An article in today’s Florida Today focuses on what evolution in the public schools means to Brevard County. The majority of quotes in the story are outstanding, and, quite frankly, reality based. Here’s a sample.
Superintendent Richard DiPatri said the change wouldn’t make a difference in Brevard Public Schools, where evolution already is taught and the curriculum is aligned with national science education standards.
…
In March 2006, a review committee found that the discussion of divine origins in a ninth-grade Biology I book was “unacceptable for inclusion in a biology textbook.” After almost a month of heated public debate, the Brevard County School Board voted to strike any mention of intelligent design from texts.…
“Considering using public funds to teach intelligent design or creationism is appalling and a disservice to all of our kids,” said Scott Mariani, an engineer at Northrop Grumman and a father of two toddlers who will attend Gemini Elementary in Melbourne Beach. “Those ideas don’t prepare them for work in the real world or the scientific work force.”Ginger Davis, a science resource teacher for the Brevard district, said students participate in labs where theories of evolution can be proven.
“Evolutions is much more than just that one little piece of Darwin,” she said. “It is a fundamental scientific concept that you can observe in a lab, but people tend to want to focus on that little narrow piece.”
But then there is this weird bit in the story:
Some Florida school districts still incorporate intelligent design in their curriculum.
Superintendent Oscar Howard of Taylor County, a Panhandle district with about 3,300 students, has spoken against teaching just evolution, arguing that evolution has not been proven.
School districts in Baker and Holmes counties also include ideas on creationism in their science courses.
Are those statement based on verifiable fact, or just a misunderstanding of what the whole anti-evolution resolution thing is about? [Update: I e-mailed the reporter, Megan Downs, and it’s apparent that no one told Downs that creationism is actually being taught. Downs said: “I can see how my article could be misleading. I will try to issue a correction/clarification today.”]
I am still amazed that these people don’t understand evolution is not about how life started, but how it evolved once it did start. This is an indictment of our educational system. People cannot tell the difference between EVOLUTION and ABIOGENISIS ( how life began ) ugh. No wonder we cannot compete in the global market.
This doesn’t come as the slightest surprise. The religious right in Florida works this way. They don’t care whether what they’re doing is illegal according to federal law. They’ll keep right on doing it with the attitude that that’s the way they do things, and since it’s the way they’ve always done things it’s the right way for things to be done. It’s a special kind of arrogance that takes hold when religious fundamentalists are the majority in some locale, particularly in the south. That’s what people like Pam Barton was saying when she talked about how Northeast Florida is a “Christian community” and David Owens said that the state was interfering in “what should be a local issue.”
More about that mentality here.
Evolution = “Every aspect of science opposed to God’s Truth!”
Thus, creationists references to such preposterous constructs as “Evolutionary physics”, “Evolutionary astronomy” and, my personal favorite, “Evolutionary mathematics”.
“Evolutions is much more than just that one little piece of Darwin,†she said. “It is a fundamental scientific concept that you can observe in a lab, but people tend to want to focus on that little narrow piece.â€
Contrary to the obstructionist hype, evolution cannot be confirmed in the lab. It is a fundamental fact that, when one trys to explain earthly phenomena without considering the Creatior, the findings will alway be in error.
There is a new discipline being introduced to the Florida school board inquiry about the exclusive teaching of the dogma of Darwinism. The discipline is physical science, the old science of cause and effect.
[Remainder of post erased by admin. Text was erased because it’s nothing more than blatant advertising. All future posts of this nature will be treated in the same manner.]
Quoted from Mr. Parsons above – “It is a fundamental fact that, when one trys to explain earthly phenomena without considering the Creatior, the findings will alway be in error” (spelling errors his, not mine)
Oh, really? Is that the official position? You cannot possibly expect us to take a statement like that and form our educational standards around it. Exactly where were you taught this fundamental fact? I have to tell you, I haven’t heard anyone say something that dumb in quite a while. I suppose you should be proud…
He’s the author. It’s an advertisement. Trying to sell to the wrong crowd I think.
C. David Parsons
You are nothing but a disingenuous peddler of perverse pseudoscience, your sole objective is to shill your mindless crap to any poor misinformed
sucker you can make a buck from.
You are the laughingstock of the science community,go away and prostitute your wares on some right wing fundie site that will nod their
tiny minds in agreement with you,afterall,other than the money that’s your real agenda is it not?
Perhaps everyone should request a complimentary copy for their recycling bin. That would help give the false impression that their junk science is spreading and take a little chunk out of Quest for Right’s budget at the same time.
Is there any way to block this guy?!
As a Brit who watches the US scene, I am often puzzled by your claims for Freedom of Speech as enshrined in the – is it ‘First Ammendment?’ In particulr the ongoing attacks on anything that even hints at religioun in schools and public institutions. Let me say, I am totally in agreement with religion not being taught in schools. That’s because most of what is taught is false. That goes for the situation in the UK as well.
Freedom of Speech works both ways, or I thought it did. But obviously it does not. Okay, the non-religious do not want public prayer or Bible reading. Fine, I see no problem there. But then, maybe there are those who do want public prayer and Bible reading. Why are they denied their right’s. Or doesn’t the US Constitution allow that. Maybe it is a good job we don’t have one here in the UK as we have enough retrictions on what we can say and do as it is.
Actually, we do have public prayer – what we don’t have is *mandatory* public prayer. We do cover the bible in school – but it’s in philosophy, literature, and similar courses, not science.
The religious can froth at the mouth as much as they want – but we don’t believe that their freedom of speech includes the freedom to pick and choose what our science teachers cover in class for all our children.