Texas 'Freedom' Network, UT Professor Oppose Academic Freedom in Public Schools (Creation/Evolution)

The upcoming battle over what public science textbooks should teach promises to be no less contentious than the battles of the past. The Texas State Board of Education held a public hearing Wednesday, November 19, 2008, about the state’s science standards, which Board members will vote on early next year. Some interest groups are outraged that certain individuals still do not believe that particles developed into people all by themselves, and they are gathering their arguments to influence the Board, whose decision will affect millions of schoolchildren’s science curricula.

One such group—Texas Freedom Network (TFN), billing itself as “A Mainstream Voice to Counter the Religious Right”—recently conducted a survey of evolutionary biologists across the state. They presented their results to the Board during the hearing, confident that the survey “leaves no doubt that the political crusade against evolution and other attempts to dumb down our public school science curriculum are deeply misguided.”1

TFN may consider the results to be definitive, but the implementation and presentation of the survey were wrapped in a host of false arguments that prop up the organization’s strong faith in unobservable macroevolution (e.g., fish changing into frogs).

First, portraying a “crusade against evolution” as an “attempt to dumb down” science education is a baseless smear, committing the fallacy of “appeal to ridicule.” The group’s mission to ensure evolutionary indoctrination in the schools belies the fact that evolution is not a scientific observation, but an abstract idea. If macroevolution were demonstrable, then surely students could just see the evidence for themselves (such as they can with gravity and entropy and other scientifically observable realities). Instead, TFN chooses to use lobbying, campaigning, faulty reasoning, and other peer-pressure ridicule tactics to push its agenda.

According to the survey, “universities in Texas soundly reject arguments promoted by opponents of scientific evolution.”1 The mantra “evolution is science” is reiterated so often that many believe it simply by virtue of its repetition, but it amounts to the argumentum ad nauseum fallacy (a conclusion is true because it is often repeated).

However, the relevant question is, “Is evolution science or scientifically verifiable?” To assert that evolution is true without demonstrating it (with live examples, plausible mechanisms, or transitional forms) is to commit the logical fallacy “begging the question,” where the conclusion is assumed in the premise.

“The claim of broad support in the science community for intelligent design/creationism so often trumpeted by evolution skeptics simply does not exist in the biology and biological anthropology departments at Texas colleges and universities,”2 the TFN stated. The survey’s authors seem totally convinced that intelligent design advocates are just cleverly disguised creationists, but this ignores the relevant facts. Many different religions—naturalism included—are represented among the hundreds of signers of the Scientific Dissent from Darwinism.3 As Dr. Jerry Bergman has amply documented in his book Slaughter of the Dissidents,4 and as the Ben Stein documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed further illustrated, any dissent from Darwinian dogma is taken as sacrilege by the establishment monopoly. To merely question macroevolution, from those of any religious background, results in systematic exclusion from positions and employment in major universities. Is it any wonder then that the survey of major university professors revealed a massive majority of evolutionary proponents?

TFN claims to be mainstream, yet popular surveys show that the radically dogmatic, evolution-only philosophy that they are laboring to force upon public schoolchildren is actually a minority view as of 2007, when a Gallup poll showed that 66 percent of Americans surveyed favored the concepts of creation.5

The TFN survey offers another faulty argument. Raymond Eve of the University of Texas at Arlington, who conducted the survey, told the Houston Chronicle that "with 94 percent of Texas faculty ... telling me it [teaching the weaknesses in Darwinian evolution] shouldn't be there, I tend to believe them."6 An argumentum ad populum holds that because many people believe a conclusion, the conclusion must be correct. However, the validity of a given conclusion should correspond to reality, not to that which is most popular. Though many people believe a certain doctrine, they may all be entirely mistaken, as history has repeatedly confirmed.

Unfortunately, the cold, hard facts of science do not support the evolutionary account. Forensic evidence from nature easily aligns with a creation model.7 TFN and the evolutionary establishment’s efforts show that in the absence of real scientific evidence, molecules-to-man evolution must be propped up by monopolistic bullying.8

1. Survey of Texas University Faculty: Overwhelming Opposition to Watering Down Evolution in School Science Curriculum. Texas Freedom Network press release, November 2008.

2. Eve, R.A, and C. A. Belhadi. 2008. Evolution, Creationism & Public Education: Surveying What Texas Scientists Think about Educating Our Kids in the 21st Century. A Report from the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund, accessed online November 18, 2008.

3. A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism. Discovery Institute. Posted on dicovery.org August 2008, accessed November 18, 2008.

4. Thomas, B. 2008. Book Review: Slaughter of the Dissidents. Acts & Facts. 37 (11): 19.

5. Gallup poll results. USA Today. Posted on usatoday.com June 7, 2007, accessed June 25, 2008.

6. Scharrer, G. Most Texas profs support no limits on evolution teaching: 98% in survey against politics in science education. The Houston Chronicle. Posted on chron.com November 17, 2008, accessed November 18, 2008.

8. Bergman, J. 2008. Slaughter of the Dissidents. Southworth, WA: Leafcutter Press. In this book, Dr. Bergman implicitly but thoroughly documents the prevalent use of the logical fallacy argumentum ad baculum (an appeal to force) in an approach that might be summarized thus: “Evolution is true because if you don’t believe in it you will lose your job.”

First, portraying a “crusade against evolution” as an “attempt to dumb down” science education is a baseless smear, committing the fallacy of “appeal to ridicule.”

I think that is a good description. "Crusade" is an apt term, with its religious connotation.

And there is no question that in order to sneak their religion into the schools creationists seek to destroy the scientific method and the findings of many branches of science. They are not doing this for the betterment of science.

The group’s mission to ensure evolutionary indoctrination in the schools belies the fact that evolution is not a scientific observation, but an abstract idea.

False. That is part of the "dumming down" effort right there.

If macroevolution were demonstrable, then surely students could just see the evidence for themselves (such as they can with gravity and entropy and other scientifically observable realities).

The evidence is there; creationists deny it, and are doing their best to ensure that it is not taught. But those denials don't make it go away.

Instead, TFN chooses to use lobbying, campaigning, faulty reasoning, and other peer-pressure ridicule tactics to push its agenda.

They are fighting back against a well-organized effort by creationists to sneak religion into schools in violation of the U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

That's been done. Creationists are the only ones who refuse to see the evidence. That doesn't make the evidence go away.

The survey’s authors seem totally convinced that intelligent design advocates are just cleverly disguised creationists...

Sounds right.

To merely question macroevolution, from those of any religious background, results in systematic exclusion from positions and employment in major universities.

When the denial is made in the face of tremendous evidence that denial shows a contempt for the scientific method and a reliance on divine revelation and other non-scientific sources of information. A person with contempt for science is not the type of person you want for an instructor in an evolution-related field.

Science is not conducted by popular opinion. It is conducted in scientific journals, using evidence. Creationists have no evidence to present in those journals, so they are using public opinion in its place. That doesn't make it science, nor does it make it correct.

This whole effort that we see is simply an attempt to push religion back into the classrooms, from which it has legally been excluded.

Unfortunately, the cold, hard facts of science do not support the evolutionary account. Forensic evidence from nature easily aligns with a creation model.

False.

TFN and the evolutionary establishment’s efforts show that in the absence of real scientific evidence, molecules-to-man evolution must be propped up by monopolistic bullying.

There is plenty of evidence. Creationists just close their eyes and refuse to see it. They insist on pushing their religion into the science classes in the guise of science, but that's not going to happen.

The reason that is not going to happen is that the theory of evolution is based on evidence, and those who are not blinded by a priori religious belief can see that evidence and make up their own minds. That is what creationists are trying to prevent or limit with their efforts to get back into the classrooms. They fear that when students see the actual scientific evidence they will understand more about the theory of evolution. That knowledge is truly what creationists fear.

[[I think that is a good description. “Crusade” is an apt term, with its religious connotation.]]

Mmm yes, presenting scietific facts that counter the fairytail of evolution is a ‘crusade’- Great argument

[[And there is no question that in order to sneak their religion into the schools creationists seek to destroy the scientific method and the findings of many branches of science.]]

ID isn’t religion0- but then again- you know that and still you come out with the same lame arguments time and time again

[[The evidence is there; creationists deny it, and are doing their best to ensure that it is not taught. But those denials don’t make it go away.]]

The evidence is NOT there- UNLESS you are 3iwlling to suspend belief and ignore biological facts.

[[That’s been done. Creationists are the only ones who refuse to see the evidence. That doesn’t make the evidence go away.]]

Kinda hard to see what both isn’t there, and worse yet, goes AGAINST biological evidence

[[Science is not conducted by popular opinion. It is conducted in scientific journals, using evidence.]]

Got conclusive evidence that sea creatures evolved into land dwelling animals? No? didn’t htink so- so exactly what ‘evidence’ are you talking about? Conjecture? Hypothesis? Gap ignoring speculations?

[[Creationists have no evidence to present in those journals, so they are using public opinion in its place.]]

This is an ignorant statement that simply ignores the FACTS once again- but apparently these type arguments are the best you can produce?

[[There is plenty of evidence. Creationists just close their eyes and refuse to see it.]]

Yawn- Do please fill us all in with the ‘plenty of evidences’ because quite frankly, your statement flies in the face of the FACT that the only ‘evidence’ macroevolution has, are nothing but speculations that once again fly in the face of biological FACTS- the only way one can call them evidences is if one ignores the overwhelming evidences that argue against those supposed efvidences that purport to support macroevolution.

[[The reason that is not going to happen is that the theory of evolution is based on evidence, and those who are not blinded by a priori religious belief]]

Lol- that’s precious- Macroevolution is nothign BUT one huge a priori religious belief- As I mentioned in another htread- it’s funny how people criticise what they don’t understand by pointing out supposed faults in the opposition that they themselves are neck deep in.

[[They fear that when students see the actual scientific evidence they will understand more about the theory of evolution. That knowledge is truly what creationists fear.]]

Ahahahaha- We’ve been given NOTHING but supposed ‘evidence’ for macroevolution- but people are now beginnign to wake up and actually EXAMINE these supposedevidences and are finding htem to be woefully lame- and in many instances- outright blatant lies. But you just keep pretending we’re ‘afraid’ of science- we
‘ll all just sit back and chuckle

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.