People in Texas want creationism in textbooks

Options
jono
jono Members Posts: 30,280 ✭✭✭✭✭
AUSTIN — More than two decades after Texas ended a virtual ban on coverage of evolution in science textbooks, the debate over how evolution should be taught to high school students goes on — and on.
State Board of Education members will hold a public hearing Tuesday on proposed high school biology textbooks and e-books that will be used in schools for eight years beginning next fall.

Not surprisingly, treatment of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution in those materials has again sparked sharp disagreements between social conservatives and science educators.
After decades of battling to limit or even eliminate the teaching of evolution, critics appear to have adopted a new strategy. They want the books to leave open the possibility of other explanations for the origins of humans and other life forms.
But the political situation on the education panel has changed since 2009, when it decided the standards for science classes throughout the state. Social conservatives then were able to push for questions about evolution. Now, their near-majority on the board is gone. So they may have trouble exerting influence on textbook publishers.


“This is a very different group of people than were here when the science standards were approved in 2009,” said board member Thomas Ratliff, R-Mount Pleasant. Ratliff defeated the creationist board member who led the charge to question basic tenets of Darwin’s theory in science books and classes.

“I have a high degree of confidence that a reasonable conclusion will be reached regarding the biology materials,” he said. He cited the “very high marks” that the initial drafts of the seven books received from leading science educator groups.
That was before state textbook review panels scrutinized them this summer.
The committees included several evolution critics and creationists. Several have urged the education board to not adopt the books unless publishers include more disclaimers on evolution.

One reviewer even suggested that coverage of “creation science” be mandated for every biology textbook. That would violate a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court ruling. The decision banned teaching of creationism in science classes.
Most criticism of the books has been more along the lines of State Board of Education Chairwoman Barbara Cargill, R-The Woodlands. She testified to a legislative committee this year on how evolution was covered in lesson plans used in hundreds of school districts.

“Our intent is to teach all sides of scientific explanation,” she told lawmakers. “But I couldn’t find anything that might be seen as another side to the theory of evolution. Every link, every lesson was taught as: ‘This is how the origin of life happened. This is what the fossil record proved.’ That is all fine. But that is only one side.”

That perspective was mirrored in one review of the biology textbook publisher McGraw-Hill submitted.
“The conclusions and tenets of evolutionary theory, while not declared as being unimpeachable, are nevertheless offered without any suggestion that there are competing scientific theories,” said one reviewer. He did not specify what those theories are.
He complained that “the theory that life most definitely emerged [from primitive organisms] is simply a foregone conclusion.”

But scholars from the University of Texas at Austin and Southern Methodist University gave the proposed textbooks a thumbs-up in a report prepared for the Texas Freedom Network.
“Our reviews reveal that creationists on the State Board of Education have failed to pressure publishers into including ‘junk science’ that questions evolutionary theory in the new high school biology materials,” the science educators said.
All the publishers, they wrote, avoided “pseudoscience intended to water down or disprove evolution.”
For example, the textbook Pearson Education submitted offers: “All historical records are incomplete, and the history of life is no exception. The evidence we do have, however, tells an unmistakable story of evolutionary change.”
Further, the book adds, “every scientific test has supported Darwin’s basic ideas about evolution.”
Such statements have stirred criticism from social conservatives. They want to leave the door open for students to consider other explanations for the origin of humans.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/headlines/20130915-evolution-at-center-of-new-texas-education-board-debate-over-science-textbooks-and-e-books.ece

Creationism as science...when education becomes a political football instead of a search for truth. America is stupid
«13

Comments

  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 0 Regulator
    Options
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • Idiopathic Joker
    Idiopathic Joker Members, Moderators Posts: 45,691 Regulator
    Options
    Theodis wrote: »
    that's all well and good... but i heard monsters that sounded like from where ever the ? the Event Horizon traveled, this morning...

    can they explain THAT....? ?

    ? is wack
  • Bodhi
    Bodhi Members Posts: 7,932 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    I would love to be in that class.
  • zombie
    zombie Members Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    Good nothing is wrong with teaching different ideas.
  • Lou Cypher
    Lou Cypher Members Posts: 52,521 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    I want marvel comic to be taught in school too

    Imagine watching the avengers for religious studies

    the-avengers-gifs-iron-man-3-32177901-500-228.gif

    ? jeremy renner is such a ? .
  • ohhhla
    ohhhla Members Posts: 10,341 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    Hahaahahaha.

    Invisie sky daddy poofing ? out of existence is science.

    lol
  • BlackxChild
    BlackxChild Members Posts: 2,916 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    Kids the earth is 5000 yrs old...
  • BlackxChild
    BlackxChild Members Posts: 2,916 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    Kids the moon is one of the great lights ? created in the sky.... ? what science tells you it's a different version of the sun.
  • jono
    jono Members Posts: 30,280 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    zombie wrote: »
    Good nothing is wrong with teaching different ideas.

    I could violate you sensibilities right now but I won't. I'm gonna stay on topic.

    There IS something wrong with teaching non science in a science book. There's no scientific basis for religion and thus it has no place on a science class, textbook or discussion.

    You want to teach creationism? Fine, take them to church. But schools aren't a place to coddle ignorance.
  • 7figz
    7figz Members Posts: 15,294 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2013
    Options
    How about the teachers just say "We don't really know how the ? we got here" and call it a day.
  • zombie
    zombie Members Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    jono wrote: »
    zombie wrote: »
    Good nothing is wrong with teaching different ideas.

    I could violate you sensibilities right now but I won't. I'm gonna stay on topic.

    There IS something wrong with teaching non science in a science book. There's no scientific basis for religion and thus it has no place on a science class, textbook or discussion.

    You want to teach creationism? Fine, take them to church. But schools aren't a place to coddle ignorance.

    creationism is a theory, a group of theories it is not a religion. We can teach any theory we want because neither can be 100% proved without doubt. There are creationist who believe in evolution and scientist who believe in ? so I really don't see why you can't teach both.
  • Splackavelli
    Splackavelli Members Posts: 18,806 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    Theodis wrote: »
    that's all well and good... but i heard monsters that sounded like from where ever the ? the Event Horizon traveled, this morning...

    can they explain THAT....? ?

    more of those strange sounds people been hearing? I guess we better prepare for some cloverfield ? , pacific rim , or for Godzilla to rise out of the ocean then.
  • BIGG WILL
    BIGG WILL Members Posts: 2,611 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    zombie wrote: »
    jono wrote: »
    zombie wrote: »
    Good nothing is wrong with teaching different ideas.

    I could violate you sensibilities right now but I won't. I'm gonna stay on topic.

    There IS something wrong with teaching non science in a science book. There's no scientific basis for religion and thus it has no place on a science class, textbook or discussion.

    You want to teach creationism? Fine, take them to church. But schools aren't a place to coddle ignorance.

    creationism is a theory, a group of theories it is not a religion. We can teach any theory we want because neither can be 100% proved without doubt. There are creationist who believe in evolution and scientist who believe in ? so I really don't see why you can't teach both.



    Deep down you do. You just don't want to admit it.

    Picture the teacher saying the Earth is around 4.6 Billion years old. Then turning the page in her book and teaching that same group of kids that the earth is no older than 10k years old?

    So, since you are all for teaching different theories lets include this one as well :

    Xenu, an intergalactic ruler, was about to be removed from power, and he wasn’t having any of it. Instead, he got rid of the population that was planning to take him out by paralyzing and taking them to Earth (good old Teegeeack at the time). There, he loaded them into volcanoes, destroying them with hydrogen bombs.

    Bodies gone, he gathered the thetans – remember, those are the souls – and implanted misleading data, such as all religions, into their memories.

    The thetans began to cluster together and inhabit bodies of aliens that survived the blast (how they survived a hydrogen bomb, one can only guess). Voila! You have the predecessors to modern humans, and these thetans continue to move from body to body and life to life accumulating more misleading data along the way.

  • Rubato Garcia
    Rubato Garcia Members Posts: 4,912 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    zombie wrote: »
    jono wrote: »
    zombie wrote: »
    Good nothing is wrong with teaching different ideas.

    I could violate you sensibilities right now but I won't. I'm gonna stay on topic.

    There IS something wrong with teaching non science in a science book. There's no scientific basis for religion and thus it has no place on a science class, textbook or discussion.

    You want to teach creationism? Fine, take them to church. But schools aren't a place to coddle ignorance.

    creationism is a theory, a group of theories it is not a religion. We can teach any theory we want because neither can be 100% proved without doubt. There are creationist who believe in evolution and scientist who believe in ? so I really don't see why you can't teach both.

    Creationism doesn't hold up to the scientific method. And that's all that really matters in this situation since we're talking about science textbooks. Creationism just isn't science.
  • zombie
    zombie Members Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    BIGG WILL wrote: »
    zombie wrote: »
    jono wrote: »
    zombie wrote: »
    Good nothing is wrong with teaching different ideas.

    I could violate you sensibilities right now but I won't. I'm gonna stay on topic.

    There IS something wrong with teaching non science in a science book. There's no scientific basis for religion and thus it has no place on a science class, textbook or discussion.

    You want to teach creationism? Fine, take them to church. But schools aren't a place to coddle ignorance.

    creationism is a theory, a group of theories it is not a religion. We can teach any theory we want because neither can be 100% proved without doubt. There are creationist who believe in evolution and scientist who believe in ? so I really don't see why you can't teach both.



    Deep down you do. You just don't want to admit it.

    Picture the teacher saying the Earth is around 4.6 Billion years old. Then turning the page in her book and teaching that same group of kids that the earth is no older than 10k years old?

    So, since you are all for teaching different theories lets include this one as well :

    Xenu, an intergalactic ruler, was about to be removed from power, and he wasn’t having any of it. Instead, he got rid of the population that was planning to take him out by paralyzing and taking them to Earth (good old Teegeeack at the time). There, he loaded them into volcanoes, destroying them with hydrogen bombs.

    Bodies gone, he gathered the thetans – remember, those are the souls – and implanted misleading data, such as all religions, into their memories.

    The thetans began to cluster together and inhabit bodies of aliens that survived the blast (how they survived a hydrogen bomb, one can only guess). Voila! You have the predecessors to modern humans, and these thetans continue to move from body to body and life to life accumulating more misleading data along the way.

    once again creationism is not a religion and does not have to get into the particulars of any religion. So alot of what you wrote is irrelevant

    science as it relates to the creation of the earth and life is mostly theory and should be taught as such.
  • zombie
    zombie Members Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    zombie wrote: »
    jono wrote: »
    zombie wrote: »
    Good nothing is wrong with teaching different ideas.

    I could violate you sensibilities right now but I won't. I'm gonna stay on topic.

    There IS something wrong with teaching non science in a science book. There's no scientific basis for religion and thus it has no place on a science class, textbook or discussion.

    You want to teach creationism? Fine, take them to church. But schools aren't a place to coddle ignorance.

    creationism is a theory, a group of theories it is not a religion. We can teach any theory we want because neither can be 100% proved without doubt. There are creationist who believe in evolution and scientist who believe in ? so I really don't see why you can't teach both.

    Creationism doesn't hold up to the scientific method. And that's all that really matters in this situation since we're talking about science textbooks. Creationism just isn't science.

    all theories of quantum physics do not stack up to the old school scientific method but is still taught
  • REV_RAGE
    REV_RAGE Members Posts: 675 ✭✭✭✭
    Options
    Theodis wrote: »
    that's all well and good... but i heard monsters that sounded like from where ever the ? the Event Horizon traveled, this morning...

    can they explain THAT....? ?

    more of those strange sounds people been hearing? I guess we better prepare for some cloverfield ? , pacific rim , or for Godzilla to rise out of the ocean then.

    I guess we can lump the whole thread under MASS HYSTERIA?
  • Ajackson17
    Ajackson17 Members Posts: 22,501 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    Quantum physics have one thing backing them and that's the math portion. If your math is not adding up, it don't make no ? sense and a scientific theory has to have math backing it no matter what it is and it needs several laws. Smh, read about the scientific method and theories and you will understand why this doesn't hold up very well and why Darwin's theory is holding up despite the mad tinkerings over the past century, but the initial hypothesis adds up.

    Also, not all creation stories are the same and the bible is the same book that says the earth was before the sun and stars, now come on. That theory falls flat on his face, right there.
  • jono
    jono Members Posts: 30,280 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    zombie wrote: »
    BIGG WILL wrote: »
    zombie wrote: »
    jono wrote: »
    zombie wrote: »
    Good nothing is wrong with teaching different ideas.

    I could violate you sensibilities right now but I won't. I'm gonna stay on topic.

    There IS something wrong with teaching non science in a science book. There's no scientific basis for religion and thus it has no place on a science class, textbook or discussion.

    You want to teach creationism? Fine, take them to church. But schools aren't a place to coddle ignorance.

    creationism is a theory, a group of theories it is not a religion. We can teach any theory we want because neither can be 100% proved without doubt. There are creationist who believe in evolution and scientist who believe in ? so I really don't see why you can't teach both.



    Deep down you do. You just don't want to admit it.

    Picture the teacher saying the Earth is around 4.6 Billion years old. Then turning the page in her book and teaching that same group of kids that the earth is no older than 10k years old?

    So, since you are all for teaching different theories lets include this one as well :

    Xenu, an intergalactic ruler, was about to be removed from power, and he wasn’t having any of it. Instead, he got rid of the population that was planning to take him out by paralyzing and taking them to Earth (good old Teegeeack at the time). There, he loaded them into volcanoes, destroying them with hydrogen bombs.

    Bodies gone, he gathered the thetans – remember, those are the souls – and implanted misleading data, such as all religions, into their memories.

    The thetans began to cluster together and inhabit bodies of aliens that survived the blast (how they survived a hydrogen bomb, one can only guess). Voila! You have the predecessors to modern humans, and these thetans continue to move from body to body and life to life accumulating more misleading data along the way.

    once again creationism is not a religion and does not have to get into the particulars of any religion. So alot of what you wrote is irrelevant

    science as it relates to the creation of the earth and life is mostly theory and should be taught as such.

    There is no scientific basis to support creationism, intelligent design, or however you want to dress it up.

    You also seemed to he confused over the scientific meaning of "theory".

    Evolution is a fact, the Big Bang is vastly more scientific than intelligent design as there is no scientific basis for such an ideal.

  • damobb2deep
    damobb2deep Members Posts: 19,972 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    show both sides whats wrong with that?
  • BoldChild
    BoldChild Members Posts: 11,415 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    "On the other hand, 't possible an all powerful being that has apparently always existed, snapped his fingers, and created all this ? , or aliens did it."

    done.
  • zombie
    zombie Members Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    jono wrote: »
    zombie wrote: »
    BIGG WILL wrote: »
    zombie wrote: »
    jono wrote: »
    zombie wrote: »
    Good nothing is wrong with teaching different ideas.

    I could violate you sensibilities right now but I won't. I'm gonna stay on topic.

    There IS something wrong with teaching non science in a science book. There's no scientific basis for religion and thus it has no place on a science class, textbook or discussion.

    You want to teach creationism? Fine, take them to church. But schools aren't a place to coddle ignorance.

    creationism is a theory, a group of theories it is not a religion. We can teach any theory we want because neither can be 100% proved without doubt. There are creationist who believe in evolution and scientist who believe in ? so I really don't see why you can't teach both.



    Deep down you do. You just don't want to admit it.

    Picture the teacher saying the Earth is around 4.6 Billion years old. Then turning the page in her book and teaching that same group of kids that the earth is no older than 10k years old?

    So, since you are all for teaching different theories lets include this one as well :

    Xenu, an intergalactic ruler, was about to be removed from power, and he wasn’t having any of it. Instead, he got rid of the population that was planning to take him out by paralyzing and taking them to Earth (good old Teegeeack at the time). There, he loaded them into volcanoes, destroying them with hydrogen bombs.

    Bodies gone, he gathered the thetans – remember, those are the souls – and implanted misleading data, such as all religions, into their memories.

    The thetans began to cluster together and inhabit bodies of aliens that survived the blast (how they survived a hydrogen bomb, one can only guess). Voila! You have the predecessors to modern humans, and these thetans continue to move from body to body and life to life accumulating more misleading data along the way.

    once again creationism is not a religion and does not have to get into the particulars of any religion. So alot of what you wrote is irrelevant

    science as it relates to the creation of the earth and life is mostly theory and should be taught as such.

    There is no scientific basis to support creationism, intelligent design, or however you want to dress it up.

    You also seemed to he confused over the scientific meaning of "theory".

    Evolution is a fact, the Big Bang is vastly more scientific than intelligent design as there is no scientific basis for such an ideal.

    many/ most creationist have no problem with evolution I am confused about nothing no theory scientific or otherwise rises to the level of absolute fact. a scientific theory is a backed up explanation nothing more.
  • zombie
    zombie Members Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    Quantum physics have one thing backing them and that's the math portion. If your math is not adding up, it don't make no ? sense and a scientific theory has to have math backing it no matter what it is and it needs several laws. Smh, read about the scientific method and theories and you will understand why this doesn't hold up very well and why Darwin's theory is holding up despite the mad tinkerings over the past century, but the initial hypothesis adds up.

    Also, not all creation stories are the same and the bible is the same book that says the earth was before the sun and stars, now come on. That theory falls flat on his face, right there.

    bringing up the Bible is irrelevant to the discussion. mathematical constructs don't necessarily have to be real. in other words using math you can prove that something can exist not that it actually does
  • zombie
    zombie Members Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    creationism is not limited to theist understandings of the universe.
  • Arya Tsaddiq
    Arya Tsaddiq Members Posts: 15,334 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options
    I think there should be a class based on critical thinking where all possible therories for the genesis of humans are taught and the students have to decide which they choose to believe. And are graded based on there dialogue, participation, and ability to think critically and provide supporting evidence for the decision they make in a final paper.