Skeptical News for 20 June 2008
Archive of previous NTS Skeptical News listings
The antievolution bill in Louisiana is on the governor's desk, and the Louisiana Coalition for Science is calling upon him to veto it.
LOUISIANA CREATIONISM BILL IS ON GOVERNOR'S DESK
On June 16, 2008, the Louisiana Senate approved Senate Bill 733 as amended by the state House of Representatives. If Governor Bobby Jindal signs the bill or does not veto the bill within 20 days, it will become law. Will Sentell of the Baton Rouge Advocate reported (June 17, 2008), "Opponents, mostly outside the State Capitol, contend the legislation would inject creationism and other religious themes into public schools. However, the Senate voted 36-0 without debate to go along with the same version of the proposal that the House passed last week 94-3."
The Advocate explains that the bill "would allow science teachers to use supplemental materials, in addition to state-issued textbooks, on issues like evolution, global warming and human cloning. The aim of such materials, the bill says, is to promote 'critical thinking skills, logical analysis and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied,' including evolution." The bill's chief sponsor, Senator Ben Nevers (D-District 12), explained: "I just believe that it is important that supplemental scientific information be able to be brought into the school system."
But the bill's opponents worry that it will bring other things into the schools. The Reverend Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State told The Advocate that the bill "is clearly designed to smuggle religion into the science classroom, and that's unwise and unconstitutional." In an open letter to Governor Jindal, the Louisiana Coalition for Science called on the governor to veto the bill, describing SB 733 "a thinly disguised attempt to advance the 'Wedge Strategy' of the Discovery Institute (DI), a creationist think tank that is collaborating with the LA Family Forum to get intelligent design (ID) creationism into LA public school science classes."
Paul Johnson, a science curriculum specialist for Terrebonne Parish, told the Houma Courier (June 14, 2008) that he worried that the law, if enacted, would open science classes to opinions and ideas without scientific warrant. He explained that students already come to class with misconceptions about evolution, adding, "We fight misconceptions and try to replace them with fact." NCSE's Joshua Rosenau told the paper that proponents of the bill have "been organizing for a while now and laying the ground work for this ... Everyone is made to feel if they dont go along with that agenda they will be painted as not devout enough."
Appearing on CBS's Face the Nation program on June 15, 2008, Governor Jindal replied to a question about his support of teaching intelligent design in the schools by saying, "I don't think this is something the federal or state government should be imposing its views on local school districts. I think local school boards should be in a position of deciding the curricula and also deciding what students should be learning. I don't think students learn by us withholding information from them. Some want only to teach intelligent design, some only want to teach evolution. I think both views are wrong, as a parent."
Pressed for his personal views on the matter, Jindal added, "I personally think that the life, human life and the world we live in wasn't created accidentally. I do think that there's a creator. I'm a Christian. I do think that God played a role in creating not only earth, but mankind. Now, the way that he did it, I'd certainly want my kids to be exposed to the very best science . I don't want them to be -- I don't want any facts or theories or explanations to be withheld from them because of political correctness. The way we're going to have smart, intelligent kids is exposing them to the very best science and let them not only decide, but also let them contribute to that body of knowledge."
Meanwhile, Louisiana's science teachers are reportedly unenthusiastic about the bill. Brenda Nixon of Louisiana State University, who works with the Louisiana Science Teachers Association, told Science (June 20, 2008) that "We have had overwhelming support from our science teacher members, who don't want to see this approved." Nixon noted also that the state's teachers already have the freedom to incorporate outside materials that are consistent with the state framework. Barbara Forrest told Science, "The only thing this bill does is give a green light for the school board to protect teachers who want to use creationist supplementary materials."
In addition to the Louisiana Coalition for Science, organizations opposing SB 733 include the American Institute of Biological Sciences, the American Ornithologists Union, the American Society of Mammalogists, the Botanical Society of America, the Natural Science Collections Alliance, the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology, the Society of Systematic Biologists, and the Society for the Study of Evolution; the American Association for the Advancement of Science; Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the ACLU of Louisiana, and the Center for American Progress.
For the story in the Baton Rouge Advocate, visit:
http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/politics/20004849.html
For the LCFS open letter to Gov. Jindal, visit:
http://lasciencecoalition.org/2008/06/17/jindal-veto-sb-733/
For Jindal's appearance on Face the Nation (video), visit:
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=4181787n&channel=/sections/ftn/videoplayer3460.shtml
For Jindal's appearance on Face the Nation (PDF transcript), visit:
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/FTN_061508.pdf
For the story in Science (subscription required), visit:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/320/5883/1572a
For AIBS's letter to Gov. Jindal, visit:
According to the bill, upon the request of a local school district, the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education must "allow and assist teachers, principals, and other school administrators to create and foster an environment ... that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning."
The bill also allows school districts to permit teachers to "use supplemental textbooks and other instructional materials to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an objective manner," although the state board of education could veto those materials.
The bill expressly states that it "shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine."
The Science Education Act is similar to an academic freedom policy adopted in 2006 by the Ouachita Parish School District.
This year, six states have considered academic freedom legislation designed to protect teachers who teach both the scientific strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary theory. Many of the bills have been adapted from sample legislation developed by Discovery Institute, including a model statute posted online at www.academicfreedompetition.com .
At least nine states currently have state or local policies that protect, encourage, and sometimes even require teachers to discuss the scientific evidence for and against Darwinian evolution.
SOURCE Discovery Institute
Known as the Louisiana Science Education Act, the bill now goes to the Louisiana Senate for final concurrence. The Senate previously passed the bill by a vote of 35-0, but a minor amendment adopted by the House means that the Senate must pass the bill again.
A counterattack for evolution
http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/bal-al.bk.review15jun15,0,3019508.story
By Glenn C. Altschuler | special to the sun
June 15, 2008
Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul
By Kenneth R. Miller
Viking / 244 pages / $25.95
In 1794, Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier, the father of modern chemistry, became a casualty of the French Revolution. Arrested and sentenced to death, he pleaded for time to complete his research. "The Republic has no need of scientists," the judge replied. Lavoisier was beheaded, his body thrown into a mass grave.
Although scientists fared much better in the 19th and 20th centuries, millions of people remain uneasy with or hostile to them. With its emphasis on chance and change (through mutation and natural selection), they believe, modern science undermines faith in an orderly world in which everything has been foreseen and foreordained. By God.
With support from the Bush administration, anti-evolutionists have gained the initiative in the struggle for America's "scientific soul." But the issue has been joined. The books under review are three among many in which scientists defend the persuasive power and practical utility of scientific reason in terms accessible to lay audiences. Without the consent of informed citizens, the authors remind us, American preeminence in science cannot endure.
The Drunkard's Walk is an informative, irreverent and iconoclastic investigation of the role of randomness in daily life. Drawing on studies in psychology, probability and statistics, Leonard Mlodinow, a professor of physics at the California Institute of Technology, demonstrates that by failing to give pride of place to unforeseeable or fluctuating forces, most of us make faulty assumptions about causes and effects.
At times, Mlodinow grants too much power to randomness. Sometimes success is the residue of industry, intelligence and good judgment. Nonetheless, by illuminating "illusions of patterns and patterns of illusions," The Drunkard's Walk provides a humbling reminder that we should not judge others - or ourselves - solely by the results that are "achieved."
While Mlodinow seems indifferent to the implications of randomness for the existence of God, George Vaillant, a psychoanalyst and research psychiatrist at Harvard, believes that spirituality has a neurobiological basis. Composed of "positive emotions" - love, joy, hope, forgiveness, compassion and awe - spirituality, he claims, is as common to human beings as breathing.
Spiritual Evolution gives neither aid nor comfort to religious traditionalists. Where spirituality is hard-wired into the limbic brain, religion is an artifact of culture, cognitive rather than emotional. Spirituality enhances empathy and trust. Religion promotes mistrust and division.
The "mere mention of spirituality," Vaillant acknowledges, leads some of his colleagues "to roll their eyes with disbelief." Spiritual Evolution is unlikely to convert the skeptics. "Positive emotions" may reflect an advance in cultural evolution. But it takes, well, a leap of faith to use the positive emotions as proof that life has "meaning" - or to bridge the gap between science and religion.
That gap is growing, according to Kenneth Miller, a professor of biology at Brown University. Creationists, "now re-branded as proponents of Intelligent Design," have had considerable success in shaping the public debate about evolution. No longer relying explicitly on the Bible, I.D. advocates insist that "irreducibly complex systems" in nature require a designer. And that Darwinian descriptions of the origins of life are just theories, not facts. A solid majority of Americans agrees with them.
In Only A Theory, Miller, the lead witness for the prosecution in the landmark evolution case in Dover, Pa., in 2005, demolishes the assertions of advocates of Intelligent Design. Given the vast number of extinct species, he writes, their designer seems persistent but not very skillful. Citing an avalanche of evidence, Miller demonstrates that systems identified by I.D. as "irreducibly complex" aren't. Though I.D. trumpets its connections to information theory, biochemistry and molecular biology, Miller concludes, as did Judge John Jones in Kitzmiller v. Dover, it rests, ultimately, on ignorance. Extending an olive branch to religious Americans, Miller suggests that evolution and faith aren't really in conflict because all of nature is part of God's providential plan. In this sense, he believes, the conviction that "the universe had us in mind from the very beginning" is a "perfectly valid metaphor."
Intelligent Design ideologues are no more satisfied with a metaphor than evangelicals were at the Scopes trial. And so the "evolution wars" rage on, and "bad science" continues to permeate public policy.
Glenn C. Altschuler is the Thomas and Dorothy Litwin professor of American studies at Cornell University.
Copyright © 2008, The Baltimore Sun
Newsweek Web Exclusive
The battle over evolution is moving beyond the courtroom and into summer camp. The Christian Camp and Conference Association says 50 percent of its member camps—which include summer camps and year-round after-school programs reaching 6 million kids every year—have a science curriculum about God's Creation. A Christian camping environment "allows us to bring kids to a wonderful knowledge of what's going on in Creation and in God's web of life," says John Ashmen, the group's vice president. At the summer camp at Timber-lee Christian Center in East Troy, Wis., for example, campers can go on a seven-room "Creation Walk," where each room showcases one of the Bible's seven days of Creation. Says Karen Good, outdoor education director at Timber-lee, "The curriculum is designed to open their eyes so when they go back to school [and hear about evolution] they say, 'Oh, that sounds goofy!' "
Other camps are fighting back by offering summer programs teaching evolution. In late June, the Unitarian Universalist Church in Fresno, Calif., sponsored the fourth season of Chalice Camp, a science camp that uses song, dance and drama to teach children about scientific discoveries about human origins. This is the inaugural season of Camp Inquiry, a weeklong camp for children 7 to 16 in western New York. For the camp's Natural History Day, the 25 campers will participate in the "Creationism vs. Evolution" challenge, where they'll go on a nature hike to learn about adaptation and evolution, take plaster casts of animal tracks to start a discussion of how humans are related to certain animal lines and study the arguments against intelligent design. Camp Quest, an atheist camp with several branches throughout the United States, teaches campers about evolution, as well as beekeeping, astronomy and the separation of church and state. "Our sense is that evolution isn't being taught enough [in schools] or that people are becoming afraid to teach it," says Chris Lindstrom, director of Camp Quest West.
Research shows that even camps that don't have a particular spiritual mission might still increase spirituality in children: a 2005 American Camp Association study found that parents notice a statistically signif-icant increase in children's spirituality levels after they've attended camp. Getting the kids outdoors apparently makes them appreciate nature and wonder who or what created it.
—Rebecca Phillips and Dena Ross
© 2006
CREATIONIST BILL PASSED BY LOUISIANA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
On June 11, 2008, with less than two weeks left in the legislative calendar, the Louisiana House of Representatives passed Senate Bill 733, a bill which opens the door to creationism in public school science classes. The bill, sponsored in the House by Rep. Frank Hoffman and in the Senate by Sen. Ben Nevers, purports to promote "critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning."
The Associated Press (June 12, 2008) reports, "The Senate already has agreed to the bill, but it heads back to that chamber for approval of a provision that would allow the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education to prohibit supplemental materials it deems inappropriate. Nevers said he will ask the Senate to approve the amendment. He stressed that the amendment does not require BESE to review all the materials. The state board would only step in if someone raised a question about whether the material was appropriate." Meanwhile, the Alexandria Town Talk (June 8, 2008) observes, "State lawmakers are looking at a hectic two weeks as the 2008 legislative session draws to a close with many major issues yet to be settled." Outstanding legislation includes next year's budget, infrastructure construction bills, a voucher proposal for New Orleans public schools, and other controversial legislation.
As The (Lafayette) Advocate (June 12, 2008) explains, "Ignoring threats of a lawsuit, the Louisiana House voted for legislation Wednesday that could change the way evolution is taught in public schools. The measure, Senate Bill 733, failed to generate a single question, passed 94-3 and appears poised for final approval. 'If this new law is used to promote religion in Louisiana public schools, I can guarantee there will be legal action,' said Barry Lynn, executive director of [Americans United for Separation of Church and State]. In 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Louisiana law that required equal time on creationism when evolution is taught in public schools." In a press release issued on June 11, 2008, Lynn added, "Louisiana students deserve better, and Louisiana taxpayers should not have their money squandered on this losing effort."
Louisiana Coalition for Science, a grassroots group recently founded to advocate for accurate science education, decried the vote in its own press release (June 11, 2008). Barbara Forrest, a founding member of the group and a member of NCSE's board of directors, said, "The Louisiana legislature tried to force creationism into public schools in 1981, and they lost in the U. S. Supreme Court. The Discovery Institute, a national creationist organization, and the Louisiana Family Forum are using the same old tricks, but with new labels. In Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District in 2005, I showed that intelligent design was cooked up as a new name for the same old creationist arguments, and the strategy behind this bill is no different. Despite their denials, even the bill's backers know that SB 733 is a creationist bill written in creationist code language." She concluded by saying, "Now that the House has passed the bill, the Senate has one more chance to do the right thing. The entire country is watching. They should reject this bill and let teachers do their jobs. This bill is being pushed by creationist groups and does nothing to help Louisiana, our teachers, or our children."
In the Louisiana Coalition for Science press release, Patsye Peebles drew on her years of experience as a biology teacher to oppose the bill. "I was a biology teacher for 22 years, and I never needed the legislature to tell me how to present anything," she said. "This bill doesn't solve any of the problems classroom teachers face, and it will make it harder for us to keep the focus on accurate science in science classrooms. Evolution isn't scientifically controversial, and we don't need the legislature substituting its judgment for the scientists and science teachers who actually know the subject."
If the bill passes the Senate, it is uncertain how Governor Jindal will respond. The Washington Times (June 12, 2008) reports, "A spokeswoman for Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal would not say whether he will sign the bill, saying only that he will review it when it gets to his desk."
For the text of SB 733 (PDF), visit:
http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/streamdocument.asp?did=482728
For the Associated Press story (via the New Orleans Times-Picayune), visit:
http://www.nola.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/news-39/1213222164265360.xml&storylist=louisiana
For the Alexandria Town Talk story, visit:
http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080608/NEWS01/806080303/1002
For the Lafayette Advocate story, visit:
http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/politics/19813589.html
For the press release from Americans United, visit:
http://www.au.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr009=1ecizlso04.app7b&abbr=pr&page=NewsArticle&id=9881
For the press release from the Louisiana Coalition for Science, visit:
http://lasciencecoalition.org/2008/06/12/reject_sb_733/
For the Washington Times story, visit:
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jun/12/new-front-opens-on-evolution-wars/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Louisiana, visit:
http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=LA
KEN MILLER ON SCIENCE FRIDAY AND COLBERT REPORT
NCSE Supporter Kenneth R. Miller will appear June 13, 2008 -- today! -- on the second hour of the nationally broadcast NPR program Science Friday to discuss his new book, Only a Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul (Viking, 2008), of which Michael Ruse writes, "Ken Miller's new book, Only a Theory, is everything we have come to expect from him -- informed, witty, and above all deeply serious about matters of concern to us all. He takes so-called intelligent design theory apart, piece by piece, showing it for the sham that it is. In its stead, Miller makes a very strong argument for the truth and beauty of evolutionary thinking and begs that we not keep this wonderful science from our children." Check local listings for the station in your area. Also, Miller will appear on Comedy Central's The Colbert Report on June 16, 2008.
For information about Science Friday, visit:
http://www.sciencefriday.com/
For information about The Colbert Report, visit:
http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_colbert_report/index.jhtml
To buy Only a Theory from Amazon.com (and benefit NCSE), visit:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/067001883X/nationalcenter02
A SECOND ANTIEVOLUTION BILL IN MICHIGAN
Senate Bill 1361, introduced in the Michigan Senate on June 3, 2008, and referred to the Senate Committee on Education, is yet another "academic freedom" bill aimed at undermining the teaching of evolution. Identical to House Bill 6027, which is still in the House Committee on Education, SB 1361 would, if enacted, require state and local administrators "to create an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that encourages pupils to explore scientific questions, learn about scientific evidence, develop critical thinking skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues" and "to assist teachers to find more effective ways to present the science curriculum in instances where that curriculum addresses scientific controversies" by allowing them "to help pupils understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories pertinent to the course being taught."
In a press release dated May 20, 2008, Michigan Citizens for Science blasted HB 6027, writing that "it does a disservice to teachers, school administrators and local school boards by urging them to incorporate material into science classes that is at odds with well-established science. The bill itself notes that 'some teachers may be unsure of the expectations concerning how they should present information on such subjects,' yet it does nothing to clear up that uncertainty. It does not spell out what ... 'the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories' are that teachers are supposed to discuss and that lack of definition is intentional. This is a recipe for disaster, ushering teachers and school boards into a Dover trap, by inviting them to include material that not only has no scientific basis, but has already been declared in Federal court to be unconstitutional to teach. HB 6027 ushers schools down a path that will inevitably lead to expensive and divisive court battles. This legislation should be rejected."
For the text of SB 361, visit:
http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?2008-SB-1361
For Michigan Citizens for Science's press release, visit:
http://michigancitizensforscience.org/main/nfblog/2008/05/20/mcfs-press-release-on-hb-6027/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Michigan, visit:
http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=MI
EDITORIALS ON THE IMPENDING STRUGGLE IN TEXAS
In the wake of the June 4, 2008, report in The New York Times on the impending struggle over the presence of "strengths and weaknesses" language in the Texas state science standards, the Times addressed the issue editorially, writing (June 7, 2008), "The Texas State Board of Education is again considering a science curriculum that teaches the 'strengths and weaknesses' of evolution, setting an example that several other states are likely to follow. This is code for teaching creationism." Observing that "[e]very student who hopes to understand the scientific reality of life will sooner or later need to accept the elegant truth of evolution as it has itself evolved," the editorial concluded, "If the creationist view prevails in Texas, students interested in learning how science really works and what scientists really understand about life will first have to overcome the handicap of their own education."
Closer to the scene, the Houston Chronicle (June 7, 2008) explained that "strengths and weaknesses" language is "a 'teach the controversy' approach, whereby religion is propounded under the guise of scientific inquiry," adding, "Given the recent comments of both the chairman and the vice chairman of the board, there is ample reason for alarm." Rebuking Don McLeroy, who described the debate to the Times as between "two systems of science" -- "You've got a creationist system and a naturalist system" -- the editorial commented, "What students really need is to be able to study science from materials that have not been hijacked by creationists whose personal agenda includes muddying the science curriculum. Creationism is not a 'system of science,'" and ended by asking, "What chance do Texas students have of competing in the 21st century if their learning of science is warped and stunted by such benighted leadership?"
For the editorial in The New York Times, visit:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/07/opinion/07sat3.html
For the editorial in the Houston Chronicle, visit:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/5823928.html
For the June 4, 2008, story in The New York Times, visit:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/04/us/04evolution.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit:
http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=TX
Thanks for reading! And as always, be sure to consult NCSE's web site: http://www.ncseweb.org where you can always find the latest news on evolution education and threats to it.
Sincerely,
Glenn Branch
Deputy Director
National Center for Science Education, Inc.
420 40th Street, Suite 2
Oakland, CA 94609-2509
510-601-7203 x305
fax: 510-601-7204
800-290-6006
branch@ncseweb.org
http://www.ncseweb.org
Not in Our Classrooms: Why Intelligent Design Is Wrong for Our Schools
http://www.ncseweb.org/nioc
Eugenie C. Scott's Evolution vs. Creationism
http://www.ncseweb.org/evc
NCSE's work is supported by its members. Join today!
http://www.ncseweb.org/membership.asp
Bryan Fischer Bryan Fischer June 11, 2008
Contrary to popular belief, as historian David Barton points out, the theory of evolution was around long before Charles Darwin. As far back as the 6th century B.C., Greek writers Thales and Anaximander had propounded the theory centuries before the birth of Christ. Aristotle, influenced by his intellectual forbears, also advocated a form of evolution.
Other ancient writers like Diogenes, Empedocles, Democritus, and Lucretius, all writing before the time of Christ, added variations to the theory, including such things as survival of the fittest, natural selection, and mutability of the species.
Philosophers Renee Descartes in the 17th century and Immanuel Kant in the 18th century had argued for the theory of a gradual origin of the solar system as an alternative to instantaneous creation.
According to Dr. Henry Osborn, curator of the American Museum of Natural History, the Founding Fathers lived in what he calls the third of history's four periods of evolution. Osborn lists almost three dozen influential writers of the colonial period who supported evolutionary theory to one degree or another. All, you will note, prior to the advent of Darwin.
All through the history of human thought, the debate over the origins of man has been a debate between two competing theories: a theistic and non-theistic explanation. Theism attributes origins to God, while non-theism attributes it to nature.
The point here is that the Founders were not in fact ignorant of the theory of evolution. It had been around for 2400 years by the time they produced the Declaration of Independence with its flat and unambiguous proclamation that man is a created being, not an evolved one, and that there is a Creator who is the source of our civil rights.
Even Thomas Paine, the most anti-religious of those who shaped the thinking of America at the time of the War for Independence (he said the Bible is "a book of lies, wickedness, and blasphemy"), rebuked the French educational system for teaching science and natural philosophy apart from any reference to "the Being who is the Author of them," going on to say that "all the principles of science are of divine origin." How is it, he said, "that when we study the works of God in creation, we stop short and do not think of God?"
Benjamin Franklin, one of the few deists involved in producing the Declaration, is worth noting since he, along with Thomas Jefferson, was likely the least orthodox of the Founders. And since Jefferson actually wrote the Declaration, we know what he thought on the subject.
Here is Franklin on the subject of origins: "It might be judged an affront to your understanding should I go about to prove this first principle: the existence of a Deity and that He is the Creator of the universe." He adds, "That the Deity is a being of great goodness appears in His giving life to so many creatures."
And again: "That He is a being of infinite power appears in His being able to form and compound such vast masses of matter (as this earth, and the sun, and innumerable stars and planets)."
Franklin goes on, "[W]hat power must He possess, Who not only knows the nature of everything in the universe but can make things of new natures with the greatest ease and at His pleasure! Agreeing, then, that the world was at first made by a Being of infinite wisdom, goodness, and power, which Being we call God."
The point here is quite simple: you will hear some argue, falsely believing that the theory of evolution did not exist until Darwin, that if the Founders had only written the Declaration after being exposed to the theory of evolution, it might look different. Well, in point of fact, they did write the Declaration after being exposed to the theory of evolution, and it looks just fine.
Bryan Fischer is the Executive Director of the Idaho Values Alliance, whose mission is to make Idaho the friendliest place in the world to raise a family. He has an undergraduate degree in Philosophy (from Stanford University) and a graduate degree in theology.
© Copyright 2008 by Bryan Fischer
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/fischer/080611
Baton Rouge -- By a vote of 94-3, Louisiana's House of Representatives today passed an academic freedom bill that would protect teachers and school districts who wish to promote critical thinking and objective discussion about evolution and other scientific topics.
There was no vocal opposition, and the floor speech by Rep. Frank Hoffman made clear that the bill was about science, not religion.
"This bill promotes good science education by protecting the academic freedom of science teachers," said Dr. John West, Vice President for Public Policy and Legal Affairs at Discovery Institute. "Critics who claim the bill promotes religion instead of science either haven't read the bill or are putting up a smokescreen to divert attention from the censorship that has been going on."
Posted by Anika Smith on June 11, 2008 5:13 PM | Permalink
Posted on: June 12, 2008 12:46 AM, by Josh Rosenau
SB 733, a creationist bill in the Louisiana legislature, was approved on a lopsided vote in the Louisiana House of Representatives today. It now moves back to the Senate, where small differences between this bill and the Senate version must be reconciled before it can go to Governor Jindal. Jindal is a leading contender for John McCain's vice presidential nomination.
In response to this and other attacks on the teaching of evolution in Louisiana, the indefatigable Barbara Forrest (author of Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design) and other activists in the Pelican State have organized a group to advocate for accurate science education.
Here's their take on this event:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
New group stands up for sound science education in Louisiana
LA Coalition for Science decries House support for SB 733, calls for Senate to reject bill
Baton Rouge, LA, June 11, 2008 – In response to numerous attacks on science education in the Bayou State, concerned parents, teachers and scientists are getting organized. The new group Louisiana Coalition for Science calls upon the Senate to oppose SB 733, a bill which will open the door to creationism in public schools.
Barbara Forrest, a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University and a founding member of the Louisiana Coalition for Science (LCFS), says, "The legislature shouldn't be allowing creationists to undermine Louisiana public schools. The House of Representatives just gave the Religious Right a green light to use other people's children for their own agenda." Forrest is the author of Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design and has served as an expert witness on the issue of intelligent design creationism. "The Louisiana legislature tried to force creationism into public schools in 1981, and they lost in the U. S. Supreme Court. The Discovery Institute, a national creationist organization, and the Louisiana Family Forum are using the same old tricks, but with new labels. In Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District in 2005, I showed that intelligent design was cooked up as a new name for the same old creationist arguments, and the strategy behind this bill is no different. Despite their denials, even the bill's backers know that SB 733 is a creationist bill written in creationist code language." The 1987 Supreme Court decision in Edwards v. Aguillard overturned a Louisiana law requiring teachers to "balance" the teaching of evolution with creationism. In the Kitzmiller case, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled that intelligent design is a form of creationism and that teaching it is an unconstitutional entanglement of religion with the state.
Patsye Peebles, a veteran biology teacher from Baton Rouge and a founding member of the Louisiana Coalition for Science, agrees that the bill should be rejected. "I was a biology teacher for 22 years, and I never needed the legislature to tell me how to present anything. This bill doesn't solve any of the problems classroom teachers face, and it will make it harder for us to keep the focus on accurate science in science classrooms. Evolution isn't scientifically controversial, and we don't need the legislature substituting its judgment for the scientists and science teachers who actually know the subject."
SB 733 lists evolution as an issue deserving of special scrutiny. Scientificorganizations, including the National Academy of Sciences, the American Institute of Biological Sciences, and the National Association of Biology Teachers have spoken out against this tactic of singling evolution out for criticism.
Betsy Irvine, a Presbyterian minister in Baton Rouge, explains, "Evolution is very strong science, and its place in science class should be uncontroversial. Many Christian traditions, including Catholicism, acknowledge the compatibility of evolution and Christian faith. It is shameful to see people sowing division on this subject. The spirit behind these attacks isn't just bad science, it's bad theology. This bill is an attack on the millions of faithful Christians who accept evolution. The best way both to protect the teaching of science in our public schools and to show respect for the religious freedom of all Louisiana residents is to unequivocally reject SB 733."
Forrest, who testified against the bill before the House Education Committee, calls upon the Senate to reject the bill. "Now that the House has passed the bill, the Senate has one more chance to do the right thing. The entire country is watching. They should reject this bill and let teachers do their jobs. This bill is being pushed by creationist groups and does nothing to help Louisiana, our teachers, or our children. It's heartbreaking to see so few people willing to stand up for Louisiana."
Forrest also commends the three legislators Rep. Patricia Haynes Smith, Rep. Jean-Paul Morrell, and Rep. Karen Carter Peterson who had the courage and integrity to speak out for the children of Louisiana by voting against the bill. "These three legislators put principle over politics. What a shame that 94 others could not do the same thing."
Louisiana Coalition for Science is a grassroots group working to protect the teaching of science in Louisiana. See http://lasciencecoalition.org.
Contacts:
Barbara Forrest barbara.forrest@gmail.com 985-974-4244
Patsye Peebles patsye.peebles@gmail.com 225-336-9023
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Church-State Watchdog Group Warns Against Using Anti-Evolution Legislation To Advance Fundamentalism In The Classroom
The Louisiana House of Representatives today approved a measure that opens the door to teaching creationism in public schools, an action that is likely to spark litigation, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
Approved by a 94-3 vote, the so-called "Science Education Act" (SB 733) allows public school teachers to use "supplemental materials" when discussing evolution.
Americans United and other groups contend that those "supplemental materials" are likely to be anti-evolution books, DVDs and other items produced by fundamentalist Christian ministries. The measure is being pushed by the Louisiana Family Forum, the Discovery Institute and other Religious Right forces.
"It's time for Louisiana to step into the 21st century and stop trying to teach religion in public schools," said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. "Laws like this are an embarrassment."
Lynn noted that Louisiana legislators have repeatedly tried to water down the teaching of evolution. In the 1980s, the state passed a law mandating "balanced treatment" between evolution and creationism. The measure was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1987. Some parishes in Louisiana have voted to paste "disclaimers" in science books, casting doubt on evolution.
"If this new law is used to promote religion in Louisiana public schools, I can guarantee there will be legal action," Lynn said. "Louisiana students deserve better, and Louisiana taxpayers should not have their money squandered on this losing effort."
Americans United and allied organizations successfully brought a lawsuit against the teaching of "intelligent design" creationism in Dover, Pa., public schools in 2005. That case ended with the Dover school board being required to pay significant legal fees.
Louisiana's new proposal would permit teachers to introduce "supplemental textbooks and other instructional materials" when studying evolution, global warming, human cloning and the origin of life.
The measure now returns to the state Senate, which has already approved a previous version of the bill.
Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom.
James Owen for National Geographic News
June 10, 2008
A rare fossil found in Australia suggests dinosaurs were able to traverse the vast prehistoric continent of Gondwana, scientists report.
The hundred-million-year-old fossil belonged to a two-legged meat-eater, or theropod, that is closely related to Megaraptor namunhuaiquii, a giant, big-clawed carnivore from Argentina, says a team led by Nathan Smith of the University of Chicago's Field Museum.
The discovery could help redraw the world map during the dinosaur era, researchers add.
That's because the newfound Australian dinosaur shows that animals could travel across Gondwana during the Cretaceous period, about 145 to 65 million years ago.
This in turn suggests that Gondwana's Southern Hemisphere landmasses broke up later than traditionally thought.
Strange Forearm
The study is based on the unidentified theropod's arm bone, which was discovered at Dinosaur Cove in southeastern Australia in 1989.
The fossil has unique features that solidly link it to the South American Megaraptor that was first described in 1998, Smith said.
"Megaraptor has a huge hand with a big [clublike] claw and a very strange forearm, so if you had to pick one bone to refer to, then the ulna [arm bone] might be that bone," Smith said.
The length of the fossil bone, 7.6 inches (19.3 centimeters), suggests the dinosaur was about half the size of Megaraptor.
This size difference could be because it is a smaller species or because it was a juvenile, Smith said.
The still-nameless Australian specimen is described this week in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
Animal Exchange
Previously scientists thought that Australian animals were isolated from life on other Gondwana landmasses during most of the Cretaceous because of geography and climate, the study authors said.
"What we now have is demonstration that there must have been some kind of [animal] exchange between Australia prior to about a hundred million years ago," Smith said.
The new study also supports alternative models for the break up of Gondwana.
Traditionally it was thought that Africa and South America separated from eastern Gondwana—which included Antarctica, Australia, India, and Madagascar—some 138 million years ago.
The alternative models show Africa separating first.
The new study is not the final say on the matter, Smith emphasized.
But "I think in the future we are going to start seeing more [Australian fossils] that really demonstrate close affinities with other animals in South America."
(Related: "Giant Dino Found in Fossil 'Lost World'" [October 16, 2007].)
Little Evidence
Yet the Australian husband-and-wife team who led the excavation of the theropod fossil aren't convinced by the findings.
Patricia Vickers-Rich, a paleontologist at Monash University in Victoria, said "too much is being interpreted based on a single bone."
The Australian dinosaur fossil record is "very scanty," she said, so "rather sweeping generalizations about biogeography are made based on very little evidence."
Tom Rich, curator of vertebrate paleontology at Museum Victoria, echoed his wife's comments.
He added that other Australian dinosaurs from the same period seem to be more closely allied with those from Asia than South America.
The reason for this is a "complete mystery to me," he wrote in an email, since a map of the world of that time would show "Australia was much further from Asia than it is today."
But, he said, "fossils should not be identified on the basis of geography if one is going to do meaningful paleobiogeographic reconstructions—otherwise one will be going around in a very tight logical circle."
The Riches said that more theropod bones from the Dinosaur Cove area are currently being studied. "There could be half a dozen different theropods," Tom Rich said, though the condition of the fossil bones may not allow individual species to be identified.