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."
Then cease with the stupid and asinine statements that believing in special creation is unscientific. Since science CAN'T PROVE SQUAT about how the universe began, you can't state with any authority that special creation is unscientific. You can only rely on your bias to make such statements. There were no scientists there to observe it. Most of the major breakthroughs in science came long before Darwin. How did they ever do it - they couldn't possibly have behaved like scientists before Darwin existed, could they?
That is your freedom - find another school if you don't like it. That would be your only option in a representative democracy. In no case, should 10 people hold sway over 500. The 10 can go to another school - that is, if the tyrants will start allowing vouchers and real choice rather than this forced monopoly.
And 1720 is a really big number.
hahahaha. "Representative republic" is a redundant term genius. A representative democracy is a democracy with elected representatives appointed by the people - i.e. the very definition of a republic. A democracy is DIRECT rule by the people (i.e. mob rule). Try reading the Constitution and the Federalist Papers to gain further understanding.
Here I am arguing for school choice, and you are blowing me off.
All I have to do is read the headlines about the mainline churches slide into total moral depravity and relativism. Their beliefs and fruit speak for themselves. If it walks like a duck...
I have also seen surveys done in some of the mainline churches that reveal that the majority of people who attend the Episcopal, Presb. USA, United Methodist and other churches do not believe that the bible is the Word of God and support and endorse every single depraved liberal cause that comes down the pike. Big Red Flag here.
Churches like these are empty shells that allow cultural norms to replace absolute scriptural truth. Does the word ICHABOD mean anything to you?
For the record. I'm a Protestant.
(I used to be a time lord but I couldn't keep up the insurance payments on my TARDIS. ;)
As I said, it's implied. I doubt any teacher anywhere in public schools ever stands in front of a class and says "here is the purpose/goal of life, students" (they'd probably be fired...). It is by not teaching these, directly, and then emphasizing only external success ('you want to do well in school because you'll end up with more money' is the main reason ever given in public schools) that children end up with a certain value system.
Of course, the problem with teaching of a "higher meaning" to human existence is that there isn't a single unified belief on the matter.
Exactly. The same problem exists when the answers to such 'higher questions' are 'only' implied by emphases and taught through example alone and not taught directly. The "problem," though, is not whether or not it is taught, but the fact that taxpayers are forced to foot the bill for it being taught.
I'm not sure how government-run schools could therefore properly teach such a method.
It, ideally, cannot, without violating a person's beliefs on the matter - and at that person's expense, if that person pays the taxes. That is the prime, inescapable problem that exists, and always will exist, with government-run schooling.
Well, if you have a better ultimate source for authority, let's hear it. Make sure that it's something that you can demonstrate as real, and not just an unsupported supposition.
I won't try to convince you one way or another about the prime source of authority, since it is beyond the matter at hand in our little discussion (we're on enough of a tangent as it is - and there are a lot of websites on the internet discussing philosophical evidences, etc. as it is). Suffice to say, however, that many taxpayers disagree with your worldview. Should they be forced to pay taxes to have beliefs diametrically opposed to their own taught? Were the opposite thing taught, do you think you should be taxed to fund it?
LOL, you mean good news for men placemarker!A "Good News" placemarker
This part I agree with completely.
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.