Texas Wrestles With Teaching "Strengths And Weaknesses" Of Scientific Theory

AUSTIN, Texas — Experts and activists concerned about the way evolution is taught in Texas' public schools made their case before the state's board of education.

Dozens of people, including a six-member expert review panel, lined up to testify as the board considers new science curriculum standards that will be in place for the next decade. The standards adopted also will dictate how publishers handle the topic in textbooks.

The crowd _ as well as the review panel _ was sharply split on the proposal to drop language in the current curriculum that requires teachers to address "strengths and weaknesses" of scientific theory.

Instead, a panel of science experts recommended that students use critical thinking, scientific reasoning and problem solving to analyze and evaluate scientific explanations.

Critics say the use of the word "weaknesses" has been used to undermine Darwin's theory of evolution and promote creationism _ or intelligent design.

"In science education, 'weaknesses' has become a code word in the culture wars to attack evolution and promote creationism," said Kathy Miller, president of the watchdog group Texas Freedom Network. "If it weren't, we wouldn't see this crusade by some of the board members and outside pressure groups to keep this single word in the science standards."

Critics of dropping the "weaknesses" mandate blame "left-wing ideology," for trying to stifle free speech. The review panel, which was appointed by the education board, has suggested putting similar language back in.

"The board is being asked to choose between free and open scientific inquiry and censorship," said Jonathan Saenz, a lobbyist for the Free Market Foundation. "That's an easy choice."

Last year, legislation permitting criticism of Darwinism in schools was introduced in Florida, Missouri, South Carolina, Alabama, Michigan and Louisiana, according to the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank that supports teaching students about the criticism of evolution.

A tentative vote in Texas is expected later this week, but the board is not expected to make a final decision on the curriculum proposal until March.

Much of Wednesday's testimony focused on the scientific evidence of evolution.

"I hope you understand now that there are good reasons to think that, yes, evolution has weaknesses that reasonable people can see, that, yes, those weaknesses do really influence the theory," said Ralph Seelke, a biology professor at the University of Wisconsin-Superior, who served on the review panel.

Eugenie Scott, executive director of the California-based National Center for Science Education, said the proposal to drop the inclusion of weaknesses is a "superior critical thinking standard."

"Abandoning the inaccurate strengths and weaknesses language does not encourage the singling out of evolution for special treatment," Scott said.

Comments

[gnomic]

The headline should read "Texas tries to out do Kansas in teaching kids to grow up stupid." Which should surprise anyone - this is the state that produced Dubya.

[ChiProgressive]

If you want to teach your kids Creationism in your own home that's fine,
but don't force faith into the classroom.

Intelligent Design is not science, it is a belief and that's OK as long as it is not taught as science.

[JEP57]

If you read Michael Behe's treatise on intellegent design "Darwin's Black Box", you will develop serious doubts about a Darwinian explanation for the beginning of life on the biochemical level. You will see that because of irreducible complexity in cellular and other systems such as the eye or blood clotting that the Darwinian explanation makes no sense. Read the book for yourself before you come to any conclusions.

[Otaku1031]

That blood clotting argument is trotted out frequently as an example of I.D. Have you actually studied the complex biochemical mechanism of this process? If any one of the required conditions for a clot to form are not present, the clot will not happen. This is a biologic safeguard that prevents an unnecessary (and dangerous) clot from forming in the bloodstream. Creationists point to this as a manifestation of Intelligent Design, when it is in fact a survival attribute. Those organisms which did not have this attribute died out, while their peers with the ability survived to pass it on to subsequent generations. This is not due to the hand of (insert deity here) but rather to the ongoing process of weeding out the ninnies. We know this process as evolution in action.

[JEP57]

The real argument against biochemical Darwinian evolution is the odds of the building blocks coming together in one accidental "unguided" step after another with no outside intellegent agent controlling anything. The odds are so astronomical that all the parts of the first dividing, replicating cell could come together by complete accident are such that you could say it's impossible. Keep in mind that all the proteins needed to come together to form this cell would have no way of replicating themselves before forming the factory that CAN replicate them. Again, it has to be accidental every step of the way according to the Darwinian theory.

[newshawk14]

After electing George W. Bush Governor of Texas, and having twice voting for him as president, I
think Texans should be teaching the "Theory of Devolution", which seems to be where they're at.

[SZM]

Any and all information taught in public school science classes must be defendable by the scientific method, and creationism certainly is not. Public school is part of the state, therefore, part of the Union, and the Constitution clearly spells out separation of church and state. Why do the tax payers of Texas even allow money to be spent discussing a religious question?? This hearing, on the "strengths and weaknesses" of evolution, is against the Constitution of the United States>.< It's a waste of time, head space and money.

[DaveScriv]

I'm an atheist in the UK, so don't know any creationists (they are thankfully a rarity here), so I'm just guessing here:
Do fundies stick to creationism because they know evolution would make their beliefs in humans having an immortal soul (& the whole heaven & hell thing) even less credible?
Trying to combine the 2 concepts (souls and evolution) would involve an imaginary scenario where god started creation, left it to develop on its own for a few billion years, then came back to 'install soul program' in primitive humans (or neanderthals?) at some arbitary stage in their development. Daft.

As someone has already said here, you must stand firm for proper science teaching in the US or you are in danger of becoming a nation of low grade workers with all foreign managers, and all industries involving biological science will move out. But that would be good for us in the UK (there are already a lot of international bio-sci companies here, especially around Cambridge) so perhaps we should let you decline?

[dctackett]

They stick to it because it's true... well, according to mommy, daddy, pastor Jim and everyone else!!!

Really, they're just not that intellectually curious. Especially in the South, remember, the South was a very heirarchical society, most people were poor and had no education. Their leaders resist education, for obvious reasons, but they've been coming around since the civil war and the implementation of universal primary education... that's why there is so much home schooling there, because they don't want the Devil to influence young Johnny... add to that the incredible amount of propaganda and lack of actual scientific appreciation and training.

It's easy for a small country that has been developed for a long time... but in the US, there is not the same kind of deeply rooted educational institutions...

I don't think letting a huge super power with nukes decline is a good idea... we're not declining, we're actually progressing. It will just take time... and the courts.

[Agent420]

Religion is the oldest scam in the world. Look at all the people that get a free ride on religion. Their beliefs are fossilized. Know how a light switch works? On and off, like life.

[ObjectiveRealist]

If Intelligent Design is a scientific hypothesis, in what science journals, conferences or published research has it been submitted to peer reviews? All I see on behalf of Intelligent Design is a lot of *political* activism. "That dog don't hunt."

[dctackett]

when your efforts don't work, turn to public opinion!

[TomTheAlmostUgly]

There is one, and only one, "weakness" with the theory of evolution: That there have been found, only a tiny fraction of the fossils needed to prove that evolution is in fact true.

[dutt]

For creationists who take the bible literally the biggest weakness of evolution is that it conflicts with their creation story. No amount of fossils will change that.

[Agent420]

Hmm. Interesting. Fossils and religion. One describes the other. No one is saying that evolution is 100% correct. In fact, there have been studies of Darwin's Tree of Life and that concept has some problems as it is more like a web of life than a tree.
Some people are talking about the odds of this or that happening without help. That might have some traction if the world was only 6,000 years old, but life has had about 3,800,000,000 years to figure things out. After that many more years maybe the human race will figure something out.

[dctackett]

what are you talking about?... evolution is, in fact true, it has been observed and there is a huge amount of fossil evidence. There is also a huge amount of evidence coming from molecular biology.

You must be talking about humans only... there are plenty of fossil records for that... fossil records are only one peice...

[KillTheMessenger]

Good trolling, Tom. Very efficient. Crisp, clean lines. No fluff. Well done.

[missviv]

I don't understand the logic behind creationists who insist on teaching fairy tales when we should be teaching science. It does not help the U.S. produce more physicists, biologists, geologists, etc. that will help us stay at the forefront of scientific innovation at a worldwide level and will only ensure that we fall behind. Why would they want to dumb future generations down? It's absolutely baffling. We need to start producing more than just debt!

[KillTheMessenger]

People who believe in said fairy tales don't have logic. So it all makes sense to them. And if their actions bankrupt the nation, it was God's punishment for gay marriage.

:-)

[dctackett]

he's also mad at our corrupt youth, working women, the progressive tax system and the death tax...

oh, and don't forget that he's also mad at socialists.... and the lack of ten commandments posters...

[ObjectiveRealist]

The process for getting science into schools is to originate and test one or more hypotheses which are useful and robust enough to be elevated *by peer review* to the status of theory. Furthermore, to get into *primary and secondary* schools, the standard is even higher. The Law of Gravity is, I assume, still standard around 6th grade. Quantum Theory, useful as it is, is not applicable enough to *common* experiences to be introduced to any but the most ambitious pre-collegiate curriculum. Neither, for that matter, is Kepler's Law on planetary orbits, although it derives simply from the Law of Gravity, with a bit of calculus.

The Intelligent Design movement's petition of the public schools is more of the form of a petition for the redress of grievance than a submission of research to peers in the community of scientists, which is the proper channel for obtaining scientific recognition. They do not submit their claims to the leading journals for the topics of their claims: anthropology, biology, geology for example. They do present their claims to political rallies, government agencies who exert power over public school curricula, in press releases, and on their publicity websites. Intelligent Design relies exclusively on political avenues to advance its ideas and does not significantly leverage the existing human, intellectual or physical infrastructure of existing valid scientific research. To refuse such resources would be terrible strategy if they had any intention to practice science correctly. They cannot be taken at their word.

[Michael Valentine]

God creates, everything afterwards is His work too, even evolution.

Why the problem? Ignorant people who can't read the Bible in a critical and allegory way, insist that every word is literally true are up against the modern world of science. They are not equipped for reality of a world that is dispelling the world of knowledge of 5,000 B.C. when the story began.

[ObjectiveRealist]

I disagree. Intelligent Design is not a populist or "grass roots" phenomenon, it is demonstrably top-down poop stirring.
http://www.samspadesf.com/2006/11/moretrash-news-from-philip-anschutz.html
As such, I do not believe the root of the problem is any such cultural / theological failure, but the lack of opposition.
(Dislaimer: I believe at my core that if we depend on theological development for the success of our democracy or culture, we are totally effed, so I am biased toward ignoring the role of theology and scanning for ringleaders.)

quote:
Anschutz is also a major supporter of the Media Research Council, a group of rabid right-wingers responsible for the majority of indecency complaints filed with the FCC, many filed against gay entertainers and plots with gay themes or contents. Anschutz is one of the leading opponents and enemies of gay and lesbian rights in this country.
/quote

Nobody uses such methods from the other side of "the aisle" but it's about time we start.

[dctackett]

I think it goes further... it's people who think a magical being made everything and wrote that book to tell people about it... it must be true if the magical being who made everything wrote it!

If you read it critically, but still believe it's true in some way, you will always find objection to a reality that doesn't conform.

[KillTheMessenger]

Creationists aren't reading it critically. Never have, never will.

[Agent420]

Imaginary friends on the loose again. And they think that rational people who do not believe what some freeloader has to say about why (s)he should get a free ride. It's because of their magic cell phone where by they can talk to their imaginary friend at any time, so don't piss me off they cry. The secret number is 666 of course. Their imaginary friend allows some small child to starve to death because the parents were told they could not have birth control so the myth believers claim their friend works in "mysterious ways." Sounds like the Twilight Zone to me.

[freethinking moderate]

The whole problem with the teach of the fact of Evolution is that the theory does not disprove god, it simply disproves the Judeo-Christian myths. There was no Fall of Man and thus no need for a jesus. This is why there is no historical evidence for the jesus of the bible - a man who need never exist and was never born naturally has no contemporary proof of his life.

These people in Texas, and other places, need some sort of god-myth in their lives and they will attack any evidence that shows their man made myths to be untrue. Everything else is just window dressing.

[dctackett]

If only the moderate christians smacked these people into place...

They're being told that the world does work the way that the magical being said it would in the book he wrote... Obviously the magical being isn't wrong.

[KillTheMessenger]

The magical being didn't even write the book. It didn't even pretend to have written the book (says the book!) but explicitly gave that assignment to his prophets. It takes a lot of twisting of the real theology of Christianity and Judaism to arrive at the weirdo conclusions of creationists.

[research]

I've gone to all my local churches and asked that they admit the "weaknesses" of religious belief.

All I am asking them to do is preface each sermon, with the statement:

"The Following ideas are not proven, they are based on the core beliefs of our religion."

I don't understand why they are so resistant?

[IndieBlue]

This is something that shouldn't be taken lightly. Because Texas is such a large purchaser of text books, and because so many publishers are located in Texas, what that state's Board of Education decides should be in their text books very often end up in your childrens' as well.

[Scottyp]

Science defined: the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.

Religion and mythology are missing the 1st four components of this definition and should not be considered in a science curriculum.

If schools are going to teach creation myths as an elective, perhaps the biblical narrative ought to be alongside the Native American, Greek, Norse and Hindu where it belongs.

[Agent420]

Science is also repeatable by anyone.