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 ... 2,281-2,3002,301-2,3202,321-2,340 ... 4,381-4,387 next last
To: VadeRetro
Yepp, I think that's the one I had in mind.
2,301 posted on 07/14/2003 1:59:49 PM PDT by BMCDA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2296 | View Replies]

To: BMCDA
That one really needed an Andrea Marcovicci nude scene. Would have saved the movie.
2,302 posted on 07/14/2003 2:01:51 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2301 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
smutty bacteria placemarker
2,303 posted on 07/14/2003 2:02:37 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2253 | View Replies]

To: BMCDA
we could do this all day and night... but it's only because we're hell-bound atheists. If we were honest to goodness REAL christians, we'd understand what the bible/god/jesus/ apostles REALLY meant.
2,304 posted on 07/14/2003 2:05:31 PM PDT by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2300 | View Replies]

To: qam1
You are aware the genealogy in Matthew is for Joseph and the genealogy in Luke is for Mary. Heli was the father of Mary.

Luke 3:23
23And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

Matthew is the Gospel to the Jews speaking of His royalty by legal adoption by Joseph through Solomon to David; Luke is the Gospel to the Greeks speaking of his humanity by Mary through Nathan to David.

One other interesting note for you is that speaking of Jeconiah in:
Jer 22:30
Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.

God pronounces a blood curse on the line from David to Joseph through Solomon (the royal line). Jesus circumvented this curse by being in the line of David by blood through David’s son Nathan, but Jesus was still of the royal line by adoption through Joseph, sans the blood curse.

Thank you!
2,305 posted on 07/14/2003 2:17:01 PM PDT by bondserv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2283 | View Replies]

To: Junior
>>>...There was no "before" the Big Bang, as time did not exist.

How did all the stuff get together to make the Big Bang?

Wouldn't that take at least a little time? Believeing in the Big Bang is also an excercise in faith.

There is evidence to support it. Believeing in what it means is an act of faith.

2,306 posted on 07/14/2003 2:21:12 PM PDT by Dan(9698)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2287 | View Replies]

To: Dan(9698)
You'd have to ask Physicist. From what I understand, the universe is a stable fluctuation (much like zero-point energy) in an underlying chaos. I can picture it and I can understand it; I, however, cannot communicate the concept.
2,307 posted on 07/14/2003 2:24:33 PM PDT by Junior (Killed a six pack ... just to watch it die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2306 | View Replies]

To: bondserv; qam1
"Blood curses?!" wow... maybe I'm not giving this whole christianity thing its just due.

Did this blood curse in the royal line continue all the way through the famous hemophiliacs of British royalty?

Do loving gods often place blood curses on innoncent unborn lineages?

Ever curious...
2,308 posted on 07/14/2003 2:25:01 PM PDT by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2305 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
we could do this all day and night... but it's only because we're hell-bound atheists. If we were honest to goodness REAL christians, we'd understand what the bible/god/jesus/ apostles REALLY meant.

LOL!! Guess it's our hatred towards the One True God - uh... I mean the ca. 2700 True Gods that's blinding us.
Aaaahh, so much hate, so little time...

2,309 posted on 07/14/2003 2:26:38 PM PDT by BMCDA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2304 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
Just as well. Before Kansas reversed itself, we were considering refusing to accept biology credits from any school system that taught creationism. There no reason why a science department should accept pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo from fundamentalist religious fanatics, any more than we should accept the prohibition on usury in the Koran as a valid form of economics, or Vedic astrology as a branch of science.

But you don't mind pushing your religion on our kids against the will of parents do you? It's called atheism. think you should read the U.S. Constitution before I mistake you for a communist tyrant. This statement of yours smacks of tyranny. What country do you think this is - Cuba? You and the elitist tyrants who run the govt schools think you own our kids and you can teach them what you want, when you want, no matter what parents think. You don't own my kids and you have NOTHING to say about their education. Got it Fidel? I'm here to tell you that you can't have my kids. Anyone with any sense will pull their kids out of the govt schools now and forever. Take your dictatorship back to North Korea.

2,310 posted on 07/14/2003 2:27:51 PM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1425 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Thanks. God gave me a brain. I believe He expects me to use it. The creationists love to pick at evolution, claiming (because they have barely a layman's grasp of the subject) that it is full of holes. However, when blatant contradictions are pointed out in Scripture they scream "anti-Christian" (even if it is a Christian pointing the problems out). BTW, I was right about being pointed to theological arguments claiming there is no contradiction, but the arguments are basically obfuscating rather than enlightening. A bit like putting a fresh coat of paint on a dirty wall...
2,311 posted on 07/14/2003 2:28:36 PM PDT by Junior (Killed a six pack ... just to watch it die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2298 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
That one really needed an Andrea Marcovicci nude scene. Would have saved the movie.

Aye, and it would have kept me from falling asleep ;-D

2,312 posted on 07/14/2003 2:29:40 PM PDT by BMCDA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2302 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
9 year olds are expected to think for themselves these days, maybe choose woodwind, brass, or strings, and they don't care what the state wants, or what their parents want for that matter. It's a little young for any of this; at 9 they should be learning to read and do arithmetic. 12 years old is functional decision age for most. Anyway, I'm concerned with the U, where no one wants any Creationism, they all want the current state of the art.

Nice try but this is laughable. First of all, you decide nothing for my kids education - I do. Second, how much did you know as a 9 year old? NOTHING. Nine year olds MUST have guidance to make the correct decisions and I don't want people like you making those decisions for my kid. It's this mentality that gave us the right to an abortion for a 13-year-old WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT. I think you should let this drop before I embarrass you.

2,313 posted on 07/14/2003 2:31:00 PM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1422 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
You are basically saying that creationism is science, when you know for a fact that it's not.

Tell that to Isaac Newton, Copernicus and Galileo - ALL of whom believed in creationism.

2,314 posted on 07/14/2003 2:31:53 PM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1421 | View Replies]

To: JesseShurun
"This is by no means "exposing" a fellow freeper's personal life at all. Goodseed has posted her link on other threads here, and it's obvious she's proud of her family. And thankfully, she has no mentions of Saturn"



"not sure what Saturn has to do with anything, personal hitpiece to affect poster's ability to understand something, I guess. Your guess is as good as mine "




http://www.he.net/

http://saturn.he.net/~danger


who is goodseedhomeschool that accout was suppend.


I am confused what is this inside joke about Saturn when it is on Stultis photo?

http://saturn.he.net/~danger/freepnet/album/pictures/Stultis.jpg

Just like to figure out riddles!
2,315 posted on 07/14/2003 2:33:06 PM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 894 | View Replies]

To: bondserv
Joachim was Mary's father, and Anne was her mother.

St. Anne, the spouse of Joachim, was the Mother of Our Lady and the grandmother of Our Lord. The devotion to St. Anne has increased very much in the whole Church. She is much venerated as the Patron of Brittany.

2,316 posted on 07/14/2003 2:33:48 PM PDT by Junior (Killed a six pack ... just to watch it die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2305 | View Replies]

To: Junior
the universe is a stable fluctuation (much like zero-point energy) in an underlying chaos.

No wonder you're confused. It's a fluctuating chaos in a hierarchical stability. Everything should jell now.

2,317 posted on 07/14/2003 2:34:39 PM PDT by RightWhale (gazing at shadows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2307 | View Replies]

To: bondserv
I am sorry I got to disagree because they don't mention Mary and they both end up at Joseph. Unless Joseph and Mary were Half brother and sister (which besides with Abraham is a big no-no) the bible goofed.

Matthew 1:16
And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Luke 3:23
And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.

Actually according to Matthew 1:23
Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel,

Why is Jesus called Jesus instead of Emmanuel?

2,318 posted on 07/14/2003 2:36:34 PM PDT by qam1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2305 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
you should let this drop before I embarrass you

If the 9 year old is going to become a scientist, he will need these concepts eventually, although not until grad school. If he isn't going to be a scientist, it doesn't matter at all.

2,319 posted on 07/14/2003 2:43:23 PM PDT by RightWhale (gazing at shadows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2313 | View Replies]

To: BMCDA
Aaaahh, so much hate, so little time...

Alas...

2,320 posted on 07/14/2003 2:46:08 PM PDT by balrog666 (When in doubt, tell the truth. - Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2309 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 2,281-2,3002,301-2,3202,321-2,340 ... 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