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 ... 4,141-4,1604,161-4,1804,181-4,200 ... 4,381-4,387 next last
To: AndrewC; Alamo-Girl; VadeRetro
Yes, I believe you have analyzed it correctly as a component of free will. The reference from Isaiah also gives the reason.

And also the reason given in Time Bandits. But there are some interesting questions to be asked about intentionality and about how things that were originally perfect could be capable of backsliding. And how we got stuck in version 1.0 of reality. Never buy version 1.0.

4,161 posted on 07/18/2003 8:28:02 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4153 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
There are three choices:

1. objective reality is wrong, and they're interpreting the book right;

2. objective reality is right, and they're interpreting the book wrong.

3. Or maybe the book is wrong.
4,162 posted on 07/18/2003 8:30:05 AM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4146 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue; ALS
But if you take God-in-general out of the picture, and put Jesus Christ in charge, then only Christians who believe exactly the way they believe have a chance of being right.

Then, what was this all about?

I pray that Christ remove all deception from your heart and mine.

I ask this in the Name of Christ our Lord, Amen.

In light of --->

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these [things].

4,163 posted on 07/18/2003 8:34:41 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4157 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
vanilla placemarker
4,164 posted on 07/18/2003 8:38:05 AM PDT by RightWingNilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4162 | View Replies]

To: js1138
And also the reason given in Time Bandits. But there are some interesting questions to be asked about intentionality and about how things that were originally perfect could be capable of backsliding. And how we got stuck in version 1.0 of reality. Never buy version 1.0.

I choose to accept as source something rather older than twentysome years.

As to your questions, again that has to do with free will. And you can only validly state "how I got stuck in version 1.0 of reality".

4,165 posted on 07/18/2003 8:40:53 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4161 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
I'm not convinced that a book that is absolutely true in every detail needs to have embedded warnings: believe every word of this or burn forever. I don't think a book that has been proofread and certified error free by the creator of the universe would contain the kind of context switches found in the Bible. Slavery is OK for some times and places, genocide is OK for a startup nation, incest is OK when the creator has killed off all the eligible non-relatives, certain foods are unclean for a while (possibly for health reasons, but then why give the OK 1900 years before the health reasons are understood?), divorce is OK, then not OK (maybe it was never OK, but permitted for a while because people really, really wanted to get divorced, so it was allowed).

All these suggest an evolving code of ethics and morality. At the very least they suggest an evolving understanding of morality.

4,166 posted on 07/18/2003 8:49:32 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4162 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
One of the things that Catholics believe is that good Jews, good Muslims, good pagans (and even good Protestants) may be saved, but it's actually easier for a pagan.

You see, a good and pious pagan, who never heard of Jesus, but believes in God, and has lived a good and Godly life, will be saved.

A Protestant can be saved if the Protestant is capable of making an act of perfect contrition, which means (gross oversimplification here) being sorry that you've sinned simply because sin is wrong, not because you're afraid of going to Hell. If you are not capable of making an act of perfect contrition, then you can only obtain forgiveness through the Sacrament of Confession.

So, as a Catholic I believe in Jesus Christ, but I accept that good pagans, good Jews, good Muslims, and even good Protestants who seek God with a true heart will be saved.

"'Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council [Vatican II] teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse to enter it or to remain in it. (Lumen Gentium 14)'

. . . .

"'Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience-those too may achieve eternal salvation.' (Lumen Gentium 16)"
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html
4,167 posted on 07/18/2003 8:51:58 AM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4163 | View Replies]

To: js1138
>>an evolving understanding of morality<<

Agreed, especially because it appears to me to have gotten better over time. Compassion seems far preferable to stoning and burning.
4,168 posted on 07/18/2003 8:55:49 AM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4166 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
You see, a good and pious pagan, who never heard of Jesus, but believes in God, and has lived a good and Godly life, will be saved.

How do you square that with--->

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

You seem to be saying a good Wiccan does not need a Savior.

4,169 posted on 07/18/2003 8:59:24 AM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4167 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Thank you so much for your reply and for sharing your concerns and for giving me the opportunity to testify! Hugs!!!

Ascribing the universe to an anthropic God--literally one whose image is mirrored in our own--fully formed from somewhere outside of His creation and infinitely capable, simply moves the question forever out of reach. (Another thing: His omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence would seem to contradict the statement that our image is His image.)

Perhaps some of the confusion is in what is meant by “image” in which context. In Hebrews 1:3-12 – Jesus is shown as the “express image” of the Father’s person and the meaning is explained:

Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.

But unto the Son [he saith], Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, [even] thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.

The Greek root word for express image is charakter means a marked likeness, a precise reproduction in every respect. Notably, it is only used to describe Jesus.

Compare that to Genesis 1 and 2 where man is being made in “our image:”

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. – Genesis 1:26-27

The usage of the Hebrew root word for likeness d@muwth shows that it means appearance. The same is true for the Hebrew root word for image tselem

You continued…

I marvel that people not only think they know absurd details of the God story, but that they imagine the answers as obvious.

Indeed, we are quite certain of what has been revealed to us by the Spirit. And we who have the indwelling of the Spirit cannot be moved:

For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. – I Corinthians 2:11-16


4,170 posted on 07/18/2003 9:17:03 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4159 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
Religious intellectual never ending schlock vs truth placemaker !
4,171 posted on 07/18/2003 9:20:04 AM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4168 | View Replies]

To: js1138
Thank you so much for your post!

But there are some interesting questions to be asked about intentionality and about how things that were originally perfect could be capable of backsliding.

How could you teach your students obedience without describing disobedience? How could you explain light without darkness? How could you describe what is good without showing what is bad? What language could you use to communicate, if there were no contrasts?

4,172 posted on 07/18/2003 9:25:16 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4161 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Troll-free P L A C E M A R K E R
4,173 posted on 07/18/2003 9:25:58 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Idiots are on "virtual ignore," and you know exactly who you are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4171 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Thanks for taking the trouble. I guess I can make a mental note to suspect translation differences on blatant apparent contradictions such as the one in my little aside about "in His image" versus "omniscient, etc."
4,174 posted on 07/18/2003 9:31:25 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4170 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
trolls up placemaker !
4,175 posted on 07/18/2003 9:32:44 AM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4173 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Religious intellectual never ending troll schlock vs truth placemaker !
4,176 posted on 07/18/2003 9:34:01 AM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4173 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Cyber virtual ignore troll schlock placemaker !
4,177 posted on 07/18/2003 9:35:46 AM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4173 | View Replies]

Another burst of insane, deranged, raving creationoid postings ... intellectual diarrhea!!
4,178 posted on 07/18/2003 9:36:45 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Idiots are on "virtual ignore," and you know exactly who you are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4177 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Cyber virtual ignore under the bridge truth needs a bath troll schlock placemaker !
4,179 posted on 07/18/2003 9:37:36 AM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4173 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Cyber virtual ignore under the bridge truth needs a bath RAVING mad troll schlock public toilet facilities pollution smell placemaker !


4,180 posted on 07/18/2003 9:39:45 AM PDT by f.Christian (evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4178 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 4,141-4,1604,161-4,1804,181-4,200 ... 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