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 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 4,381-4,387 next last
To: exmarine
Showing that any theory has sufficient evidence to support it is not a valid argument that all other theories must also have sufficient evidence to support them.

As a theory is a hypothesis with supporting evidence, you'd be hard-pressed to make your case.

With the BB, one must assume that the physical laws and constants came about by chance...

That's a bit of a non-sequitur, as no such assumption is made.

181 posted on 07/09/2003 3:02:11 PM PDT by Junior ("Eat recycled food. It's good for the environment and okay for you...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; Junior; All
They never do quit trying to get that camel's nose under the tent, do they? Why, oh why, must religious people continually attempt to use the non-parochial government schools to prosletyze?

I see that this thread lasted until post #38 before the usual suspects began crawling over it. I do believe they keep a rotating watch here, and the one with "the duty" pings the others when ANY pro-science thread pops up.

182 posted on 07/09/2003 3:02:32 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Come now a Barbie Doll is alive?

There are more of them all the time, and they are showing greater variety as time goes by.

183 posted on 07/09/2003 3:04:23 PM PDT by RightWhale (gazing at shadows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Killer science !

Bait - switch science - evolution ...

give them propaganda - ideology ---

denigrate God and conservatism !

Here's the result ...

Communism w /o the physical appearances - methods ---

just do it mentally // internally via lies !
184 posted on 07/09/2003 3:04:33 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
I don't think that's required by Big Bang theory at all. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

What other way is there in the absence of God? One has to assume that order came from chaos (which is what explosions are).

185 posted on 07/09/2003 3:04:43 PM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
I do believe they keep a rotating watch here, and the one with "the duty" pings the others when ANY pro-science thread pops up.

What do you suppose post 2 is all about?

186 posted on 07/09/2003 3:04:51 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
Teaching principles consistent with a religion is tantamount to teaching the relion.

How is science inconsistent with religion?

187 posted on 07/09/2003 3:05:01 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
Thank you. It appears to be a creationist apologetics site. I am bookmarking it for future reference, however, and it will probably join AiG and ICR on TUCvER, if I ever get around to producing another version.
188 posted on 07/09/2003 3:05:06 PM PDT by Junior ("Eat recycled food. It's good for the environment and okay for you...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
There are more of them all the time, and they are showing greater variety as time goes by.

You have a point there.

189 posted on 07/09/2003 3:05:44 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Junior
As a theory is a hypothesis with supporting evidence, you'd be hard-pressed to make your case.

It's all subjective. Evidence can be interpreted in a hundred different ways, as you well know that the observer is never objective. :)

190 posted on 07/09/2003 3:06:19 PM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Technically, sexual critters do no "self replicate" either, as neither sex is capable of reproduction on its own. Might not this case be made for virii?
191 posted on 07/09/2003 3:06:33 PM PDT by Junior ("Eat recycled food. It's good for the environment and okay for you...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
Every science starts at step 2 or higher.

You make a good point, but I don't think the examples you give are good analogies. It would make more sense to say that what initially created cows doesn't affect the operation of the beef industry.

How life initially came about does affect the science of evolution. If a single life for became all life forms is a very different scenario than if twenty five different initial life forms formed all life forms.

192 posted on 07/09/2003 3:07:48 PM PDT by Onelifetogive (Just asking...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: ALS

fc...

"The nice thing about economic and intellectual freedom is ...

when people do it for themselves they are apt to do it wisely ---

when others choose to do it for others ---

it becomes corrupted by their own egos that which they fail to even admit (( bias )) or recognize !"


als ...

Perfectly put. It is the essence of why we don't want marxist/darwinist theories shoved down our children's throats in schools.
193 posted on 07/09/2003 3:07:51 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Barbie dolls are definitely a parasitic infection, influencing their hosts, through a complex, interconnected matrix of variables, to produce replicas of themselves. Interestingly, only flawed replicas having divergent soft exoskeletal parameters seem to survive.
194 posted on 07/09/2003 3:08:27 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Oh. Well, I agree that a host is necessary for replication, but this still seems like a fine line. For example, a double stranded DNA virus such as a herpesvirus or a poxvirus certainly seems to mimic otherwise common place parasitic behavior (hence, I suppose, the question about whether tapeworms are alive). The mere necessity of a host as an integral aspect of replication doesn't seem to me (until persuaded otherwise of course) to be the demarcation line for life.
195 posted on 07/09/2003 3:08:55 PM PDT by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Junior
Technically, sexual critters do no "self replicate" either,

A point except that they are made up of living cells that do self-replicate.

196 posted on 07/09/2003 3:09:48 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: Onelifetogive
I exist (( reality )) ... therefore I evolved (( proof ))--- isn't that STUPID ?
197 posted on 07/09/2003 3:10:13 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
The poster of the thread pinged those with whom he wanted to discuss the posted story.

He posted the thread; he pinged who he wanted. That's different from waiting in the wings to attack ANY thread which discusses evolution, using arguments and tactics which have been THOROUGHLY debunked.

198 posted on 07/09/2003 3:10:33 PM PDT by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
Firstly, the Big Bang is mute on the existence or non-existence of God. Secondly, and I'm sure you've been privy to this information before, but I may be wrong, the Big Bang was not an explosion, it was a sudden inflation of space-time from a singularity.
199 posted on 07/09/2003 3:11:40 PM PDT by Junior ("Eat recycled food. It's good for the environment and okay for you...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
The mere necessity of a host as an integral aspect of replication doesn't seem to me (until persuaded otherwise of course) to be the demarcation line for life.

You can believe what you wish. You can even characterize a dead parrot as merely sleeping or stunned if you wish.

200 posted on 07/09/2003 3:13:28 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 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