children today.
To honor his life and teachings, Christians of all races and denominations have joined together to designate June 10 as Jesus Day. As part of this celebration of unity, they are taking part in the 10th annual March for Jesus in cities throughout the Lone Star State. The march, which began in Austin in 1991, is now held in nearly 180 countries. Jesus Day challenges people to follow Christ's example by performing good works in their communities and neighborhoods. By nursing the sick, feeding the poor or volunteering in homeless shelters, everyone can play a role in making the world a better place.

I urge all Texans to answer the call to serve those in need. By volunteering their time, energy or resources to helping others, adults and youngsters follow Christ's message of love and service in thought and deed.

Therefore, I, George W. Bush, Governor of Texas, do hereby proclaim June 10, 2000, Jesus Day in Texas and urge the appropriate recognition whereof, in official recognition whereof, I hereby affix my signature this 17th day of April, 2000.
http://www.snopes.com/religion/jesusday.htm

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your post!

In the religion threads, one might go on for days and days defining the term [Christian fundamentalism]. But that would carry us far afield from the subject most of us come into threads like this to discuss. In the limited context of these evolution threads, it usually means a belief that creation literally happened precisely as described in Genesis, so that to one with such a belief, evolution is impossible. So defined, it's not really limited to Christians. Someone said there are Muslims with the same opposition to evolution. There may be others as well.

It used to be that these threads stayed on topic with the theory of evolution v intelligent design - or - the theory of evolution v. young earth creationism.

Lately however the threads have become side-tracked on besmirching either Christian fundamentalism on the one hand, or Catholicism on the other. I would much prefer we simply agree to stay on the original topics, but if besmirching must go on, then I strongly recommend we define the terms - because it is inappropriate to equate Young Earth Creationism to Christian Fundamentalism. Likewise, it would be inappropriate to equate the Theory of Evolution to Catholism.

[ALS]

Largest denominational families in U.S., 2001

(self-identification, ARIS)

Denomination	1990 Est. Adult Pop.	2001 Est. Adult Pop.	Est. % of U.S. Pop., 2001	% Change 1990 - 2001
Catholic	46,004,000	50,873,000	24.5%	+11%
Baptist	33,964,000	33,830,000	16.3%	0%
Methodist/Wesleyan	14,174,000	14,150,000	6.8%	0%
Lutheran	9,110,000	9,580,000	4.6%	+5%
Presbyterian	4,985,000	5,596,000	2.7%	+12%
Pentecostal/Charismatic	3,191,000	4,407,000	2.1%	+38%
Episcopalian/Anglican	3,042,000	3,451,000	1.7%	+13%
Judaism	3,137,000	2,831,000	1.3%	-10%
Latter-day Saints/Mormon	2,487,000	2,697,000	1.3%	+8%
Churches of Christ	1,769,000	2,593,000	1.2%	+47%
Congregational/ United Church of Christ	599,000	1,378,000	0.7%	+130%
Jehovah's Witnesses	1,381,000	1,331,000	0.6%	-4%
Assemblies of God	660,000	1,106,000	0.5%	+68%

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for the heads up and the link! Hugs!!!

[ALS]

:)

[Alamo-Girl]

Er, if I may interrupt... you said:

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.

I am a Christian Fundamantalist and as far as I know you and I have never had a problem getting along. Do we have a problem?

[Stultis]

"Tractionless Troll"

LOL!

[ALS]

Well stulty, what do you thonk about all those fundamentalists in the White House? Does that "scare you"?

[ALS]

thonk is funny enough but not the right word, think will do

[AndrewC]

thonk

Boy you came close to getting Microsloth on your tail!!

Thunk® Microsoft (0-4000AD)

[ALS]

the analites are thick in these here parts :)

[Stultis]

Nope. I'm luvin' it. Give me more.

[ALS]

So you don't agree with the big fear factor on fundamentalists by the evos in these threads?

[Aric2000]

There are some fundamentalists that have NO tolerance for others beliefs, nor have any tolerance for others that have a different worldview then their own.

These others have done their best to shut up ALL opposition by loading the evo/creo threads with nonsense, made up quotes, misleading statements, cut and paste hack jobs and just downright attacks to shut up ALL opposition without bringing any facts, evidence or scientific thinking to ANY of their posts.

You I consider a TRUE christian, someone who is tolerant of others beliefs, tolerant of opposing opinions, and actually speaks sense.

You and I agree far more then we disagree, you do not see things in the black and white that they seem to, you see the shades of grey, and try to find the middle ground where we can agree.

They do NOT, they want to shut up all those that disagree in any matter, way, shape or form they can.

I find it disturbing, sick, and most of all, not at all Christian.

They want converts, all they seem to be able to do is CHASE off anyone that they think might be a threat to their closeminded beliefs.

Again, I have no problem with you, you are considerate, are NOT threatened by others beliefs, but most of all, You use actual evidence and opinion to show your points, and are unafraid to tell others what it is you actually believe.

I love opposing viewpoints, but when the opposing party does NOT debate, but chooses to attack instead and NOT answer questions with a direct reply, it gets a bit frustrating.

You know who I am talking about, and I personally think he is the biggest abuser on this board, and I find his "christian" attitude, more taliban like then tolerant.

No Alamo girl, I do Not have a problem with you, have NEVER had a problem with you, and LOVE your posts, except of course where you actually treat a certain someone with respect that I don't think he deserves.

But that is you, you are just a loving and caring person, and I like that in you, it is refreshing, but most of all, it is fun to debate you, although, if they ACTUALLY debated like you do, they might find that we agree, far more then we disagree, just as you and I do.

But instead they attack CONTINUASLY, and do NOT give anyone a chance to find a possible middle ground.

Big hugs to you Alamo Girl, we may not agree on everything, but that is the beautiful thing about this country, we don't HAVE to.