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 ... 3,741-3,7603,761-3,7803,781-3,800 ... 4,381-4,387 next last
To: CobaltBlue
As AndrewC pointed out from your post: and the worde was God... unless you're adding to the trinity... Then we have John 1:10 the world was made through him which to me is really obvious.

Also 1 Corinthians 8:6 and Colossians 1:16 all things came from God and Jesus and by him all things were created by Jesus.

Lastly there's the Hebrews passage 1:2 and through whom [Jesus] made the [universe/worlds/world].

It's not just John 1:1 that references Jesus as creator.

3,761 posted on 07/16/2003 9:38:02 PM PDT by scripter (The God of Christianity cannot be found in Mormonism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3704 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
If Jesus wasn't a surrogate ... then He was God --- God is the Creator !
3,762 posted on 07/16/2003 9:39:09 PM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3757 | View Replies]

To: Nebullis; js1138
Hmmm… I see we are now in the smokey backroom – which means there will not be very many Lurkers and thus, not much reason to go into detail. IOW, we already know we cannot convince each other to change our views in a substantial way, so we usually speak past each other to help the Lurkers find what they seeking so they can arrive at their own conclusions. Sigh…

So I’ll be brief.. js1138, you said:

Why is Pinker being brought into a discussion of science teaching? Pinker is a philosopher, as was Marx.

Pinker is a scientist also.

Nebullis, you said:

Just to correct misrepresentation of Steven Pinker, he states that "science and ethics are two self-contained systems played out among the same entities in the world...

The quote is attributed to Harold Pinker not Stephen Pinker, but I’m sure it is the same guy. The bottom line is that Grandpierre did not misquote Pinker, he drew a conclusion from Pinker’s statement – namely, that moral reasoning assumes the existence of things that science tells us are unreal (i.e. everything is caused.)

The conclusion of strong determinism is The Illusion of Conscious Will - and extending evolution theory, memetics.

You mentioned me in another post:

Pinker is a neuros-cognitive scientist. But your point applies to Singer and really should be directed at Alamo-Girl who is using the tactic of associating bad philosophy with good science.

Peter Singer’s bad philosophy is based on evolution, it is extremely left-wing and he is in a position of power and prestige to influence others.

It troubles me that he and Lewontin (et al) are infiltrating the science community at such a high level. I would that conservative scientists could turn that particular tide. Every move to strong determinism (whether neuro-science, artificial intelligence or whatever) – plays into the liberal ideology.

Just my two cents…

3,763 posted on 07/16/2003 9:40:44 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3523 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Your analysis only works if you think that God the Creator is exactly the same as Christ the Son and the Holy Spirit/Ghost.

In which case why bother with the distinctions at all?

3,764 posted on 07/16/2003 9:43:38 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3759 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
>>Now it appears you are the one denying the Trinity !<<

You're the one arguing that Jesus Christ knocked up His own mother, who was also His own daughter.
3,765 posted on 07/16/2003 9:45:51 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3760 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
Do you have the Holy Spirit mixed up with Jesus now and God ... evolutionary theology --- right ?
3,766 posted on 07/16/2003 9:49:30 PM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3765 | View Replies]

To: scripter
>>Lastly there's the Hebrews passage 1:2 and through whom [Jesus] made the [universe/worlds/world]. <<

Through whom he made the aeons.

Let me ask you this. Do you agree with the Apostles Creed:

I believe in God, the Father almighty, 
creator of heaven and earth. 
I believe in Jesus Christ, God's only Son, our Lord, 
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, 
born of the Virgin Mary, 
suffered under Pontius Pilate, 
was crucified, died, and was buried; 
he descended to the dead. 
On the third day he rose again; 
he ascended into heaven, 
he is seated at the right hand of the Father, 
and he will come again to judge the living and the dead. 
I believe in the Holy Spirit, 
the holy catholic church, 
the communion of saints, 
the forgiveness of sins, 
the resurrection of the body, 
and the life everlasting. AMEN.
3,767 posted on 07/16/2003 9:49:39 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3761 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
Let me try it on you, the Apostles' Creed, agree or disagree?

I believe in God, the Father almighty, 
creator of heaven and earth. 
I believe in Jesus Christ, God's only Son, our Lord, 
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, 
born of the Virgin Mary, 
suffered under Pontius Pilate, 
was crucified, died, and was buried; 
he descended to the dead. 
On the third day he rose again; 
he ascended into heaven, 
he is seated at the right hand of the Father, 
and he will come again to judge the living and the dead. 
I believe in the Holy Spirit, 
the holy catholic church, 
the communion of saints, 
the forgiveness of sins, 
the resurrection of the body, 
and the life everlasting. AMEN.
3,768 posted on 07/16/2003 9:50:41 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3766 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue; AndrewC
Your analysis only works if you think that God the Creator is exactly the same as Christ the Son and the Holy Spirit/Ghost.

As I see it AndrewC's example works according to Orthodox Christianity. God (Elohim) is what God is - Elohim is a title. The Father, Son and Spirt are Elohim. As previously stated, the Father created through the Son, the Word.

3,769 posted on 07/16/2003 9:51:04 PM PDT by scripter (The God of Christianity cannot be found in Mormonism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3764 | View Replies]

To: scripter
The Father is the Creator. The Son is not the Creator.
3,770 posted on 07/16/2003 9:52:21 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3769 | View Replies]

To: Nebullis
Whether he assumed it or not is irrelevant.

It is very relevant. Back it up, and not from TO, the origin of the phony statement.

3,771 posted on 07/16/2003 9:54:17 PM PDT by gore3000 (Intelligent people do not believe in evolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3737 | View Replies]

To: scripter; CobaltBlue
Isaiah also proclaims the truth --->

Isa 12:2 Behold, God [is] my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the LORD JEHOVAH [is] my strength and [my] song; he also is become my salvation.

Joshua is interpreted "God is my salvation" and Joshua is JESUS.

So this verse can be read

Behold, Jesus I will trust and not be afraid for the LORD JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also is become JESUS.

3,772 posted on 07/16/2003 9:55:56 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3761 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
Through whom he made the aeons.

I know of no Bible version that uses that translation. Again, most use universe, then worlds, then world. None use aeons yet even that doesn't matter as there are other verses in support of Jesus in creation.

And of course I agree with the Apostles Creed, but that's not the issue. The issue is that Jesus was involved in creation.

3,773 posted on 07/16/2003 9:56:05 PM PDT by scripter (The God of Christianity cannot be found in Mormonism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3767 | View Replies]

To: js1138
According to Popper, risky predictions,

Where's the proof. The man lied, it was not a prediction it was a lie. He implied that it had been proven when it had not been.

It is no surprise to see evolutionists defending liars. You guys have been doing it for half this thread.

3,774 posted on 07/16/2003 9:56:32 PM PDT by gore3000 (Intelligent people do not believe in evolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3740 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
The Father is the Creator. The Son is not the Creator.

Then what do you do with John 1:10, 1 Cor 8:6 and Colossians 1:16 which all state Jesus created everything?

3,775 posted on 07/16/2003 9:58:35 PM PDT by scripter (The God of Christianity cannot be found in Mormonism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3770 | View Replies]

To: ThinkPlease
The charge that Ernst Haeckel intentionally "faked" his drawings is irrelevant.

Ok, fraud does not matter to evolutionists, it is normal stuff for you guys. That is the best reason not to believe in evolution. Fakes are okay, fraud is okay.

3,776 posted on 07/16/2003 9:59:15 PM PDT by gore3000 (Intelligent people do not believe in evolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3748 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
Your analysis only works if you think that God the Creator is exactly the same as Christ the Son and the Holy Spirit/Ghost.

No, I demonstrated it was the direct interpretation of the verse you posted. What is water, ice, and steam?

3,777 posted on 07/16/2003 9:59:24 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3764 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
Very little objectivity is spoken anywhere ...

pretty much everbody goes by their bias - ego -feelings - experiences --- self favoritism - delusians ...

and objective physical and abstract reality - honesty - sincereity they never entertain or communicate !

Add evolution into the picture and it is like lsd ...

that's why it is so popular --- the age of fantasy we are living in .

Go to church drunk ... believing in sacred mushrooms --- evolution too !
3,778 posted on 07/16/2003 9:59:28 PM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3768 | View Replies]

To: ThinkPlease
You'd be surprised, you might learn something.

Not from a writer who believes that fraud is okay and insults are evidence.

3,779 posted on 07/16/2003 10:00:43 PM PDT by gore3000 (Intelligent people do not believe in evolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3748 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
>> What is water, ice, and steam?<<

Not the Trinity, according to any version I am aware of, but thanks for trying.
3,780 posted on 07/16/2003 10:01:20 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3777 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 3,741-3,7603,761-3,7803,781-3,800 ... 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