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 ... 1,361-1,3801,381-1,4001,401-1,420 ... 4,381-4,387 next last
To: Aric2000
I see, so if I do NOT take genesis literally, then I am going to hell

Where did I say that? Stop putting YOUR words into my statements.

even if I am a christian otherwise

Maybe I need to understand your definition of being a Christian.

you guys are just too funny sometimes...

Thank you.

1,381 posted on 07/11/2003 2:14:28 PM PDT by NewLand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1371 | View Replies]

To: goodseedhomeschool
Well, you see goodseed, we start off with 2 different mindsets.

You are in a religious mindset, and believe that evolution is religion as well.

We on the other hand have it on GOOD scientific authority, that evolution is INDEED science, not because WE say it is, but because 10'S of thousands of scientists say it is.

The ONLY people that CLAIM that evolution is some kind of religious doctrine are fundamentalists, that's it, THAT'S ALL.

So as long as you continue to be closeminded to the fact that evolution is SCIENCE and NOT religion, then we will NEVER agree.
1,382 posted on 07/11/2003 2:15:56 PM PDT by Aric2000 (If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1375 | View Replies]

To: NewLand
As we said as a child ... time to blow (( up )) this evo pop stand -- beanery too !
1,383 posted on 07/11/2003 2:17:20 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1381 | View Replies]

To: NewLand
That is EXACTLY what you said.

If you understand evolution, then you are going to hell, ergo, if you understand evolution, then you do NOT take genesis literally. therefore, ergo, if you do NOT take genesis literally, then you will go to hell.

That is the logical conclusion of what you said.

It is what you are saying, whether you care to admit it or not.
1,384 posted on 07/11/2003 2:18:46 PM PDT by Aric2000 (If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1381 | View Replies]

To: Junior
Once more, nowhere in the Bible does it say, "Believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis, or you are doomed to Hell."

Once more, where did I say that? Stop putting YOUR words into my statements.

If you don't have evidence to support your "theory"

Evidence arrived here 2003 years ago...you just refuse to accept that. I cannot change your heart. Only you can.

1,385 posted on 07/11/2003 2:18:52 PM PDT by NewLand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1372 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
>>raison d?être<< Anybody else see a question mark?

That would be the . . . uh . . . interfragetory proclitic mode, not available in English.

1,386 posted on 07/11/2003 2:20:38 PM PDT by RightWhale (gazing at shadows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1374 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Selling your schlock for the atlantis three ring spinning circus - mirage ...

nobodies buying your clown anticks now ---

diehards for darwin !

grifters ...

oops you were left behind ---

the train station is empty !
1,387 posted on 07/11/2003 2:21:51 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1382 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
It's amazing that you can interpret my words, my mind, my heart. It's not amazing that you are wrong.

I think after 40+ years of life and 4+ years here on FR, anyone can plainly see that I state exactly what I mean to say on any topic.

I have no need to use a word like ergo...

1,388 posted on 07/11/2003 2:23:05 PM PDT by NewLand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1384 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
If you blapheme the Creator // creation with evo - ego lies for sure you're going to hell ... how could that be a surprise !
1,389 posted on 07/11/2003 2:26:12 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1384 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
If a younger fossil were found UNDER an older fossil in the same location and strata, it would disprove evolution in a heartbeat,

Careful loadin' up the ammo here. Fossils do occasionally occur out of sequence, and strata do occasionally get folded up sideways and upside down as mountains form. The fossil & geological column correlations are impressive evidence, and worthy of touting, but they are statistically preponderant evidence, and it is worthwhile keeping that in mind when arguing with creationists.

1,390 posted on 07/11/2003 2:28:59 PM PDT by donh (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1341 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Evolution is the mooneyfication of America ...ideology zombies - FREAKS !
1,391 posted on 07/11/2003 2:29:15 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1384 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale; CobaltBlue
raison d?être

What does eatin' raisons gots to do with evolution?

1,392 posted on 07/11/2003 2:30:58 PM PDT by donh (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1386 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Maybe I need to understand your definition of being a Christian.

You sure are good at firing off accusations and putting your words in other people's mouth...but not very good at answering direct questions.

1,393 posted on 07/11/2003 2:31:32 PM PDT by NewLand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1381 | View Replies]

To: goodseedhomeschool
how come we find modern fossils under the so called "older ones".

You need to rephrase this somehow, because there isn't a problem with this.

1,394 posted on 07/11/2003 2:32:56 PM PDT by RightWhale (gazing at shadows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1283 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
fC ...

Can ' science ' supercede theology ?

ll ..

No; nor can theology supersede science.

fC ...

Which should explain the other ?

ll ..

Two separate fields, each with its own role.

fC ...

Do you think they are a hopeless garbled mess and you should keep shooting from the hip ?

ll ..

Where do you see me "shooting from the hip"?

fC ...

# 1 ... theology (( truth )) can trump false science !

# 2 ... Isn't that the definition of schizophrenia * --- two opposite competing ' unintegrated ' entities in the same body ?

# 3 ... Shooting from the hip --- mindless unexplained contradictory --- see # 2 above !


... * ... notice something (( seek help )) ?

1,395 posted on 07/11/2003 2:35:47 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1384 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
I am trying to do a right wing entry level ' half way ' house for the republican party ...

realatarians ---

nothing is free except liberal // evos association with reality (( responsibility )) !

realatarians2 ... designeduniverse.com (( unfolding )) !
1,396 posted on 07/11/2003 2:43:28 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1384 | View Replies]

To: All

back later tonight

1,397 posted on 07/11/2003 2:44:17 PM PDT by NewLand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1393 | View Replies]

To: gore3000; Dataman; AndrewC; ALS
REPENT ... the end is near !
1,398 posted on 07/11/2003 2:53:11 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1397 | View Replies]

To: NewLand
Junior is a catholic, and therefore a christian.

You DO realize that, do you not?

Oh, that's right, if a person is not YOUR kind of christian then they aren't a christian, is that it?
1,399 posted on 07/11/2003 2:53:19 PM PDT by Aric2000 (If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1385 | View Replies]

To: donh
A good question. An even better question is "what does evolution have to do with religion"?

Seems like two or three things set the fundamentalists off back circa 1900 - wide acceptance of evolution and German "higher" biblical criticism being the most often listed.

I wasn't aware that analytical biblical criticism was started in Germany but it makes sense, given that the Germans pioneered philological studies of other ancient texts, e.g., the Iliad, the Odyssey.

I would have thought that any Christian would have been excited by using linguistics and philology to analyze the Bible.

Maybe what bothered them is that to really be a Biblical scholar, you have to learn a lot of old languages and study someplace more challenging than Joe's Bible Study?

1,400 posted on 07/11/2003 2:54:09 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1392 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,361-1,3801,381-1,4001,401-1,420 ... 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