Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

@cicerone imposter,

Sir Wallis Budge, prominent Egyptologist:

"A Hymn To Amen-Ra ... president of all the gods ... Lord of the heavens ... Lord of Truth ... maker of men; creator of beasts ... Ra, whose word is truth, the Governor of the world, the mighty one of valour, the chiefs who made the world as he made himself. His forms are more numerous than those of any god ... "Adoration be to thee, O Maker of the Gods, who hast stretched out the heavens and founded the earth! ... Lord of eternity, maker of the everlastingness ... creator of light ... He heareth the prayer of the oppressed one, he is kind of heart to him that calleth upon him, he delivereth the timid man from the oppressor ... He is the Lord of knowledge, and Wisdom is the utterance of his mouth. "He maketh the green herb whereon the cattle live, and the staff of life whereon men live. He maketh the fish to live in the rivers, and the feathered fowl in the sky. He giveth life to that which is in the egg ... "Hail to thee, O thou maker of all these things, thou ONLY ONE. In his mightiness he taketh many forms."

Don't pay any attention to the ignorant in this forum who are only superficially educated on a subject they believe they are an authority on. My eyes aren't watering but such village idiot musings make me want to puke.

1 Reply

@Lightwizard,

Get pucking then.

What does ancient Egypt have to do with us? I've waded through Ancient Evenings once. Never again.

0 Replies

@DontTreadOnMe,

Then why doesn't the church teach the strength and weaknesses of Creationism? What's good for the goose! They want it one way, not both ways, the selfish little cowards. Hiding behind their bibles and opining before school boards about "evolution is only a theory." So some higher power just poofed it all into existance and that's not a theory? It's not even a supposition -- it's a superstition.

2 Replies

@Lightwizard,

We are a superstitious lot I'm afraid and that's a fact. I know that a few superfine intelligences have transcended such ignorant and stupid considerations but thankfully they are still a small minority and easily dismissed as eccentric, cantankerous cranks who count for nothing at elections.

0 Replies

@Lightwizard,

Lightwizard wrote:

Then why doesn't the church teach the strength and weaknesses of Creationism? What's good for the goose! They want it one way, not both ways, the selfish little cowards. Hiding behind their bibles and opining before school boards about "evolution is only a theory." So some higher power just poofed it all into existance and that's not a theory? It's not even a supposition -- it's a superstition.

they should, to be fair.

but they won't, because the interest of "the church", meaning any religion, is continuance. of power and of money.

they aren't going to risk losing any members and the weekly tithe just to pursue inquiring mind.

the ones that do get vilified by the less curious dogmatics.

0 Replies

TEXAS UPDATE

Quote:

Scientists weigh in at education board on curriculum
(By Molly Bloom, AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN, March 26, 2009)

Elements of a revamped state science curriculum " about which the State Board of Education heard public testimony Wednesday " would undermine science education in Texas, according to an open letter from the head of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and two dozen Texas university officials, including the University of Texas System chancellor.

"We urge you to vote for removing anti-science changes to the draft standards and (to) protect the future of science education and technology-based industry in Texas," they wrote.

The board meeting continues today at the William B. Travis Building, 1701 N. Congress Ave.

The current curriculum requires students to study the "strengths and weaknesses" of scientific theories including evolution. In January, the board voted to move away from that language but approved standards requiring students to study the "sufficiency or insufficiency" of evolutionary theory. The board also approved other changes that qualify statements about evolution and the Earth's creation.

Some board members have said they want the standards to require a more critical approach to the teaching of evolution, saying that the theory that species evolved from a common ancestry lacks the empirical data required to be taught without discussion of any insufficiencies.

"The board's decision is very simple: Are you for science or censorship? Are you for scientific progress or a ban on critical discussion?" said Jonathan Saenz, director of legislative affairs at Free Market Foundation, a Plano-based conservative lobbying group.

The board is expected to hold a preliminary vote on the new science curriculum today and a final vote Friday. The board's decision will resonate nationwide because of Texas' ability, because of its size, to influence what is printed in textbooks.

UT Chancellor Francisco Cigarroa; the presidents of the UT M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, the Texas A&M Health Science Center in College Station and UT-Dallas; and American Association for the Advancement of Science chief executive Alan Leshner were among the signers of the Monday letter, urging the board not to "introduce unwarranted uncertainty to long-settled scientific issues."

2 Replies

@wandeljw,

You mean we get to find out who are the fools and who are the sane, intelligent people on Friday?

1 Reply

@Lightwizard,

I have no idea what is going to happen with this board. I am going to be following this very closely the next few days, LW.

0 Replies

The Houston Chronicle is liveblogging today's board meeting:

http://www.chron.com/commons/readerblogs/evosphere.html?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3af12fd84e-253f-46cf-9408-ee579f9a3a0bPost%3ad1b712bf-942b-458f-903f-72e6f381b9a9

1 Reply

@wandeljw,

Quote:

The board's decision will resonate nationwide because of Texas' ability, because of its size, to influence what is printed in textbooks.

Why is that wande when California has 13 million more people than Texas and New York and Florida have the same advantage when combined?

Quote:

Technology
With large universities systems coupled with initiatives like TEF and the Texas Emerging Technology Fund, a wide array of different high tech industries have developed in Texas. The Austin area is nicknamed the "Silicon Hills" and the north Dallas area the "Silicon Prairie". Texas has the headquarters of many high technology companies, such as Dell, Inc., Texas Instruments, Perot Systems, AT&T, and Electronic Data Systems (EDS).

Electronic Data Systems headquarters in PlanoThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) located in Southeast Houston, sits as the crown jewel of Texas's aeronautics industry. Fort Worth hosts both Lockheed Martin's Aeronautics division and Bell Helicopter Textron. Lockheed builds the F-16 Fighting Falcon, the largest Western fighter program, and its successor, the F-35 Lightning II in Fort Worth.

This suggests that Texas is not as backward scientifically as some avid creators of self-reassuring straw scarecrows like to assert.

If the science standards in Texas ever reach the nadir which anti-creats on these threads have managed to arrive at it would be reasonable to express concern.

1 Reply

@wandeljw,

The IDiots and Creationuts are being put on the defensive big time. They do somewhat well impressing the choir when they are aggressive, but do terribly when trying to defend their quasi-science. If evolution were a patch-work quilt, they would be a few pieces left to sow in and scientists are certain those pieces are out there. The DI IDiots quilt hasn't any edges yet, is loosely sewn together in bits-and-pieces, patternless and full of holes -- if you needed it in an Arctic cabin to keep warm at night, you'd freeze to death.

The dross explanations of what weaknesses they perceive in evolution science is a comedy.

2 Replies

@Lightwizard,

LW, Look at it this way; the bible itself is full of holes, it's inconsistent, contradictory, and teaches love while approving their avenging god who destroys the whole world with a flood.

If they can navigate through all that and still think there's a god, logic tells us trying to teach them anything is hopeless.

They will fight to the death their right to their god, and an afterlife in heaven.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

If heaven is some grandiose Ritz Carlton in the sky, will it still have Do Not Disturb signs for the doors? I'm imagining that poor people without an American Express are let in and given the same suite as a Rockerfeller?

Hell must be like the slums in any big city, or the tent and cardboard towns just over the border in Mexico.

We already have heaven and hell on Earth -- we even have many locales that are considered paradise.

There's no way of knowing what happens to the elusive soul after death -- one's bones are encased in a casket six-feet-under. The supernatural belief that there are ghosts is no different than belief in an afterlife and that depending on the tabulation of sins against good deeds which will admit one into heaven or hell.

The soul is already within each body, all animals included. It's the individuality of each being -- those slight differences of character and personality that underneath the physical facade is really who we are.
Of course, one can have an evil soul or a good soul or a indeterminable mixture. A serial killer is a sociopath and mostly certainly has an evil soul which blocks out any empathy for others.

1 Reply

@Lightwizard,

I believe most humans are a combination of good and bad; most people leans towards one way or another influenced by their genes and environment.

How I've lived my life has been greatly influenced by my environment; the major driver of my life.

Most of my "choices" have been pretty good.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

That's a good providence instead of an evil fate. I'm sure those who are in prison already believe they're already in hell, not that they haven't deserved it. Our laws keep us in line to an extent. There's always someone who will get by breaking the law, especially now -- investment bankers. They keep coming up with new titles in which to thwart regulation and do their dirty deals.

This is what we've evolved into and it's not encouraging. It's unfortunate that capitalism stokes the fires of avarice better than anything else.

1 Reply

@Lightwizard,

Many around the world doesn't even have to be in prison to know they're already in hell. Maybe god can save their "souls."

0 Replies

TEXAS UPDATE
Excerpt from Steve Schafersman's Houston Chronicle Blog (this afternoon):

Quote:

McLeroy has a new standard to put into the Biology's evoluton section: "7(G) analyze and evaluate the sufficiency or insufficiency of natural selection to explain the complexity of the cell." This is obviously another Creationist-inspired amendment. McLeroy is citing Dr. Bruce Albert's article from 1998, "We have always underestimated cells. But, as it turned out, we can walk and talk, because the chemistry of the cell is much more complex than we ever thought..." This is completely crazy and so unprofessional. Every scientist sees that this is a contrived ploy to insert a pro-Creationist standard that questions the sufficiency of natural selection. This is unscientific on its face. McLeroy is trying to do now exactly what he did in January: get a scientifically-damaging standard inserted into Biology without the chance for any scientist expert review or consultation. This sort of process is just too stupid and unethical for words. All Texas citizens should be ashamed.

Bob Craig has suggested a substitute motion: "Analyze and evaluate the evolutionary explanation of the complexity of the cell." McLeroy is speaking against Craig's substitute motion saying Craig's in not clear and his is supported by Bruce Albert. Pat Hardy says she has received a note from her science expert and he says that natural selection by itself is not sufficient to explain cellular complexity. Other evolutionary processes are involved. Craig's substitute amendment failed 6-8 with Rick Agosto voting No with the seven religious right Creationists.

Now we have the vote to add McLeroy's unscientific and anti-evolution amendment. The vote is 9-5 to add it, with Rick Agosto and Rene Nunez voting Yes with the seven Religious Right Creationists. Science is screwed again.

(emphasis added)

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

This suggests that Texas is not as backward scientifically as some avid creators of self-reassuring straw scarecrows like to assert.

apples and oranges.

that's like saying that because the vatican didn't reject the introduction of the slide rule, that they must have been right to suppress galileo.

0 Replies

@wandeljw,

I don't know who has the straight story:

Split vote upholds Texas education board ruling to ax evolution 'strengths and weaknesses' rule

02:20 PM CDT on Thursday, March 26, 2009

By TERRENCE STUTZ / The Dallas Morning News
[email protected]

AUSTIN " A last-ditch effort by social conservatives to require that Texas teachers cover the "weaknesses" in the theory of evolution in science classes was rejected by the State Board of Education Thursday in a split vote.

Board members deadlocked 7-7 on a motion to restore a long-time curriculum rule that "strengths and weaknesses" of all scientific theories " notably Charles Darwin's theory of evolution " be taught in science classes and covered in textbooks for those subjects.

Voting for the requirement were the seven Republican board members aligned with social conservative groups. Against the proposal were three other Republicans and four Democrats.

The tie vote upheld a tentative decision by the board in January to delete the strengths-and-weaknesses rule in the new curriculum standards for science classes that will be in force for the next decade.

Those standards spell out not only how evolution is to be covered, but also what is supposed to be taught in all science classes in elementary and secondary schools, as well as providing the material for state tests and textbooks.

All three Dallas-area board members opposed the weaknesses requirement " Republicans Geraldine Miller of Dallas and Pat Hardy of Fort Worth, and Democrat Mavis Knight of Dallas.

Knight, who had heart surgery in February, cast her vote by video conference from the state education service center in Richardson.

A final vote will occur on Friday, but the outcome is not expected to change. One board member who was absent " Democrat Mary Helen Berlanga of Corpus Christi " will participate in Friday's meeting by video conference from Houston. She has already stated her opposition to the requirement backed by social conservatives.

Opponents of the strengths and weaknesses rule argued that it would eventually open the door to teaching of creationism " the biblical explanation of the origin of humans " in science classes. They also insisted there was no dispute in the scientific community about the basic tenets of evolution, including the gradual development of humans from lower life forms.

The seven board members and social conservative groups supporting the rule have argued that its absence would discourage classroom discussion about evolution. They have cited alleged flaws in Darwin's theory that they contend should be covered in classes and textbooks.

Board members were expected to continue review of the proposed curriculum standards for several hours on Thursday.

1 Reply

@Lightwizard,

Quote:

The dross explanations of what weaknesses they perceive in evolution science is a comedy.

So what? Life is a comedy isn't it? What do you want it to be LW? Not a comedy? Do you prefer a tragic wail of woe and lamentation only to be escaped from by frenzied activity. I presume they place ads for expensive leisure activities adjacent to the articles wande quotes. If they don't they should.

And there are weaknesses from the point of view of the educational system and potential futures.

There are transitions. Everything is in transition. There are no species it all.
If there is one common ancestor then you might as well call an elephant and a primrose different species as calling you a different species from your father. The father and son are just labels for two species. The Holy Ghost is a genuine transition type.

The fossil hunters are searching the sediments for some transition types. Thousands of them and all on funds backed by you silly twats. And they are transition types themselves. And they say they can't find any. That's comic too.

And they won't be finding any either.

Well-it would be a nuisance having to find them something else to do in this period of high unemployment. And for those magazines that print their findings for you silly sods to pore over it would be a disaster. And the findings not being given in evidence would put a whole load of court staff on the dole as well.

And all done with a po-faced serious pomposity. In a credit crunch too when government spending is under such severe scrutiny. It's hilarious.

Another weakness is that there's a risk that the doctrines of evolution will be used by unscrupulous leaders for various purposes which it would be impolite to list.

I saw a film recently where government scientists were engaged in stopping flies from sleeping. It was cruel. After they had kept them awake for a few days they were examining their fantastically complex brains (mushed up they said) under a microscope and writing on notepads. I think they are trying to find a way of getting us all on a double shift system. We are pretty useless as both producers and consumers when we are festering in the charper zonked out. So it does make sense from a scientific point of view. They say that they have found that one in five flies can do without sleep more or less entirely. Just an odd cat nap. So they are going to breed off these and produce a new fly which will easily replace the lazy flies if it gets out of the lab.

Then there's the problem of the po-faced, pompous prigs you would have to inflict on the kids to teach them about evolution in the way you envisage. It could of course be done by teachers with a well developed sense of humour but I rather fear the school would be besieged by angry parents and writs would be flying back and forth and outraged letters to the editor from Disgusted of Lower Peoria.

It is no use in a debate to keep insisting these matters are "dross". That's just another version of fools being those who disagree with LW and intelligent people being those who agree with him. Fatuous.

The obvious fact that you can't see the utter vacuous fatuity of that stuff is quite sufficient evidence that what you have to say on any subject is just another of the many versions of self-validation you practice, as do many others of that ilk. Which begs the question of why you need to self-validate so habitually. Psychologists reckon RSVS (repetitive self-validation syndrome) is caused by a sense of feeling hollow and pointless. And that's understandable because evolution theory does tend to point inescapably in that direction.

0 Replies

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know