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."

[bondserv]

So you would ask the children to ignore how the sunset is beautifully painted across the sky.

Or the soothing auditory sounds that waves crashing on the beach produce.

Or the shade of green that the grass takes on after the pure water from the clouds stimulates a unique chemical reaction with life.

Or the rusty color of the bark on a redwood tree as it majestically reaches to the sky.

Or the sweet smell of fresh cut grass as you tee off for a round of golf.

Or the taste of a nicely BBQ'ed fresh cut of filet mignon as the flavor explodes over the taste buds of the mouth.

Or the excitement of a dog greeting his master after a trip away from home.

How can you teach a child to appreciate the wonders of life if you attribute these things to sterile, cold, space and time?

The Designer took great care in laying out a wonderful world for us. If not for the curse (Chaos, brought on by the 2nd Law) and the enemy having chosen to continually try to ensnare us with destruction of one another, we would be completely satisfied with His creation.

[qam1]

Bat bones tend to be light and slender (which accounts in part for the sparse fossil record of bats). As in birds, bats have some reduced bones, the radius and fibula are shortened and thin. Bats, like birds, also have fused cranial bones for additional lightness. The arrangement of the muscles is also designed for lightness and for flight.

From: Amazing Creatures, an article which evolutionists could not refute and therefore abused to force its being pulled from FR.

Talk about being delusional, You points about bats were easily refuted and shot down before the thread was pulled.

Bat fossils clearly show an evolutionary trend from less sophisticated to the more sophisticated we see today.

Your site claims the fibula is shorted and thinned but what your site conveniently leaves out is that in early bats the fibula wasn't thin at all (2nd from bottom in list), that feature along with others evolved over time.

I won't hold my breath waiting for a correction to appear on the site.

[bondserv]

Beautiful!!

[bondserv]

Thanks for your input and response.

We have some Spirit filled afterglow gatherings that will bless your socks off. The peace that surpasses understanding can be a serious recharge of the spiritual batteries.

[PatrickHenry]

Automated Troll-Guard ^tm notification:
All trolls ignored.
Security settings on high.
Idiot tolerance level on low.
Troll traction index: 11%

[ALS]

Automated Evo-Guard ^tm notification:
All Evos auto-ignorant.
Evo inSecurity settings on high.
Evo IQ level stuck on low.

"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religion but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We shall not fight alone. God presides over the destinies of nations." - Patrick Henry

[ALS]

Job 38:2
Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
38:3
Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
38:4
Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
38:5
Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest ? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
38:6
Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened ? or who laid the corner stone thereof

[gore3000]

A) Your posts haven't laid a glove on the scientific basis for evolution.

No? That's why you folks cannot refute them with your tens of thousands of references, hundreds of links and hundreds of professional propagandists whose job is to talk away the facts.

Let's look at the list of scientific facts presented to the evolutionists which they cannot refute:
1, post# 1868 - showing that genetics disproves evolution.
2. post# 66 in the 'Monkey Trial' thread - showing that evolution is not even a theory. (original thread destroyed due to evos not wanting it seen).
3. Amazing Creatures (original thread destroyed due to evos not wanting it seen).
4. Evidence Disproving Evolution still here at FR for all to see that the evolutionists could not refute it.

All the above go to the heart of the veracity of the theory of evolution. All of them are scientifically correct, none of them has been refuted. All you and your friends know how to do is repeat 'evolution is science' but cannot give a single refutation to any of the above. If evolution was science there would be no question that would need an insult as a reply.

[gore3000]

If you want to believe that everybody can pick up a Bible and figure things out and every understanding and perception is as good as any other, more power to you.

I don't know who you are talking to, certainly not to me - that's why you could not even quote a word I said.

[Aric2000]

ya gotta love it placemarker

[ALS]

[gore3000]

Bat fossils clearly show an evolutionary trend from less sophisticated to the more sophisticated we see today.

Bats are mammals, therefore they share many characteristics of mammals. They however share many characteristics with birds which clearly could not have been inherited. Evolution is about inheritance and these birdlike features were not inherited. Therefore to speak of convergent evolution as evolutionists speak of is totally ludicrous. Your table may look impressive, but so do the evolutionary trees, cladistics, mtDNA studies and much else put out by the rhetorical factories of evolution none of which are evidence but an attempt to manufacture evidence where none exists.

Since the table is not sourced and does not show where the facts came from it is not evidence of anything. In addition, there are over a thousand species of bats nowadays, it would be easy to compare the known fossils against a totally unrelated species such as the fruit eating bats and claim that the features are different. That's not proof of anything. The 50 million year old bats already had the bat sonar and the birdlike features for flight.

[VadeRetro]

How can you teach a child to appreciate the wonders of life if you attribute these things to sterile, cold, space and time?

You can't appreciate any of that unless you believe a fairy story about a magical being zapping it all into existence out of nothing in a week? Hello? Is anybody home in your head?

[ALS]

The question was a question, of which you failed to answer.

curious

[gore3000]

And this Texas textbook controversy is a pretty good example.

Correct! The evolutionists are very intolerant and try to silence all who disagree. Interestingly, even though evolutionists claim that they are not atheists and that their theory is not atheistic, they use the word "God" in their attempts to silence opponents as if it was a dirty word.

[VadeRetro]

Or the taste of a nicely BBQ'ed fresh cut of filet mignon as the flavor explodes over the taste buds of the mouth.

Another thing: good filet mignon is too good for BBQ sauce.

[ALS]

[VadeRetro]

That's why you folks cannot refute them with your tens of thousands of references, hundreds of links and hundreds of professional propagandists whose job is to talk away the facts.

You forgot all the museums in the world, with all their specimens, and all the labs with all the cages, cultures, and instruments. Nothing can touch your posts because you will still post them whether reality is in agreement with their content or not.

[ALS]

evos in a parallelogram universe P L A C E M A R K E R

[VadeRetro]

The Designer took great care in laying out a wonderful world for us. If not for the curse (Chaos, brought on by the 2nd Law) and the enemy having chosen to continually try to ensnare us with destruction of one another, we would be completely satisfied with His creation.

Damn that Osama!