Reply With Quote
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.
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.SalonOn 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.
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.
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.
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.
Because we can only handle one beer and one remote control at the same time?
Name a mammal with more than two arms and we can start the argument.
Legs do not count.
Goro.
Why do humans not have marsupiums? That'd be pretty handy.
So when your playing with your ass and jerking off you don't have to answer the phone.
I don't think they'd have enough time in public school (grades prek - 12) to discuss the weaknesses in organized religion!!!
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.
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.
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 is the evidence for intelligent design?
Micca your posts are priceless.
rofl come on we have apes now why arent they having human babies?
...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.....because evolution fails as a theroy...
Yours me friend however are not.
Micca your posts are priceless.
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?
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.
Please explain your personal theory of the development of life on earth.it's about letting people think without fear.
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.
Yeah and Copernicus provided it! I don't think you understand how science works. Proof before theory.
Einstien said he discovered the theroy of relativity ten years before he could prove it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
