The Evolution of Texas

[Nbadan]

If TX Creationists want to discuss the weaknesses in Evolution then why not have a class that discusses the weaknesses in organized religion too?

Texas prepares for evolution vote with national implications


On Thursday and Friday, the Texas Board of Education will be holding one of the most important votes on evolution in recent years. The board is considering whether to adopt a new curriculum that will have teachers question aspects of the theory, suggesting that there are gaps in the fossil record, that life on Earth does not spring from a common ancestor and that cells are too complex to have evolved. That sort of thing is pretty common these days, but this vote could affect the rest of the South, if not the nation as a whole.

When it comes to textbooks, Texas public schools are the equivalent of McDonald's or WalMart. Because they're such a big customer, textbook publishers figure it's just easier to follow Texas standards, even for books sold elsewhere in the U.S. So this vote could mean textbooks that would be teaching Texas' anti-evolution curriculum to students outside of the state.

The new standards under consideration are of course not being presented as creationism, just as an attempt to make sure that students are taught everything about evolution, including so-called weaknesses in the theory. But the chairman of the school board, who's been pushing this, is a young-Earth creationist.

This isn't the first time Texas has talked about evolution and its textbooks; in 2003, our own Katharine Mieszkowski wrote about another attempt to attack evolution in the state's textbooks.

Her article is here.Salon (http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/03/26/texas/index.html)

[ChumpDumper]

So will they require teachers to question the existence of God too?

If you are going to argue academic rigor, let's do it right.

[Extra Stout]

I thought the biggest hole in evolutionary theory was still that most species appear in the fossil record, remain in relative stasis over long periods of time, then disappear. I thought that's why Gould came up with the whole "punctuated equilibrium" thing.

Then there's the Cambrian explosion, in which enormous change and diversification happened very quickly. The state of theory still doesn't explain how macroevolution goes from being nearly stopped, to breakneck speed, to being stopped again. There are of course many hypotheses, but none empirically determinant.

I know some people think the inability of evolution to explain how life began is a weakness, but that's akin to claiming the theory of gravity is weak because it can't explain magnetism.

What I can't know for sure, since I haven't read the passages from this textbook, is whether actual weaknesses in evolutionary theory are going to be taught, or whether creationist propaganda is going to be taught. If the former, great! It's good for students to understand that science is not a unified theory of everything, that new data can overturn old assumptions, and that answers pose new questions -- even in the most robust theories. If the latter, then... my frustration continues.

[Blue Jew]

http://williamthecoroner.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/istock_can-of-worms.jpg

[PixelPusher]

I thought the biggest hole in evolutionary theory was still that most species appear in the fossil record, remain in relative stasis over long periods of time, then disappear. I thought that's why Gould came up with the whole "punctuated equilibrium" thing.

Then there's the Cambrian explosion, in which enormous change and diversification happened very quickly. The state of theory still doesn't explain how macroevolution goes from being nearly stopped, to breakneck speed, to being stopped again. There are of course many hypotheses, but none empirically determinant.

I know some people think the inability of evolution to explain how life began is a weakness, but that's akin to claiming the theory of gravity is weak because it can't explain magnetism.

What I can't know for sure, since I haven't read the passages from this textbook, is whether actual weaknesses in evolutionary theory are going to be taught, or whether creationist propaganda is going to be taught. If the former, great! It's good for students to understand that science is not a unified theory of everything, that new data can overturn old assumptions, and that answers pose new questions -- even in the most robust theories. If the latter, then... my frustration continues.

At this point, I'd settle for one semester of Science that focused exclusively on developing an understanding of scientific method.

That, and a critical thinking class on the side, and we can worry about teaching how earth and babby is formed later.

[LockBeard]

Serious question.

I was wondering this 2 days ago...why do Humans only have 2 arms?

[Transporter]

Serious question.

I was wondering this 2 days ago...why do Humans only have 2 arms?

Rule #56 so you don't try and twittle while driving.

[coyotes_geek]

Because we can only handle one beer and one remote control at the same time?

[DarkReign]

Serious question.

I was wondering this 2 days ago...why do Humans only have 2 arms?

Name a mammal with more than two arms and we can start the argument.

Legs do not count.

[LockBeard]

Goro.

Why do humans not have marsupiums? That'd be pretty handy.

[DizzG.]

Serious question.

I was wondering this 2 days ago...why do Humans only have 2 arms?

So when your playing with your ass and jerking off you don't have to answer the phone.

[KenMcCoy]

If TX Creationists want to discuss the weaknesses in Evolution then why not have a class that discusses the weaknesses in organized religion too?

I don't think they'd have enough time in public school (grades prek - 12) to discuss the weaknesses in organized religion!!!
:lol

[E20]

Serious question.

I was wondering this 2 days ago...why do Humans only have 2 arms?

We have 4 limbs like most mammals, but we are bipedal so the function of our upper limbs are just different, same with most primates, although some can use there arms to run in conjuction with there legs.

[spurster]

I thought the biggest hole in evolutionary theory was still that most species appear in the fossil record, remain in relative stasis over long periods of time, then disappear. I thought that's why Gould came up with the whole "punctuated equilibrium" thing.

Then there's the Cambrian explosion, in which enormous change and diversification happened very quickly. The state of theory still doesn't explain how macroevolution goes from being nearly stopped, to breakneck speed, to being stopped again. There are of course many hypotheses, but none empirically determinant.

I know some people think the inability of evolution to explain how life began is a weakness, but that's akin to claiming the theory of gravity is weak because it can't explain magnetism.

What I can't know for sure, since I haven't read the passages from this textbook, is whether actual weaknesses in evolutionary theory are going to be taught, or whether creationist propaganda is going to be taught. If the former, great! It's good for students to understand that science is not a unified theory of everything, that new data can overturn old assumptions, and that answers pose new questions -- even in the most robust theories. If the latter, then... my frustration continues.

In a sense, the theory of gravity is weaker than the theory of evolution. No one has seen a gravity wave yet, as opposed to knowing a great deal about DNA, differences and similarities in DNA, and genetic engineering. I think gravity engineering is a long ways off yet.

[micca]

If TX Creationists want to discuss the weaknesses in Evolution then why not have a class that discusses the weaknesses in organized religion too?

Texas prepares for evolution vote with national implications



Her article is here.Salon (http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/03/26/texas/index.html)

Alot of scientists think darwins theory have serious holes ,they are not asking people to become believers, they are asking for the freedom to pursue science and not to have to prop up a discredited theroy just because it makes parnoid people nervous. Just because evolution fails as a theroy doesn't mean that void is going to be filled with the bible or torah.

[baseline bum]

Alot of scientists think darwins theory have serious holes ,they are not asking people to become believers, they are asking for the freedom to pursue science and not to have to prop up a discredited theroy just because it makes parnoid people nervous. Just because evolution fails as a theroy doesn't mean that void is going to be filled with the bible or torah.

Then what the fuck is the evidence for intelligent design?

[MannyIsGod]

Alot of scientists think darwins theory have serious holes ,they are not asking people to become believers, they are asking for the freedom to pursue science and not to have to prop up a discredited theroy just because it makes parnoid people nervous. Just because evolution fails as a theroy doesn't mean that void is going to be filled with the bible or torah.

:lmao

Micca your posts are priceless.

[mookie2001]

rofl come on we have apes now why arent they having human babies?

[Nbadan]

...because evolution fails as a theroy...

...it's the talk-radio mantra....thing is, there's just as much evidence that we were genetically engineered by 'intelligent beings'.....think about it...if we had the technology we do it too....it would ensure the survival of our species no matter what....see told ya..

[micca]

:lmao

Micca your posts are priceless.

Yours me friend however are not.

[micca]

...it's the talk-radio mantra....thing is, there's just as much evidence that we were genetically engineered by 'intelligent beings'.....think about it...if we had the technology we do it too....it would ensure the survival of our species no matter what....see told ya..

No it's about guys alot smarter and alot more educated and alot more curious than any of us asking for the intellectual freedom to prusue science where ever it leads why must you try and control peoples freedom, your just paranoid it's gonna lead to some fundamentalist fantasy you have, it could lead to a place nobody could imagine. Why are you and Manny so paranoid where you abused alter boys or something?

[micca]

Then what the fuck is the evidence for intelligent design?

At a certain point in history people were saying what evidence do you have the earth revolves around the sun? Alot of people aren't saying anything other than let us pursue a line of inquery without a witchunt, it could dead end, or it could lead into a totally different direction than anyone could imagine this isn't about who's right it's about letting people think without fear.

[ChumpDumper]

Please explain your personal theory of the development of life on earth.
it's about letting people think without fear.:lmao

[MannyIsGod]

At a certain point in history people were saying what evidence do you have the earth revolves around the sun? Alot of people aren't saying anything other than let us pursue a line of inquery without a witchunt, it could dead end, or it could lead into a totally different direction than anyone could imagine this isn't about who's right it's about letting people think without fear.

:lmao

Yeah and Copernicus provided it! I don't think you understand how science works. Proof before theory.

[micca]

:lmao

Yeah and Copernicus provided it! I don't think you understand how science works. Proof before theory.

I don't think you can imagine a mind that's not as banal as yours.
Einstien said he discovered the theroy of relativity ten years before he could prove it.

[micca]

Please explain your personal theory of the development of life on earth.:lmao

I don't have one it's a mystery to me, and mysterys don't make me uncomfortable. I am really intigued by what people who've studied it, and continue to study it come up with.

[ChumpDumper]

I don't have one it's a mystery to me, and mysterys don't make me uncomfortable. I am really intigued by what people who've studied it, and continue to study it come up with.Really, you don't believe anything when it comes to the development of life on earth.

Entertaining.

[baseline bum]

At a certain point in history people were saying what evidence do you have the earth revolves around the sun? Alot of people aren't saying anything other than let us pursue a line of inquery without a witchunt, it could dead end, or it could lead into a totally different direction than anyone could imagine this isn't about who's right it's about letting people think without fear.

It is a fucking dead end. There's nothing scientific about intelligent design garbage. It's conjecture that has not a thing supporting it. Give me a fucking break. It has no place being taught as science, and is nothing but a power grab by bible-beater douchebag anti-intellectuals.

[micca]

It is a fucking dead end. There's nothing scientific about intelligent design garbage. It's conjecture that has not a thing supporting it. Give me a fucking break. It has no place being taught as science, and is nothing but a power grab by bible-beater douchebag anti-intellectuals.

That's not the issue. the issue is whether or not scientist will have the freedom to pursue science or whether bigots and brown shirts are going to decide what thoughts are verboten. There are many scientists that want to pursue this were every it leads, even if it leads back to evolution fine who cares, but they must live in fear of nit wits who work at home depot calling them bible beating douchebags.

[ChumpDumper]

That's not the issue. the issue is whether or not scientist will have the freedom to pursue science or whether bigots and brown shirts are going to decide what thoughts are verboten. There are many scientists that want to pursue this were every it leads, even if it leads back to evolution fine who cares, but they must live in fear of nit wits who work at home depot calling them bible beating douchebags.Scientists who live in fear of the opinion of Home Depot employees should never be listened to under any circumstances.

And how is that the issue? We're talking about grade school here.

[RandomGuy]

That's not the issue. the issue is whether or not scientist will have the freedom to pursue science or whether bigots and brown shirts are going to decide what thoughts are verboten. There are many scientists that want to pursue this were every it leads, even if it leads back to evolution fine who cares, but they must live in fear of nit wits who work at home depot calling them bible beating douchebags.

:lol

This made me laugh.

Many creationist "scientists" claim that they are being "discriminated" against by mainstream science, when even the smallest amount of honest skepticism is leveled at their badly written and/or logically fallacious theories.

There is a VAST gulf between "keeping an idea down" and asking honest and appropriately critical questions.

If your idea holds up to the principles of good logic and sufficiency of evidence to support conclusions, great. Just don't go bitching about "brownshirts" when someone points out the flaws in your work, just like they are supposed to do.

THAT is how real science works.

[baseline bum]

That's not the issue. the issue is whether or not scientist will have the freedom to pursue science or whether bigots and brown shirts are going to decide what thoughts are verboten. There are many scientists that want to pursue this were every it leads, even if it leads back to evolution fine who cares, but they must live in fear of nit wits who work at home depot calling them bible beating douchebags.

You're fucking retarded, bible-beating douchebag.

[Oh, Gee!!]

That's not the issue. the issue is whether or not scientist will have the freedom to pursue science or whether bigots and brown shirts are going to decide what thoughts are verboten. There are many scientists that want to pursue this were every it leads, even if it leads back to evolution fine who cares, but they must live in fear of nit wits who work at home depot calling them bible beating douchebags.

tin foil hat thread

[baseline bum]

Putting your bible-beater creationism shit in science classes is wholly equivalent to having Richard Dawkins come to your church and argue why there is almost certainly no god.

[boutons_deux]

Science setback for Texas schools

March 31st, 2009 in Other Sciences / Other
After three all-day meetings and a blizzard of amendments and counter-amendments, the Texas Board of Education cast its final vote Friday on state science standards. The results weren't pretty.

The board majority amended the Earth and Space Science, and Biology standards (TEKS) with loopholes and language that make it even easier for creationists to attack science textbooks.

"The final vote was a triumph of ideology and politics over science," says Dr. Eugenie Scott, Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE). "The board majority chose to satisfy creationist constituents and ignore the expertise of highly qualified Texas scientists and scientists across the country." NCSE presented the board with a petition from 54 scientific and educational societies, urging the board to reject language that misrepresents or undermines the teaching of evolution, which the board likewise ignored.

Although the "strengths and weaknesses" wording that has been part of the standards for over a decade was finally excised--wording that has been used to pressure science textbook publishers to include creationist arguments--a number of amendments put the creationist-inspired wording back in.

"What we now have is Son of Strengths and Weaknesses," says Josh
Rosenau, a project director for NCSE. "Having students 'analyze and evaluate all sides of scientific evidence' is code that gives creationists a green light to attack biology textbooks."

For example, the revised biology standard (7B) reflects two discredited creationist ideas--that "sudden appearance" and "stasis" in the fossil record somehow disprove evolution. The new standard directs students to "analyze and evaluate the sufficiency of scientific explanations concerning any data of sudden appearance, stasis and the sequential nature of groups in the fossil records." Other new standards include language such as "is thought to", or "proposed transitional fossils" to make evolutionary concepts seem tentative when, in fact, such concepts are well-documented and accepted by the scientific community.

The changes will not immediately affect curricula in Texas high schools, but "the standards will affect standardized tests and textbooks," says Rosenau. Thanks to such laws as No Child Left Behind, ubiquitous standardized tests are central to measuring student progress and proficiency. Teachers teach to the test, notes Rosenau, and textbooks have to reflect this.

"Will publishers cave in to pressure from the Texas board to include junk science in their textbooks? It has happened before," says Scott. "But textbooks that please the Texas board will be rejected in other states.

Publishers will have to choose between junk science and real science."
"Let's be clear about this," cautioned Dr. Scott. "This is a setback for science education in Texas, not a draw, not a victory. The revised wording opens the door to creationism in the classroom and in the textbooks. The decisions will not only affect Texas students for the next ten years, but could result in watered-down science textbooks across the U.S. There's a reason creationists are claiming victory."

NCSE's Josh Rosenau summed up the frustration of scientists and educators alike: "This is a hell of a way to make education policy."

Source: American Institute of Physics

========

"Religious" assholes, GFY

http://www.physorg.com/news157728177.html

[clambake]

holy shit

[baseline bum]

Fuck the Christian Taliban.

[johnsmith]

^^^You should start fire bombing churches all over town^^^


Videotape it too.

[baseline bum]

^^^You should start fire bombing churches all over town^^^


Videotape it too.

So I take it you think the Christian Taliban is a good thing for this nation?

[johnsmith]

^^nope, just think you should start your crime spree. I think you're ready for it.

[baseline bum]

This is just fucking bullshit. People wonder why our educational system sucks and why we're not competitive with China and India in producing engineers and scientists, and then push for this creationist garbage to be used to pollute young minds. You can't have it both ways.

[johnsmith]

This is just fucking bullshit. People wonder why our educational system sucks and why we're not competitive with China and India in producing engineers and scientists, and then push for this creationist garbage to be used to pollute young minds. You can't have it both ways.

My personal opinion on shit like this is that it's no different then any other problem in America: Apathy.


You're mad about it right now, you'll be mad about it tomorrow, but once this thread goes away, you won't think about it and you sure as hell won't do anything about it either.

That's what we are, a bunch of apathetic, lazy folks, who like to sit on internet forums and complain without actually being a part of anything bigger then a semi-anonymous group of individiuals residing in the same general vicinity while doing nothing beneficial for anyone in particular.



I agree with you whole heartedly about this subject, but it's almost five and I have shit to do................................................ ...............see, apathy.

[DarkReign]

My personal opinion on shit like this is that it's no different then any other problem in America: Apathy.


You're mad about it right now, you'll be mad about it tomorrow, but once this thread goes away, you won't think about it and you sure as hell won't do anything about it either.

That's what we are, a bunch of apathetic, lazy folks, who like to sit on internet forums and complain without actually being a part of anything bigger then a semi-anonymous group of individiuals residing in the same general vicinity while doing nothing beneficial for anyone in particular.



I agree with you whole heartedly about this subject, but it's almost five and I have shit to do................................................ ...............see, apathy.


Shit, cant argue with this at all. Good post.

Of course, I feel for the TX residents who have to tolerate this madness (and its influence on curriculum nationwide, supposedly), if I had children, I wouldnt be too worried about it.

Youre still the parent. Act like one if this means something to you. So what if Johnny Creationist Jr spews his nonsense? As long as your kid can recognize it for the BS it is, youre good to go.

Now, I am not blind to the implications this has on future generations of American mental-midgets who now have the right to vote after having been indoctrinated by religious babble. Things change, though.

The kids who'd be influenced by this...stuff are 18 years away from voting. 18 years, thats a long time. 18 years ago, I wasnt on the internet. 18 years ago, a GUT was the laughing stock of the science community and anyone who researched into it were basically outcasts.

Things change, is my point. The Dark Ages end at some point.

[Spurminator]

What I can't know for sure, since I haven't read the passages from this textbook, is whether actual weaknesses in evolutionary theory are going to be taught, or whether creationist propaganda is going to be taught. If the former, great! It's good for students to understand that science is not a unified theory of everything, that new data can overturn old assumptions, and that answers pose new questions -- even in the most robust theories. If the latter, then... my frustration continues.

[101A]

Alot of scientists think darwins theory have serious holes ,they are not asking people to become believers, they are asking for the freedom to pursue science and not to have to prop up a discredited theroy just because it makes parnoid people nervous. Just because evolution fails as a theroy doesn't mean that void is going to be filled with the bible or torah.


Fail.

Evolution happens; Darwin's concept of HOW it happens (random mutation - with beneficial ones succeeding while less beneficial ones do not - your temporal lobe, for instance) is what makes it a "theory".

[Extra Stout]

Evolution is just about the strongest theory in modern mainstream science. If it didn't blow a huge freaking hole in the fundamentalist reading of the Old Testament, it would not be controversial in the least.

[Blake]

My personal opinion on shit like this is that it's no different then any other problem in America: Apathy.

You're mad about it right now, you'll be mad about it tomorrow, but once this thread goes away, you won't think about it and you sure as hell won't do anything about it either.

That's what we are, a bunch of apathetic, lazy folks, who like to sit on internet forums and complain without actually being a part of anything bigger then a semi-anonymous group of individiuals residing in the same general vicinity while doing nothing beneficial for anyone in particular.

I agree with you whole heartedly about this subject, but it's almost five and I have shit to do................................................ ...............see, apathy.

I don't like it, but I have to feed the family and have to choose which battles to fight on my free time. I'm no scientist so this is one of those battles that really is not important enough for me to spend time fighting.

I'm not sure if that's really apathy......... meh.......

I'll probably get mad about it again when it's my daughter's turn to take earth science in school and then forget about it after she has graduated.

[Blake]

Youre still the parent. Act like one if this means something to you.


in so many words, that's the bottom line

[clambake]

why do people that hate intelligence call it intelligent design?