Panel okays evolution alternatives A Senate committee says teachers can discuss other origin-of-life ideas. By Linda Kleindienst The Orlando Sentinel Wednesday, April 9, 2008 Florida teachers could mention religious theories about human origins, such as creationism and intelligent design, without fearing retribution under a measure that passed a key Senate committee Tuesday. The “Evolution Academic Freedom Act” was approved 7-3 by the Senate Judiciary Committee and now goes to the full chamber for consideration, although no date has been set. The measure awaits its first hearing in the House. Sen. Ronda Storms, R-Valrico, said she filed the bill after hearing cases of students and teachers who felt “muzzled” and unable to discuss alternate theories on the origin of life. She said teachers have suffered retribution from school authorities and students have been the target of “denigrating comments” from other teachers. While the measure does not allow any teacher to promote a specific religious doctrine, “you can hold to your own religious views without being attacked for it,” Storms said. “This promotes the free flow of ideas.” While the committee’s six Republicans voted for the measure, the “no” votes came from Democratic Sens. Ted Deutch of Boca Raton, Steve Geller of Cooper City and Jeremy Ring of Parkland. “I believe the purpose of this bill is to let people bring their religious beliefs into school,” said Geller, the Senate’s Democratic Leader, voicing concerns about keeping the separation between church and state. “We need to keep the wall.” The legislation was filed after the state Board of Education, by a one-vote margin, approved changes in February to the state science standards requiring the teaching of the “scientific theory of evolution.” The new standards, which will present evolution as a “fundamental concept underlying all biology,” will be included in public-school curricula starting this fall, and the Science FCAT will test students on the material beginning in 2012. Mary Bahr, a Marion County middle-school teacher who helped write the standards, warned that Storms’ bill could “muddy the water” on what should be taught. “If this passes, what will we be teaching in our science classes?” she asked. Despite Storms’ claims of reprisals against teachers, according to the Florida Department of Education there has never been a case in Florida in which a public-school teacher has claimed discrimination based on science teaching. But Nathan Dunn, vice president of the Florida Family Action Network, read to the committee several letters from science teachers who claimed they had been shunned or ostracized when questioning evolution.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/orl-evolution0908apr09,0,3308090.storyOK so let me get this straight.1) In the history of the world, the amount of scientific evidence supporting the existance of a deity is Zero.2) In all the world, the number of repected Science research universities who accept “Intelligent Design” as a valid scientific theory is Zero.3) Some un-named teachers wrote emails saying they were “shunned or ostracized” because they questioned what is regarded by the scientific community as FACT. They weren’t hurt or fired, or threatened, they were shunned or ostracized for believing that 1+1=3.4) So… we have to change the law that was just passed to be the exact opposite of what it meant.I can’t wait until the Pastafarians and Wiccans get into their “opinions” of alternate Life Origins
At least the florida govenor doesn’t “rain dance” like georgia. Perdue is way nuttier than any other governor (except Huckabee). In science, ID would have to prove itself and have points to teach. But besides debunked anti-evolution propaganda, what real unique points can they have without promoting a religous doctrine, as they claim not to?
no phreedm public school teachers should not be thinking outside the box.since not 1954 we have had outside the box thinking one fad after another in public education.we need to teach the core subjects and civics.time to stop with this nonsense that all the little darlings can be doctors.if you want people to learn about ID teach it in church.
should read since 1954.
Dave, I think you’re blowing this out of proportion.
There’s no harm in mentioning that not everyone believes in evolution. It’s the simple truth and kids are going to figure it out anyway. As long as it’s mentioned in an honest way (meaning that they don’t present it as an alternate scientific theory), it certainly won’t bother me. If they do present ID as a realistic alternative then they’ve stepped way over the line and should be reprimanded. There should already be laws about preaching in schools on the books, but there’s a difference between preaching and accepting that the world is the way that it is.
The most important thing in that post is that they’re teaching the evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology. As long as they’re teaching science in science class they can’t just pretend that religion doesn’t exist, especially in other classes. I would love it if they would start teaching about some of the various religions (and non-religions) and they treated them all equally. I’d like to see how long religions lasts once it becomes obvious that none of the major religions can prove they have their roots in reality. It won’t happen in present day Jesumerica since the Christians currently have a near monopoly on religious foolishness, but I can dream, can’t I?
This runs right up to the edge of what I find acceptable in schools. But it doesn’t cross the line yet.
AOL,
Thank you for the info about the snake with two legs. It is truly awe inspiring. I think you just made my weekend.
And they say we don’t have any evidence for evolution…
Comment from: Boise Jim
Hey BJ…
Not exactly comparing apples to apples…but thanks for proving my point…
The FEAR of discussing new ideas outside of the accepted scientific theories of the day is exactly what the Catholic church did 600 years ago…which is exactly what AA is doing today…
What are you so fearful of? If the proof is so overwhelming then why not allow it to be discussed…?
Why should a professor be denied tenure because of his beliefs?
Should a private citizen be sued because of their religious convictions? Why should a Christian photography business be sued and fined because they declined a job at a gay wedding? Is that the type of country you want to live in?
You claim to be for freedom and yet in everything you (and AA) do your actions prove you’re for a more totalitarian form of government…muzzle those who don’t think as you do…
Alex…
Yes…absolutely. For so many of the ideas you’ve mentioned are already discussed in schools. Alchemy is discussed and then shown to be wrong. The stork? We have enough sex ed classes to prove that point…
Aliens from other worlds? It’s already discussed.
The point is why suppress the free flow of ideas? Why should any subject be off limits in a country founded on freedom?
Why do you support the idea of having “thought police”…?
You make the claim that there is not proof of ID…so? Should we deny the discussion of all theories simply because we don’t have proof?
Of course not…
Being such a well educated man I’m really surprised you don’t see the danger of implementing a Stalinist type approach to education…
alatham,
Evolution is a fact. Anyone who believes otherwise is uneducated or in denial.
Expanding on your idea completely, would be absurd. For example, we should then be stating that some don’t believe that the earth is roundish or, how about some don’t believe that humans have been to the moon. The absurd beliefs are, for all practical purposes, endless in number.
The only reason that evolution is still a theory is because it isn’t reasonably predictable but, unpredictability is, part of what evolution is. That does not change the fact that evolution is.
No goddoneit.
phreedum,
How do we find the time during the school day to present every crackpot alternate theory out there? American kids are already near the bottom in performance among the developed nations of the world. Why not stick to the facts and let kids learn about all of these unsubstantiated ideas outside of school? I’m all for freedom of enquiry but teaching kids that intelligent design is as valid as evolution is just wishful thinking and a great disservice to the kids and our future as a scientific power.
well some with sense have managed to at least include this definition in the bill:
“the term ?scientific information? means germane current facts, data, and peer-reviewed research specific to the topic of chemical and biological evolution”
so as far as i know there are no scientifically peer-reviewed studies on ID since it is not science. that should help some, but there is no doubt that there will be a lawsuit filed sooner or later after some flaming xtian teacher tests the limits of what can be said.
comparing an atheist’s stand on this to Galileo and the catholic church is laughable. we don’t care if it’s taught as part of a ‘religions of the world’ or ‘mythology’ or ‘comic book superheroes’ class. just keep it out of science which has a prescribed set of criteria to follow.
Intelligent Deception is still deception even if you stick the word intelligent in front of it. and even if it were true it is still not science as defined by man’s standards. it would fall under supernatural mythical phenomenon kind of like superman, spiderman, etc.
Comment from: alexatheist
I think you just answered your question…
You’re not answering the point. It’s not a question of allowing “crackpot” ideas, (although many of the past great scientists were considered crackpots in their day) it’s the question of allowing the free flow of thought…
Who would decide what’s a crackpot idea or ins’t?
You’re describing exactly what we have. A Stalinist approach to education. The powers at be limit what can be discussed…
Just like the Roman Catholic church did 600 years ago…which lead Western Europe into the Dark Ages..
There are many who believe we’re heading into a new Dark Ages BECAUSE of the limitations placed on education…
And you wonder why we’re falling behind the rest of the world…
If it can’t stand up to peer reviewed scrutiny then it is a crackpot idea. Scientific truth isn’t something which one can have an opinion about.
Phreedum I’m not going to say this to come across as eltist but rather just to state a fact: I studied biology and the scientific method at the university level and I have a thorough understanding of scientific concepts which it is obvious that you don’t. If you understood how science worked you would see just how laughable ID is and that it just is not science. Until there is at least one study in support of ID which stands up to the rigors of the scientific method it will always remain a crackpot theory.
I never said that I wonder why American school kids finish near the bottom in education, I know why. It is because we elevate emotions and feelings and standardised test scores above actual learning. The fact that our schools are overrrun by non English speaking children of illeagle immigrants also cheats students out of an education. American kids just won;t be able to compete with Asian and European kids in the future.
So phreedum since you support teaching all points of view in public schools I assume that you would throw your full support behind the neighbourhood witch’s coven doing a module on spell casting as a balance to chemistry, right? Maybe we need to bring in the Flat Earth Society too balance the lessons taught in geography. If you wouldn’t support this then please tell me why since this is no more ridiculous a proposal than teaching kids that god magically created the universe as a balance to the science of physics or astronomy.
Where does it end?
D’oh!
illeagle=illegal
too=to
What can I say? I’m a product of the VA public school system.
phreedm said:
“There are many who believe we’re heading into a new Dark Ages BECAUSE of the limitations placed on education…
And you wonder why we’re falling behind the rest of the world…”
congrats, you’re finally right about something but for the wrong reasons. one of the primary reasons is because of nutjobs like ronda storms and you who think that introducing fairy tales into science will help things out. there are others of course, with political correctness being a big part as well.
alexatheist,
Damn, you completely had me christianed (fooled) on that one. All this time I thought you were doing it on purpose.
David Silverman,
Went looking but found that I am unsure regarding your reference, so instead here are some good links, Judge Jones did a good job.
This is the Decision. If you search for “behe” and read the surrounding text, there is some good stuff there:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/
dover/kitzmiller_v_dover_decision.html
This one has audio of Judge Jones reading some of his key findings:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/judge.html
This is Nova’s PBS Judgment Day program:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html
And Wikipedia has a page titled
“Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial documents” with lots of links.
Alex…you are an elitist…but be that as it may…
So you do support the idea of “thought police”…
So here…prove the following using your argument…
OK…show me. For if you can’t…then we should not allow the discussion of homosexuality in the public schools…
The 500+ other animals that get down homoerotically don’t count or what? Or did they make a choice also?
phreedm wrote: “If it can’t stand up to peer reviewed scrutiny then it is a crackpot idea.”
Precisely, which is why there’s no ID taught in science class.
Your analogy to Galileo is off base. Galileo HAD science on his side. The IDiots do not.
The whole schtick of accusing scientists of being SCARED is mere projection on the part of religionists.
What’s happening here is that religious evolution deniers are attempting to get pseudoscience taught in classrooms because they fear the way evolution threatens belief in the Genesis creation myth. What’s NOT happening here is a situation where “dogmatic” scientific “thought police” are trying to keep some brave, innovative idea out of classrooms because they somehow fear for THEIR “scientific orthodoxy”.
The reason ID isn’t able to be taught in biology class is the same reason that flat-earth belief isn’t taught in geology class, or that Holocaust Denial isn’t taught in history. It’s just plain WRONG.
Going all Monty Python and crying “Help! Help! I’m being repressed!” won’t make ID right.
Those are just the facts. I know that embracing some kooky conspiracy theory probably flatters the innate need of religionists to feel like victims all the time, but like most everything else that lurks in the murky minds of believers, it’s simply imaginary.
The solution is simple: Produce some scientific research that actually backs up a valid Theory of Intelligent Design, and have it withstand peer review…and voila, it will enter the mainstream of scientific ideas!
Otherwise, all the whining and projecting in the world won’t change facts. Sorry. Right now, the weight of scientific evidence continues to support evolutionary biology, and continue to leave ID out on the sidewalk with a tin cup.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7339508.stm
My mistake in the previous post. I attributed a quote to phreedm when it was really from alexatheist responding to phreedm. Still, my points stand. Consider my comment in support of alex’s response.
Or better yet…
Someone show me evidence of the above…
Creation is an origin myth. Already noted are the gaps
? The sun was created on the fourth 4th day. No sun; no solar system.
How can there have been three 24-hour solar days (including morning and evening) without a solar system?
? The geographical name places mentioned in Genesis 2 (Tigris and Euphrates) would have been erased by the flood.
There’s more…
? Note also that the earth produced vegetation without the sun; without photosynthesis. Scientific?
? Genesis contains two creation accounts; Genesis 2:4b to 2:25 is thought to have been written first. Genesis 1:1 through 2:4a, second.
? As the result of Adam’s sin, death entered into the world; a part of the curse. Yet Adam ate prior to the fall. What did he eat? Vegetation that would have died upon consumption.
? Pain and suffering also existed prior to the fall. Note that Eve’s pain in child bearing was “multiplied” from the Hebrew רבה which means “greatly increase.” To increase something must exist.
? Layers of ice in the polar regions reveal age, must like the rings of a tree. The prove an old earth far exceeding Ussher’s 4004 BC creation date.
And on it goes…
Comment from: mw66
Ok…prove that it’s wrong. Scientifically…not emotionally…
Ok…prove that it’s wrong. Scientifically…not emotionally…
See above post.
phreedm
what version of creation would you teach, each religion has its own.these subjects are best left for college level studies when minds are more mature and a person is more likely to be well grounded in their own faith tradition.pastors jumping in on scientific subjects is no better than untrained persons preaching from the pulpit.
the question we should ask ourselves is why is it important to us the individual personally how life was created.will the answer affect our moral interaction with others.
Actually phreedum your analogy is flawed since the fact is that gay people are real as evidenced by people like myself whereas ID is not real as evidenced by the total lack of evidence. However to indulge you I will say that there are many studies linking sexual orientation, both homosexual and heterosexual, to genetics and these can be easily accessed by Googling some key terms. The most famous of these studies involve fruit flies, twins, handedness, and hair whorls. The available data indicates a very strong genetic component to sexual orientation but genetics is a relativley new science so there is still a lot more work to be done. In any case, phreedum, comparing sexual orientation’s genetic basis to imtelligent design is just another example of your utter lack of an understanding of science.
ID is an untestable assertion and is therefore of less value than a testable assertion that is tested and found to be invalid. Somehow this little FACT continues to escape xian idiots and their NoGodBlog representative Phreeky. Seriously, what is wrong with their brains?
I think most everyone here would agree creationists are uneducated hicks. For your entertainment I wanted to stop by to give you all an example of a 100% pure creationist hick. This is a comment about an article in the Miami Herald about Sen. Ronda Storms and her religious attack against science education in Florida:
http://tinyurl.com/539fez
Here’s a sample and there’s a lot more stupidity where this came from:
“There for they have taught these lies to our kids with ONE purpose, and that was to take GOD OUT of the schools. So who actully had and still has an AGENDA. Not those who are afraid of teaching real Science or letting our KIDS think for themselfs ,and letting them decide if they were created by a creator .”
If I lived in FL, I would send my son/daughter to school highly coached to assert that the earth was created by millworms. The teacher had better create a module and spend at least several classes on the subject, and there better be a quiz!
If not, I would cry “Oppression!” and would take it to the legal level.
Millworm creationism would be taught or else!!!
Alex…
No…your answer is flawed. Simply because you exist, and because your gay does not answer the question…
Are individuals born gay…?
You point to fruit fly studies as proof? This from an elitist who brags about college level biology studies?
The truth is you can’t point to one study…
Therefore according to your own criteria the idea that someone being born gay should not be discussed within our educational system…if and until there’s one study which stands up to the rigors of the scientific method…
Your words…not mine…
But of course since you’re an elitist you only apply your words to others…not yourself…