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."
True. For the most part it only tells us the order in which the elements were deposited. How they were deposited requires the examination of more specific detail. For example, if sandstone was deposited in a desert environment the individual grains will be pitted and frosted (from bouncing along and striking against each other as they are blown along the surface in the wind). There may also be striations representing the characteristic angle of repose of dry sand along the leeward faces of sand dunes, and the windward faces may preserve footprints of desert creatures. Etc. They will look different in many ways from sand deposited by water.
Hopefully, you're not going to have to rely upon your kids to support you in old age, because I doubt they'll be able to afford it on their level of pay.
Just checking...
The fact that England had been opposed to slavery since the beginning of the century seems to escape you! Besides to which, great men transcend their environment, evil men, use the evil around them to further their agenda.
Are you going on record asserting that Darwin believed in and supported slavery?
I didn't catch it the first time around, but gore3000 also errs in claiming that "England had been opposed to slavery since the beginning of the century". England did not finally outlaw slavery in all it's territories until 1833, and had not outlawed slave trading for it's own flagged ships till 1807.
That being said, Britain certainly was the major driving force in first ending the slave trade and then ending slavery around the world. They engaged in major diplomatic initiatives to end the slave trade and even (around 1830 IIRC) began treating siezing or destroying Brazilian and Portuguese slave ships as pirate vessels when those countries continued the trade in violation of a treaty.
Oooh! Good point, js!
Which quote was that?
Well, some states have standards for curricula or textbooks -- e.g. Texas' "Proclamation," to make a passing reference to the thread topic :) -- and these may have force of law, but the ONLY time I'm aware of evolution EVER being mandated by actual legislation, it was in a law advocated and defended by creationists. The "equal time" law passed in Arkansas, and later overturned by the courts, mandated that "creation science" must be taught if "evolution science" is taught, and vice versa.
So it seems that only creationists have tried to legislatively mandate the teaching of evolution! Maybe you need to complain to them. I've never heard of an evolutionist who even wants such a mandate. Seeking such a mandate (as creationists do) can only discredit a theory. Evolution is only included in textbooks and curricula because it is -- in objective fact -- a part of science. It doesn't NEED any legislative mandate. Evolutionist don't WANT a mandate.
Creationist DO want a mandate. And that speaks volumes.
Show me in the Constitution where it says that the Federal Govt is in charge of enforcing science curriculum. This is a free country - this isn't China or N. Korea or Cuba. In this country, there is individual freedom. If people in some backwoods Manhattan (hehe) community want to teach Wicca, the govt has no right to stop them. The people rule in this country, not a group of 9 black-robed oligarchs. The issue is personal freedom! Get that thru your head. I don't give a flip what you think about my community - you don't live here and you have no right to tell us how to live. Get that thru your thick skull.
2,823 posted on 07/15/2003 9:14 AM PDT by exmarine
Funny. I'm dating a conservative, church-going freeper. I think I'll pass along your warning myself, though, rather than give you her handle.
Which quote was that?
"...I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science...It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaw[s] and holes as sound parts."Here's one source
Charles Darwin to Asa Gray, cited by Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin, (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1991) p. 456, 475.
I'll have to wait till this evening to post the full context.
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.