Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

New state science standards find opponent on the board
(St. Petersburg Times, December 5, 2007)

State Board of Education member Donna Callaway said she will vote against the proposed new state science standards because evolution "should not be taught to the exclusion of other theories of origin of life." Further, she hopes "there will be times of prayer throughout Christian homes and churches directed toward this issue," according to a Nov. 30 column in the Florida Baptist Witness, a weekly newspaper based in Jacksonville.

The board will vote on the new standards early next year. Educators and scientists have generally given them a good review. Callaway is the highest-profile critic to surface since the draft standards were released in October.

FLORIDA UPDATE

Quote:

New state science standards find opponent on the board
(St. Petersburg Times, December 5, 2007)

State Board of Education member Donna Callaway said she will vote against the proposed new state science standards because evolution "should not be taught to the exclusion of other theories of origin of life." Further, she hopes "there will be times of prayer throughout Christian homes and churches directed toward this issue," according to a Nov. 30 column in the Florida Baptist Witness, a weekly newspaper based in Jacksonville.

The board will vote on the new standards early next year. Educators and scientists have generally given them a good review. Callaway is the highest-profile critic to surface since the draft standards were released in October.

wandeljw wrote:

FLORIDA UPDATE

Quote:

New state science standards find opponent on the board
(St. Petersburg Times, December 5, 2007)

State Board of Education member Donna Callaway said she will vote against the proposed new state science standards because evolution "should not be taught to the exclusion of other theories of origin of life." Further, she hopes "there will be times of prayer throughout Christian homes and churches directed toward this issue," according to a Nov. 30 column in the Florida Baptist Witness, a weekly newspaper based in Jacksonville.

The board will vote on the new standards early next year. Educators and scientists have generally given them a good review. Callaway is the highest-profile critic to surface since the draft standards were released in October.

I hope "there will be times of prayer throughout Christian homes and churches directed toward" saving us from people like Donna.

rosborne979 wrote:

wandeljw wrote:

FLORIDA UPDATE

Quote:

New state science standards find opponent on the board
(St. Petersburg Times, December 5, 2007)

State Board of Education member Donna Callaway said she will vote against the proposed new state science standards because evolution "should not be taught to the exclusion of other theories of origin of life." Further, she hopes "there will be times of prayer throughout Christian homes and churches directed toward this issue," according to a Nov. 30 column in the Florida Baptist Witness, a weekly newspaper based in Jacksonville.

The board will vote on the new standards early next year. Educators and scientists have generally given them a good review. Callaway is the highest-profile critic to surface since the draft standards were released in October.

I hope "there will be times of prayer throughout Christian homes and churches directed toward" saving us from people like Donna.

rosborne,

What surprised me even more is that a state school board member mischaracterizes evolution as a theory about the "origin of life".

Thanks Pauli.

Have you any details on the "financial scandals" and on Mr Jackson's "formal family organisation"?

How many teachers recieved a copy of Mr Behe's book?

On the board's web pages it looked like Mr Patel had been replaced by a lady.

Am I right in thinking--

1- That in Rio Rancho the divide goes on gender lines? There seems to be a lot of ladies supporting the "no religion" line and the opposite position is guarded by men with dolicho-blond ancestry. The ladies had a majority on the Polk school board.

2- That education in RR is conducted according to whether or not there could be a court challenge from "one angry parent"?

3- That the scientific justification for monogamous practice and age of consent laws, both of which are contrary to evolution theory, will be critically discussed in the district's schools bilogy lessons?

4- That had Mr Jackson not been accused of financial irregularities, either because he engaged in none or had not been discovered, the children of the district would be getting a different education from the one they will now get, if only for the time being.

5- New text books be required as a result of the latest vote?

PS- Have you any details on voter turn-out in the election for board members and on the mechanics involved?

Florida educator to oppose rule on teaching evolution only
(Leslie Postal, Orlando Sentinel, December 6, 2007)

A key state official plans to vote against Florida's proposed new science standards because evolution would be taught in public schools to the "exclusion of other theories of origin of life."

Donna Callaway of the State Board of Education told the Florida Baptist Witness that she will oppose the new standards because they do not give teachers leeway to acknowledge other views, according to an editorial posted on the paper's Web site last week.

Callaway is one of seven state board members who have final say on the standards. The board could vote on them as early as next month.

The former Tallahassee middle school principal is the first board member to make public comment on the standards. Neither Callaway nor other board members could be reached Wednesday.

The proposed standards are controversial because they would, for the first time, require public school students to learn about evolution. The current standards, adopted in 1996, do not use the word evolution but require the teaching of evolutionary concepts. They have been criticized as weak and vague, which is why state officials wanted new ones.

The editorial urged Baptists to speak out against them because they attempt "to make evolution dogma" the rule and ignore the belief that God or an "intelligent cause" created living things.

The editorial appears in the Dec. 6 issue of the Baptist newspaper, which should arrive in some 40,000 homes starting today, said James Smith, the publication's executive editor. Callaway contacted him about sharing her views, he said.

In the editorial, Callaway is quoted as saying she agreed with teaching evolution but wanted other theories explored, too.

"I firmly believe that a child can deal with the proof of science along with a personal belief in God as the Creator of the universe at the same time. The classroom should allow him, openly, that opportunity," she said.

Callaway, a veteran public school educator, was appointed to the state board in 2004 by former Gov. Jeb Bush. The Baptist newspaper identified her as a "longtime, active member" of First Baptist Church in Tallahassee and said she hoped there would be "times of prayer" directed to this issue.

Callaway's comments in a church-based paper troubles Florida Citizens for Science, which supports the new proposals.

"She's allowing her personal religious views to cloud her judgment on science education in Florida," said Brandon Haught, the group's spokesman and a Lake County resident. "We need to trust the subject-matter experts . . . these new standards were written by subject-matter experts."

The proposed standards were written by teachers and professors with the goal of beefing up science education in Florida, where fewer than half the students are proficient on state science tests. The state released the new standards in October, giving the public 60 days to comment. The comment period closes Dec. 14. So far, more than 8,000 people have gone online to give their views. Those who agree with the new evolution standards slightly outnumber those who oppose them, but there is a clear diversity of opinion.

More on State Educator Opposed to New Florida Standards:

wandeljw wrote:

More on State Educator Opposed to New Florida Standards:

You just love doing this don't you

Wrong Message
(Dallas Morning News Editorial, December 7, 2007)

The state of Texas doesn't merely advocate teaching the science of evolution; our education policy requires it. So why jettison a high-ranking educator who seems to have no problem carrying out that policy?

Christine Comer was forced to resign as director of science at the Texas Education Agency on Nov. 7 after she had forwarded an e-mail notice about an Austin lecture, "Inside Creationism's Trojan Horse," by a professor who serves on the board of the National Center for Science Education. Ms. Comer provided no commentary with her message. But the mere fact that she forwarded it was deemed by her bosses as advocacy.

TEA Education Commissioner Robert Scott explained that other factors played into her dismissal. He couldn't discuss personnel matters, but he specified that "she may have given the impression that we were taking a position as an agency - not as an individual, but as an agency - on a matter."

Ms. Comer declined to comment to us. But she told The New York Times she felt she was being monitored by the "thought police" when her boss, Deputy Commissioner Lizzette Reynolds, quickly seized upon the e-mail as a firing offense.

We hope this isn't the beginning of a worrisome trend within the new leadership of the TEA and State Board of Education. Professional educators need assurance that no one aims to impose a religious agenda on students and require the teaching of creationism alongside evolution in science classes.

If Ms. Comer was incompetent, it's certainly not reflected by her 27-year career as a teacher and nine years of service as director of science. The impression we get is that her bosses were gunning for her, and the forwarded e-mail was the most expedient excuse they could find.

This action could not have sent a worse message to our state's educators, when we should be doing everything possible to encourage people to choose teaching as a career, not frightening or bullying them into leaving.

Deputy Commissioner Lizzette Reynolds, quickly seized upon the e-mail

Intelligent design battle resurfaces in court, school boards
(By Jonathan M. Gitlin, Ars Technica Journal, December 08, 2007)

The attempts by creationists to have their beliefs accepted as legitimate science is a topic we've touched on more than a few times at Ars Technica. The past couple of weeks have seen several more acts played out, both in relation to the science that children are taught in schools and the standards to which researchers in academia are held.

The first of these events happened last week in Texas, where the Texas Education Agency's Director of Science has been forced out of her job for allegedly not "remaining neutral" over the teaching of evolution in schools. Christine Comer, a former science teacher, had her nine-year stint as Director of Science ended as a result of an e-mail she sent to colleagues, notifying them of an upcoming talk being given by Barbara Forrest. Forrest is the author of Inside Creationism's Trojan Horse, a book that details the movement to have ID taught as science in America's Schools.

The movement suffered what ought to have been a fatal blow following the Kitzmiller v. Dover legal case, but creationists are readying themselves for another confrontation in the coming year, when Texas reviews its scientific curriculum. Although the state has taught evolution as fact for the past decade, the new chair of the State Board of Education is a self-proclaimed proponent of ID and it is widely believed that this will be reflected in the upcoming curriculum.

There are ramifications of this happening in a state as large as Texas, due to the large numbers of textbooks purchased. Textbook suppliers will often design books just for the three largest markets in the US (Texas, Florida, and California) and then sell them to all the other states in the country. If Texas insists on ID being included, the effect will be felt far outside the state's borders.

The decision to remove Comer was made by Lizzette Reynolds, a former staffer for George W. Bush during his days as governor of Texas. "This is highly inappropriate," Reynolds said in an e-mail to Comer's supervisors. "I believe this is an offense that calls for termination or, at the very least, reassignment of responsibilities... This is something that the State Board, the Governor's Office and members of the Legislature would be extremely upset to see because it assumes this is a subject that the agency supports."

As if that weren't enough, this week saw a lawsuit filed in Boston by a former postdoc at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution over his dismissal. Nathaniel Abraham was fired from his position in 2004 after he informed his Principal Investigator (PI) that he was a creationist. Dr. Abraham was hired to work on an NIH grant concerning how "how aquatic animals respond to chemical contaminants by examining... mechanisms from a comparative/evolutionary perspective."

After Abraham brought up his creationist beliefs, his PI, Mark Hahn, wrote to him to say that he would only be paid for the 7-10 percent of the work on the project that did not involve evolution. This did not prove satisfactory for either party, and a month later Abraham was asked to resign: "...You have indicated that you do not recognize the concept of biological evolution and you would not agree to include a full discussion of the evolutionary implications and interpretations of our research in any co-authored publications resulting from this work... This position is incompatible with the work as proposed to NIH and with my own vision of how it should be carried out and interpreted."

Abraham now works at Liberty University, the Virginia university founded by the late Rev. Jerry Falwell.

This isn't the first case of a creationist with credentials. Last year, Marcus Ross submitted his PhD dissertation to the University of Rhode Island for examination. Although Ross's field is geosciences and the dissertation was about marine reptiles that died out 65 million years ago, he is also an avowed young earth creationist who personally believes the world to be no more than 6,000 years old. The granting of his doctorate has raised questions in the academic community regarding his intentions. Ross has appeared in creationist and ID propaganda materials, and has been accused of using his PhD from a secular university as a springboard to further a religious agenda.

Whether these cases highlight a certain duplicity or hypocrisy on behalf of the scientists working within frameworks they refuse to recognize or instead represent their ability to compartmentalize their beliefs is not for us to say, but it does suggest a new approach by the creationist movement in its fight against science.

Both cases also raise questions about the neutrality of scientific organizations when it comes to the nature of science itself. Do institutions have a duty to remain impartial or a responsibility to defend central tenets?

Shall she remain neutral about heliocentrism?

blatham, It really isn't a rumor about Portland sunshine.

Here are the annual averages of sunshine in Portland by month.

PERCENT POSSIBLE SUNSHINE
46 28 38 48 52 57 56 69 66 62 44 28 23 48

cicerone imposter wrote:

blatham, It really isn't a rumor about Portland sunshine.

Here are the annual averages of sunshine in Portland by month.

PERCENT POSSIBLE SUNSHINE
46 28 38 48 52 57 56 69 66 62 44 28 23 48

Tourist bureau lies. There is no way that we have a 48% chance of experiencing sunlight on the 12th month.