Evolution sparking latest textbook firestorm

[Theophylact]

in Texas.

AUSTIN — Controversy over textbooks erupted again Wednesday as scientists and members of the public addressed the Board of Education over the treatment of evolution in biology textbooks.
Nearly all of the three dozen speakers defended the teaching of evolution against a report that questioned the accuracy of evidence supporting the scientific theory in the 11 biology texts being considered for adoption in Texas.

After Discovery Institute — a Seattle-based public policy group — submitted the 55-page report, teachers, scientists and activists went on the offensive.

They said they feared that the elected board, dominated by conservative members, would use the report to influence publishers to include references to creationism or "intelligent design" as a scientific theory.

While intelligent design, which claims that a higher power directed human development, is more scientific, critics said it couldn't be included because it had not been peer reviewed by reputable scientists.

Raymond Bohlin, speaking on behalf of the Discovery Institute, said Darwin's Origin of the Species was not peer reviewed.

"Often new scientific ideas are not welcomed in the scientific literature," said Bohlin, who holds a doctorate in biology and is director of communications at Probe Ministries in Richardson.

Texas Freedom Network Director Samantha Smoot called Discovery's analysis "creationism dressed up in a lab coat," and stressed that good science books are needed to prepare students for both the TAKS and careers in medicine and biotechnology.

"I'm here to keep outside forces from removing science from science books," said David Hillis, a biology professor at the University of Texas. "The goal (of Discovery) is to insert a religious and political agenda into the science classroom."

The meeting was reminiscent of last year's four-month battle over the adoption of social studies textbooks.

Trustees Terri Leo, R-Houston, and Don McLeroy, R-Bryan, questioned several speakers at the public hearing, asking whether perceived weaknesses in evolutionary theory should be included in textbooks.

Leo said publishers shouldn't remove evolution or insert religion into books, but should present both the strengths and the weaknesses of Darwin's theory.

"If we censor out scientific weaknesses, we limit the best of our educators by addressing them to avoid debate of different viewpoints and to explore the range of theories in the classroom," Leo said.

The elected board does not alter textbook content, but can reject books because of mistakes or because they don't match the state curriculum.

Another public hearing will be held in September, and a vote on new books for both biology and English as a second language, which will cost an estimated $90 million, will take place in November.

Copernicus' De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium wasn't peer reviewed, either...

[Redwolf]

Oui! More evolution controversy.

I don't really care in all honesty, becuase I don't believe in evolution as creation. I am open to listening about evolution, because evolution itself does happen every day. When the topic comes to where life comes from though, my ideals take priority. Do I have scientific claims to back up my Christian beliefs? No. Do I need them? No. In all honesty, NO BODY KNOWS HOW WE GOT HERE. Hence why it's called the theory of evolution. No one knows for sure. So what's the point of teaching evolution anyway? With the level in which today's stundents 'pay attention' in class, I doubt they'd learn anything anyway. We'll at least the school made a few friends and turned some old friends into enemies. And looks pretty on national news doing so.

It's just controversial news, Redwolf. They need to throw some sparks somehow.

On the other hand, I was one of the kids that payed attention in biology class when we did the evolution bit (granted, the rest of the time I was in la-la land). Evolution is pretty interesting to me, and I have at times subscribed to the "Damn, aren't we lucky" camp, and the "It was the aliens, they made us this way" camp. And you know, questioning my views and teachers of religion the whole time made life that much more interesting.

Personally, I think that it would be bad to introduce religion, or God as a driving force behind evolution into a science textbook. This is what the people that are of faith go to church for, or read scriptures for. I went to school to learn science, not religion. I think that putting the theory of guided evolution in WOULD be a good idea though, if for nothing less than to have a different viewpoint with which students can assess evolution as a whole. All current theories are, as you have stated, just theories, and penning in a student (with a potentially bright future in the field) with a single theory on which to cogitate is a serious mistake in my opinion.

[Epidemic]

interesting point.

Many argue that the miracle of earth the skies and time are all but impossible to exist with out the guiding hand of a creator.

Let me ask you this, All of the above mentioned would pale in comparison to the order, magesty and miracle of a creator which could have created the above, correct?

Why then is it so much more amazing that the universe or the great nothingness could have spawned a creator then to have simply been a big bang from nothingness.

Either way it is bigger than our little brains could even begin to understand.