Replies

Here is a link to the full text of the bill being discussed. It applies to all science courses, but it singles out biology (the only science dealt with specifically) with this provision:

If a theory or hypothesis of biological origins is taught, a critical analysis of such theory or hypothesis shall be taught in a substantive amount.

To me, the wording in that bill implies that science cannot be trusted...

Information that appears to be verified empirical data, but is not, shall be identified to distinguish it as separate from verified empirical data.

Since when is unverified empirical data presented as verified in a high school science class?

Teacher classroom instruction shall use the following best practices to support the objective teaching of scientific information and minimize dogmatism while promoting student inquiry, healthy skepticism, and understanding:

Since when is 'dogmatism' an issue in high school science classes?

When information other than verified empirical data is taught representing current scientific thought such as theory or hypothesis regarding phenomena that occur in the future or that occurred previous to written history, a critical analysis of such information shall be taught in a substantive amount.

'that occurred previous to written history' covers an awful lot of science that is now required to be critically analyzed.

This bill sounds like it's been written from the YEC playbook.