Florida Citizens for Science

Florida has a new law this year that allows any citizen, even if he or she doesn’t have a child in the school system, to challenge contents of instructional materials used in the local public schools. Don’t like something you see in a textbook? File a complaint with your local school board and you may get your moment in the spotlight because the new law apparently requires that your complaint triggers a formal hearing complete with an appointed hearing officer. (See our long series of posts about the law at our Instructional Materials bills ’17 blog category.)

That law is now heading out for a test drive in Nassau County. The school board there received a complaint from Mr. Jay W. Shutt last month. I obtained this request via public records request. All bolding and other formatting are his.

PETITION FOR ACTION TO
THE NASSAU COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION

     My request to the Nassau County Board of Education is that we stop promoting this scientifically inadequate theory of evolution as fact to our students.  We should no longer purchase books teaching evolution as proven scientific fact or books that present evolution as proven fact.  Until the current books wear out, I propose placing a disclaimer sticker in the front of every textbook that promotes or presents evolution as proven fact.  The sticker could read something like the following:

This book contains references or information about evolution leading the reader to believe that evolution is proven fact.  Those who believe in Creation Science would argue that evolution is impossible because:  (1) evolution cannot explain the chance formation of  the first  living cell capable of cell division. (2) evolution cannot explain the complexities of life such as the human genome having 3 billion base pairs and the human brain being  capable of more than 20 million billion calculations/second. (3)evolution cannot explain the transfer of intelligence to genes.  For example, how does a pollen grain know when it is at the right place on  the right flower?  How does it know what to do next? And (4) evolution cannot explain the lack of transitional forms (missing links) in the fossil record.  There is not one “so called” missing link agreed upon by all highly qualified evolutionary scientists.

If the Nassau County Board of Education decides to adopt these measures, there is a strong possibility of a threatened lawsuit by groups such as the ACLU.  However, if our lawyer along with a highly qualified molecular biologist (who believes in intelligent design) sit down with these groups and explain that they will need to come up with reasonable, scientific, evolutionary explanations for the serious flaws in their theory, I doubt they would dare a court challenge.

The truth is that the extraordinary advances in microbiology and DNA knowledge have really eliminated evolution as a plausible explanation for life on planet earth.  As far back as 1953 Francis Crick and James Watson began mapping the human genome.  These men immediately became aware that the complexity of DNA far exceeded what evolutionary science could reasonably produce.

Francis Crick, who was an atheist and a believer in evolution, changed his position to accepting that extra-terrestrials brought life to our world.  I’m not sure if he later changed his beliefs, but he still needed to address the issue of “where did the alien DNA come from?”

This is a second reason I don’t think the Board’s decision will actually be challenged in court.  The new scenario that life on earth was brought here by extraterrestrials is about ready to be publically promoted.  It has been programmed into our literature and our films for many years.  UFO sightings and alien encounters have been exploding exponentially for the last few years.  Even the Catholic Church has astronomers on Mt. Graham observatories in Arizona searching the skies for the arrival of our “space brothers.”
All this is coming, and I don’t think organizations who oppose Creation Science will risk a certain defeat in a court of law on the issue of evolution being taught as fact in our schools.  More than likely, they will do everything they can to keep the Board’s decision from making state or national news.

The Board will probably postpone a final decision on this issue until a future date.  Maybe the Board would like to call in experts in the fields of evolution and molecular biology to gather more information.  However, I request that the Board set a timeline for whatever future measures it decides to take.  I make this request because, as human beings, we tend not to rush into areas which may cause us difficulties.  If timelines are not set, decisions may be put off almost indefinitely.   This issue is too important to allow unnecessary delays, and I hope the Board will elevate it to a high priority issue.  Thank you all for your time and consideration.

Sincerely yours,
Jay W. Shutt

Before the new instructional materials law, a request of this type could be dismissed with a polite “thank you for your time.” And that is the proper way to handle nonsense like Shutt’s letter. But no longer. The emails I received in response to my public records request indicate that a hearing was being arranged. An email to Mr. Shutt dated October 6 states:

Mr. Shutt, In follow-up to our conversation and my email to you yesterday, please let me know some dates and times you’re available for a hearing so that I can get it coordinated.  Also, it would be helpful if you would provide me an estimate of the amount of time you believe that you will need to make your presentation.

Thanks.
J. Ray Poole
Chief of Legal Services
Nassau County School District

I’m providing here links to the Word documents Shutt submitted: his request (EVOLUTIONARY PETITION FOR ACTION TO BOARD) that I copied above and his summary of the errors found in some Nassau County textbooks(Evolution is an Unscientific Theory). His summary starts with this:

Since the late 1960’s, and even before that in secular colleges, the theory of evolution has been taught as proven scientific fact.  That is the case in the 3 Nassau County science textbooks (1 middle school and 2 high school) I read.   All 3 textbooks, and almost all science textbooks at any level, begin with a faulty definition of evolution.

I invite you to read his ridiculous summary, which ends with this call to action:

We need to stop teaching a scientifically bankrupt theory which debases our self-worth and eliminates moral absolutes, as proven fact, to our children.  And we need to act as soon as possible!

It will be interesting to see how Nassau County handles this request. I can’t imagine this actually impacting the textbooks there, but you never know. I’m in the process of following up my first public records request with additional requests for updates. I believe that the hearing was scheduled for early November, and so I need to find out what happened. 

This is merely the first challenge. I guarantee more are to come in other counties. And they’ll likely be a bit more sophisticated than Mr. Shutts’ outdated flailing.

By the way, do you know what’s going on in YOUR school district?

Florida’s new Instructional Materials law is now featured in an article in the AAPG (American Association of Petroleum Geologists) Explorer: Science Curricula Under Threat?

The problem, according to those who think there is one, is in the first sentence of Florida House Bill 989.

“…allowing a resident of a county to challenge the use or adoption of instructional materials …”

This bill – and Gov. Rick Scott signed it into law – will allow any adult, in any school district, even if he or she doesn’t have a child attending school in district – or, for that matter, any school district in the state – to lodge a complaint over the teaching methods or materials in Florida’s public schools.

And while it could potentially pertain to any subject – Toni Morrison’s “Beloved,” for instance, has been called pornographic by some Florida parents who want it removed from public school curricula – the intent, critics contend, has to do with curtailing scientific inquiry, namely with regard to evolution and global climate change.

Sponsored by the Florida Citizens’ Alliance, whose website construes the fight in nothing less than biblical proportions, casting itself as David against the state’s Goliath, the organization purports to “advance a rebirth of liberty in Florida” and claims the bill is simply about choice and academic freedom.

Not all agree.

Jonathan P. Smith, president of Florida Citizens for Science, an advocacy group opposed to the measure, said HB 989 has ominous implications for education in the state.

“This bill will allow anyone – and I mean anyone – to object for any reason to current text books used in the state,” he said.

Make sure to go read the whole thing.

On the Gulf Coast of Florida, west of Gainesville, is Dixie County, which recently attracted attention from the National Coalition Against Censorship. According to the NCAC, the school district’s superintendent, Mike Thomas, issued a directive “which prohibits the school district from purchasing and/or using ‘instructional materials (textbooks, library books, classroom novels, etc.)’ that ‘contain any profanity, cursing, or inappropriate subject matter …’

The NCAC notes:

Excluding material because it may be subjectively considered “inappropriate” and “questionable” potentially affects a wide range of materials that address race, gender, religion, sex, political violence, history, science, politics, the environment, or any other issue on which people may disagree.

Of course, the subjects I perk up at are “science” and “the environment.” I’m not aware of science materials being directly targeted in Dixie County, but I also don’t know much about what’s going on there as information about this issue is scarce on the Internet. However, I am concerned when I see in the NCAC letter that the superintendent tells teachers to make instructional materials choices based on “community standards.” NCAC says:

The vague notion of “community standards” offers educators no clear guidance and impermissibly imposes the viewpoints of some community members on every student in the District.

Why am I concerned? Because the argument for matching textbooks with local community standards was used by proponents of Florida’s new instructional materials law. (See our Instructional Materials bills ’17 blog category for more on the law.) Can you imagine the argument that “we didn’t come from no monkey” being used as a community standard to ditch certain science materials? I can.

The president of the Florida Library Association is also concerned:

School officials are bound by constitutional considerations, including a duty not to discriminate against unpopular or controversial ideas. The U.S. Supreme Court has cautioned that, ‘Local school boards may not remove books from library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books …’ Board of Education v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982).