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."
Yeah, but if we got them fixed they couldn't reproduce and then that whole "stellar evolution" thing goes right out the window.
Ah, I see! You've provoked an epiphany, PH.
Now I also understand why a minority person can't be racist, why followers of Farrakhan can't be antisemites, why left-extremists can't be unpatriotic, and why we should heed the environmental advice of limousine liberals while their private jets punch holes through the ozone.
Wonderous how it all comes together.
As Hillary's follower's say: "She's wonderful! Simply wonderful!"
I think you will find that if strong AI is ever achieved it will be at the expense of strong determinism. The more nearly we mimic brain function, the more difficult it will be to insure sanity. And that's even before we attempt anything approaching human brains. Just my two cents.
Yup, another thread has died of smoke inhalation. Better to be archived than pulled.
Go do a google search for 'proper motion'. Then get back to me.
As for your ad hominems, well, I'll leave them unanswered, since ad hominems in general provide information about the writer, not the recipient.
The ancient Greek manuscripts don't have punctuation, as you know. So it's hard to say exactly where ho gegonen goes.
Prior to the 4th century, Bible scholars attached it to Verse 4. Afterwards, they tended to attach it to Verse 3.
Fundamentalists are particularly attached to the King James Version, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate, not the Greek manuscripts, and has a lot of differences with Bibles that were translated from Greek manuscripts.
And that's leaving out the fact that John contains words that are found nowhere else, so scholars can't even agree with what they mean.
Not to mention the Elohim problem.
Explain to me why fundamentalists think the King James Version is the inerrant word of God? I seem to be missing something.
You know, you are right about that. Will try to tone down the sarcasm in the future. Hopefully that will go both ways.
In the table below, all of the material I quoted from the 6th Edition is matched with the corresponding material from the 1st Edition. I have highlighted, in red, the only substantive addition in the 6th edition, where Darwin provides some data from experiments only (but nevertheless) alluded to in the 1st edition.
I think gore was referring to the Larry Gonick edition.
Larry Gonick cartoon placemarker.
Actually, with a bit of googling on the expression: "Darwin was not a scientist" you can find sites that are possible sources of the g3k material:
Is Darwin to blame for America’s departure from the Bible?.
Creation or Evolution?. (Starts out like a Chick comic book.)
Creation Worldview Ministries. (Some of this sounds strangely familiar.)
That's okay. If you're not comfortable with it I'm certainly not going to push the issue, I just ask that you think and pray about all the verses we listed and their context. Please feel free to ping me to other biblical issues.
Explain to me why fundamentalists think the King James Version is the inerrant word of God? I seem to be missing something.
Some Christians hold that view but they're a small minority. If you want a good idea why some hold that view I very much recommend The King James Only Controversy by James White. I've read the book a few times - it's a quick and easy read and it summarizes their argument well and also points out their fallacies.
Christians who hold that view are good folks, many are my closest friends, they're just hung up on the King James Version. You may have noticed I never quoted the KJV in any of my posts. That's primarily due to the fact that I like the modern English sentence structure of the NIV. Personally, if I could only have one version I'd probably pick the NASB. Recently I've been checking out the NET, which you can download for free. It has search capabilities and quite a few technical notes.
I meant to tell you that's not true. The KJV is based on the Textus Receptus (Received Text). More modern translations such as the NIV and NASB use earlier manuscripts, but earlier doesn't necessarily mean more accurate, it just means it's possibly closer to the autographs. The King James is a fine translation, it's just not for all folks. I'm going to be busy today so I won't be around much.
Don't know if the whole genes have been sequenced since, but enough had by 1999 to identify the disabling mutation.
From:
Plagiarized Errors and Molecular Genetics (Another argument in the evolution-creation controversy) by Edward E. Max
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/molgen/
For the example of the GLO unitary pseudogene of humans, it is known that vitamin C is required in the diet of other primates, (though not for other mammals except guinea pigs). The theory of evolution would make the strong prediction that primates should also be found to have GLO pseudogenes and that these would carry similar crippling mutations to the ones found in the human pseudogene. This prediction was stated in earlier versions of the present essay. A test of this prediction has recently been reported. A small section of the GLO pseudogene sequence was recently compared from human, chimpanzee, macaque and orangutan; all four pseudogenes were found to share a common crippling single nucleotide deletion that would cause the remainder of the protein to be translated in the wrong triplet reading frame (Ohta and Nishikimi BBA 1472:408, 1999).
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.