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 ... 1,421-1,4401,441-1,4601,461-1,480 ... 4,381-4,387 next last
To: VadeRetro; Junior; longshadow
This is a quote from Ann Coulter's new book, Treason, Page 291-292:
America's enemies, from Soviet spies to terrorists, have been defined by their effortless ability to lie. Ronald Reagan said of Soviet Communism: "The only morality they recognize is what will further their cause, meaning they reserve unto themselves the right to commit any crime, to lie, to cheat." And Ehud Barak said of Muslim terrorists: "They don't suffer from the problem of telling lies that exists in Judeo-Christian culture. Truth is seen as an irrelevant category. There is only that which serves your purpose and that which doesn't. There is no such thing as 'the truth.' "

1,441 posted on 07/11/2003 4:46:17 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1435 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Here's one from a recent interview:

Ann Coulter bowled me over when I asked her the following question: "Ann, why do liberals hate conservatives in 2003 America?"


Her answer was a simple one, and then the clock ran out and she was gone. But that simple answer stirred the pot, and it echoed what this column had proclaimed merely weeks ago.


"Conservatives, by and large believe in God, and liberals believe they are gods," came the reply.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33427

..coincidence?
1,442 posted on 07/11/2003 4:47:28 PM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's finest . contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1441 | View Replies]

To: exmarine; RightWhale
Baloney. The court cases speak for themselves.

But judges can be removed or voted out. Creationism could be taught in schools if we Christians could get past our petty differences. If 73% of Americans identify themselves as Church-going Christians, how does the vast left wing conspiracy continue to control government and school curricula?

1,443 posted on 07/11/2003 4:52:34 PM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1418 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
how does the vast left wing conspiracy continue to control government and school curricula?

The Prince of this world openly manipulating free will agents.

How else can we explain suicide bombers. These people are willing to die fighting God. NEA, ACLU, NOW, Media, University leadership...

Moral people are busy taking care of themselves, their children and the burdens of their brethren.

1,444 posted on 07/11/2003 5:03:28 PM PDT by bondserv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1443 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
Hillary , "When I am appointed dictator, um,, I mean, elected, presidente, I will not keep files on the VRWC, which does not exist, and I will not hold grudges against any Christian fundamentalists", gravemarker:


1,445 posted on 07/11/2003 5:14:07 PM PDT by JesseShurun (The Hazzardous Duke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1426 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
>>You are basically saying that creationism is science, when you know for a fact that it's not. <<

Actually, I think what they're saying is this (can't get "equals not" to work so will try If Then)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If creation is religion
Then evolution is religion

But:

If evolution is science
Then creation is science
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Corollary (I think)
If evolution is not science
Then creationism is not science

In other words it's a sort of tit-for-tat tautology. That's why no substance.
1,446 posted on 07/11/2003 5:55:45 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1421 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
Oooh and aaah over unctuous charlatans placemarker.

I like the way it rolls trippingly off the tongue.
1,447 posted on 07/11/2003 5:58:52 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1423 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
Did it ever occur to you to ask yourself how many Christians are fundamentalist creationists?

Is it possible that your definition of Christian is faulty?
1,448 posted on 07/11/2003 6:10:36 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1443 | View Replies]

To: JesseShurun; ALS; f.Christian
Creationist loking for big banana in its genes Marky Mark placemarker:


1,449 posted on 07/11/2003 6:13:36 PM PDT by JesseShurun (The Hazzardous Duke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1445 | View Replies]

To: ALS
Any comments?

-------------------

CROSSWALK.COM'S CHERYL JOHNSTON:
Where does science meet faith?

KEN BOA: There are four different views. Science as being contrary to Christianity is one, or another view is that it's not just in conflict, but that they're talked about as two different areas. There's some that say that science and faith work very well together. Some are more cautionary. I'm actually very excited about where science is going. I just did a Monday night study, on science and Scripture, an eight-part series, on molecular biology to cosmogony. I think it's an exciting place, time, to live because we live now in a culture, in a world, where technology is driving us to a greater realization that the world really is exquisitely crafted, beautifully designed, rich in information, both in information-rich macro-molecules, as well as the information in the fine-tuning of the cosmos and the irreducible complexity of living systems and the systematic or the whole idea of specified complexity of the information that's in the human genome, in proteins, even on a simpler level on large-scale systems, and it's exciting. Maybe it's this, that my suspicion is that God seems to increase the evidence as disbelief increases

1,450 posted on 07/11/2003 6:20:13 PM PDT by NewLand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1442 | View Replies]

To: JesseShurun; ALS; f.Christian; Alamo-Girl; Stultis
Waco-ey bump!!! (What are those cwazy lil Christianoids 'fraid of? I'm a funtime girl!!!)


1,451 posted on 07/11/2003 6:21:48 PM PDT by JesseShurun (The Hazzardous Duke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1449 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Roaring toward 1500 P L A C E M A R K E R
1,452 posted on 07/11/2003 6:22:44 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1450 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
Need examples of court cases? There are many communities that WANT TO TEACH Creationism but the courts and the govt. schools say no to the will of the people.

Let me rephrase that to be more accurate:

Need examples of court cases? There are many communities that WANT TO TEACH Creationism to other people's children but the courts and the govt. schools say no to the will of the people extremists.

And the rest of us thank them for doing their jobs!

1,453 posted on 07/11/2003 6:37:28 PM PDT by balrog666 (When in doubt, tell the truth. - Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1418 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
CORRECTED STATEMENT:

Need examples of court cases? There are many communities that WANT TO TEACH Creationism but the courts and the govt. schools bow down to the demands of the liberals.

1,454 posted on 07/11/2003 6:48:31 PM PDT by NewLand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1453 | View Replies]

To: HalfFull
[pseudo-gene for ascorbic acid]...It happened when both were created by the Creator. ...

OK, so this alleged 'creator' deliberately made us, chimps, gorillas et al subject to scurvy? But not monkeys, or dogs, or platypuses, or any other mammal (except guinea pigs, which have a different mutation).

Why just the great apes? Why the exact same mutation? Is the alleged 'creator' deliberately trying to fool us?

1,455 posted on 07/11/2003 6:54:24 PM PDT by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1160 | View Replies]

To: Virginia-American
Is the alleged 'creator' deliberately trying to fool us?

Is the alleged 'creator' deliberately testing the fundamentalists?

1,456 posted on 07/11/2003 6:56:50 PM PDT by balrog666 (When in doubt, tell the truth. - Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1455 | View Replies]

To: HalfFull
... insults, stupid drawings, bones lined up to support wishfull thinking, baseless assumptions, ....

...and the same genetic mistake in all the great apes, including us, but nowhere else.

1,457 posted on 07/11/2003 7:09:19 PM PDT by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1216 | View Replies]

To: goodseedhomeschool
...all theories should be included in a textbook...

How about nonstandard theories of archeology, such as Afrocentrism (the claim that the Greeks stole science and philosophy from Egypt, that Socrates was black, etc). This abomination is actually being taught in schools (including colleges!) right now.

1,458 posted on 07/11/2003 7:14:58 PM PDT by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1232 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Truth is seen as an irrelevant category. There is only that which serves your purpose and that which doesn't.

Hey! I've heard someone arguing that way on these threads lately. Hmmmm. Who could it be now?

1,459 posted on 07/11/2003 7:16:18 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1441 | View Replies]

To: Virginia-American
>>Is the alleged 'creator' deliberately trying to fool us?<<

Not possible because it's contrary to scripture. James 1:13

"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."

I think the standard creationist statement to insert here is that the Devil does tempt man, but that begs the question, did the Devil create man and the apes? No? Did the Devil create the need in man and apes for Vitamin C? No? Sure? No fooling?

Well, then, it's a mystery. A great mystery.
1,460 posted on 07/11/2003 7:17:42 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1455 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,421-1,4401,441-1,4601,461-1,480 ... 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