Needs graphics
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."
Illustrating again that Creationism is just another PostModern-Deconstructionist attack on scientific inquiry.
Spare me the empty rhetoric. Give me your defintion of science, otherwise, I and all others here will have to conclude that you are not prepared to defend your statements.
Give me your definition of science.
Spare me the empty rhetoric. Give me your defintion of science, otherwise, I and all others here will have to conclude that you are not prepared to defend your statements.
Do you have a reading problem? What you are trying to do is play the gotcha game: lure someone into making a restrictive definition, then jump up and say, "AhHa! this widget A doesn't fit into box B."
Problem is, Science is what scientists do. It works by consensus, not definitions. The standards and practices of science adapt to the problem at hand. The only master rule is that the consensus has to hold up over time.
I just did. Science is what scientists do (professionally). Is that too simple for you?
otherwise, I and all others here will have to conclude that you are not prepared to defend your statements.
What sort of overweening arrogance could possibly lead someone to pretend to speak for "all others here"? And what sort of chutzpah could lead someone who just yesterday posted a claim about homeschooling that he declined to defend, to demand such a defense from others?
Ooh. You can play the gotcha game too.
What was that definition of madness? Doing (or posting) the same thing over and over again, somehow expecting that the result will be different this time?
Exactly, To quote Karl Popper, a real philosopher:
"This, then for me is science. I do not try to define it, for very good reasons. ... Definitions are either abbreviations and therefore unneccessary...or they are Aristotelian attempts to 'state the essence' of a word, and therefore unconscious conventional dogmas. "
Popper proposes a rough demarcation criterion for science vs. non-science (that science is predictive, it actively looks for tests and refutations, etc.) I happen to think his demarcation proposal can be improved (I'm not the first or even the hundred-and-first to say this); but in general I agree with his rejection of attempts to define science, except in terms of a description of how science is done.
The quote, BTW, is from 'The Problem of Demarcation (1974), which is excerpted in a book of essays by Popper, called Popper Selections, edited by David Miller, Princeton University Press, 1985.
I am curious where you get this idea. Outside of the Bible (or a book written using the Bible or about the Bible), would you please show documented records that Jesus truly existed?
For example, just basic questions as the time and order of creation are greatly disputed among fundamentalist Christians. Do you want the public schools to take sides while teaching ”creationism?”
Take this question:
The creation “day” lasted :
A. 24 hoursThe answer to the above question is extremely important; for instance, take a look at dating of fossils. A mammal fossil that is 6 million years old will be acceptable to a subset of Creationists but not to others. A mammal fossil that is 13,000 years old will be acceptable to another subset of Creationists but not to others. Similarly, a mammal fossil that is 7,000 years old will be acceptable to another subset of Creationists but not to others.B. 1000 years.
C. 7,000 years.
D. An indeterminate amount of time (it could be anywhere from 24 hours to zillions of years)
When did God create the large Earth mammals?
Young Earth Creationists of the 24-hour creation days spend quite a bit of time ridiculing fossil tests that do not match their sectarian interpretation of the Bible, while other Christian fundamentalists have accepted those dates without any trouble for many decades.
I know of three verses that refer to Jesus at creation:
Here's John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.In chronological Bibles, John 1:1 is the first verse listed. Here's John 1:10
He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.1 Corinthians 8:6
Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.That's a reference to God and Jesus, from which all things came. Which aligns with the above verses and the following verses.
Colassians 1:15-16a
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created...Hebrews 1:1-2
In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.The Bible tells us God created everything through Jesus, the Word.
I don't have time to get into the details but if you're looking for a source for this belief...
There is a mention by Josephus, although John the Baptist got much bigger press.
Thanks. Was wondering if there were any others like Roman or official records?
Needs graphics
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.