CREATIONISTS DEALT MAJOR BLOW IN BATTLE OVER EVOLUTIONARY CONTENT IN TEXAS BIOLOGY TEXTBOOKS

[ZRT2209]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/17/creationists-dealt-major-blow-in-battle-over-evolutionary-content-in-texas-public-school-biology-textbooks/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=ShareButtons

The battle over evolution and creationism in public schools forges on. And in Texas, where some social conservatives have advocated for a more balanced approach to the study of life’s origins, it seems creationists may be in for major disappointment.

Next month, the Texas’ State Board of Education is set to meet to officially adopt new biology textbooks. Despite Chairwoman Barbara Cargill’s goal of infusing all sides of the debate into educational texts, the 14 publishers the board will choose from have reportedly not included any creationist content.

For years, conservative members of the board have been pushing for books to include information that is critical of evolutionary theory — and 2013 was no exception.

[SeattleVet]

1. Good.

There is no place in a Biology textbook for religious dogma.

Do you think that they are also open to the idea of putting a paragraph or two about Darwinian Evolution into Genesis for 'balance'?

[onyourleft]

2. Good.

Keep the creationist crap at church as it certainly does not belong in science texts.

[TeamPooka]

3. that's a win for education

[Comrade Grumpy]

4. Good. The role of the Texas textbook choosers has been really pernicious.

[Auntie Bush]

5. Now we have to make them admit there is global warming.

But glad they nixed the creationist theory of evolution.

[Uncle Joe]

6. Kicked and recommended for reason and logic.

Thanks for the thread, ZRT.

[starroute]

7. It's too bad there's no better source than Glenn Beck's The Blaze

I just did some googling, and it seems that's the only place the story appears, but you might at least have added a caveat at the beginning of the post. Any story that talks about "a more balanced approach" in reference to creationism is clearly biased, and people who read the thread should be made aware of that.

[Wounded Bear]

8. I caught that, too....

Sounds more like a "gin up the base, we're losing" kind of article than a real news piece.

The truth we're trying to support is that there aren't two sides to arguments like this, unless the two sides are labeled correct and incorrect.

[Half-Century Man]

11. I think that the new worthiness of

"drooling morons speak at public event" is somewhat limited. I also think that The Blaze is "drooling hateful morons who write things down".

[blogslut]

16. Here is a better link/source

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2013/10/science_scores_a_victory_in_fi.php

[starroute]

21. Thanks!

"Victory for science" is much better than "defeat for creationism."

[Arugula Latte]

9. "more balanced approach" -- like including the creation myths of upteen cultures?

[ffr]

10. Then who will vote for Republicons in the future? Oh no!!!

[toby jo]

12. Biology isn't philosophy?

Well, sheyit!

What'll those damn rebels down in Texas come up with next?

[Turbineguy]

13. Republicans think they are the product of intelligent design.

There used to be some sort of unpleasant penalties for blasphemy.....

[HereSince1628]

14. The history of evolutionary thought may be the greatest story of biology, yet without an ending

It is is a terrific story of the struggle for scientific explanation by humans, vulnerable to mistakes and biases working with incomplete and sometimes misinterpreted evidence (for example how an 'accepted' model of DNA structure by one of the world's leading structural chemist led to decades of thinking that DNA was too simple to code the complexities needed in inheritance).

It is a story about something as obvious as the pyramids, but often as seemingly as deeply encrypted as hieroglyphs awaiting discovery of the Rosetta stone.

It is a tale of replacing explanatory myths of the seemingly unknowable with competing postulates based on empirical part-truths, the correction of logical but magnificently wrong ideas, pushing postulated explanation too-far, and the re-collection and reconciliation of fragments sometimes lost, sometimes thought wrong--yet later found to harbor intellectual jewels.

Telling that story-with a not too long and boringly illuminated list of examples of competing alternative views--would be a terrific introduction to science as it really works.

I'm really not afraid of evolution being told as a story of the unrolling, untangling and re-knotting biological understanding. I'm not afraid of telling students that the history of evolution is one in which nontrivial mistakes were made, discovered and usually corrected.

When a person really gains an understanding of the development of this greatest of all organizing concepts in biology, you can't help but be wary, based on history, that although we are deeply committed to the story as we now know it, it likely contains some gaps. Also, probably some flaws. All available for fixing, filling and expanding upon by generations of curious minds to come.

[BluegrassStateBlues]

15. Thank Darwin. nt

[calimary]

17. GOOD.

[hatrack]

18. " . . . advocated for a more balanced approach to the study of life's origins," . . . .

Pardon me while I find someone on whom I can projectile vomit.

[seabeyond]

19. for five years i have heard this outraged cry that creationism will get in our books and is in our

schools. it isnt. every class my boys have been in, the idea is rejected by the teacher when a student brings it up, hard and fast, and it is in no books.

but... there will be thread after thread about how the schools in texas are teaching this crap and doesnt matter what is said.

then, we find out, once again, no... it is not in the books.

[Spider Jerusalem]

20. "Advocated for a more balanced approach" is nonsense.

It's a stupid false equivalency, and anyone who believes there needs to be "balance" is an idiot. "The all-powerful sky-god created everything in six days, 6000 years ago" is not supported by science. The evolution of complex life from simple organisms is as much of a matter of settled fact as anything can be. As is the vast age of the universe and the Big Bang and the age of the earth and the age of the dinosaurs and many other well-established scientific facts denied by creationists.

The bizarre idea that, when you have a group of ignorant yahoos making an absurd claim based on faith and belief on one side, and a group of scientists supporting their theories with evidence on the other, there are two sides, or that there's even an argument, is one of the biggest problems the USA has. It's not just issues like creationism and the teaching of evolution in schools; it's things like global warming denialism, the Republican Party's fantasy economics, etc. The idea that uninformed opinion is as valid as fact and as worthy of a hearing and debate.

[ZRT2209]

23. "a more balanced approach" = adding bullshit to the textbooks

[RainDog]

22. k&r n/t