Texas State Board of Education Evolution

G

GT WT

1,000+ Posts
Interesting NYT article about Don McLeroy (chairman of the SBoE) and his attitudes towards teaching creationism in Texas public science classrooms.
The Link

texasflag.gif
 
Very scary. What are these weaknesses? And even if there are weaknesses, why in the world would they need to be taught in school? Far better to let that be hashed out in the scientific community and not poison young minds by discussing alleged weaknesses in TOE. School is simply not the place for that.
 
It's obvious that by singling out evolution for special treatment of its "strengths and weaknesses" belies another motive. The New York Times author who has obviously followed this movement knows exactly what that is--Creationism. Other weasel phrases like "academic freedom with regards to human origins" and "teach the controversy" try to get around the numerous legal decisions against teaching Creationism/ID in public schools.

Here's how the ID people should go about getting their idea in public schools: win a scientific consensus. Get grant money, run a lab, publish papers in peer-reviewed journals, debate it at university meetings and academic conferences, and if you can convince the scientific community your idea has validity, THEN you can take it to the textbook publishers. Don't skip the long arduous scientific process and lobby the legislature or governor to get the ideas directly inserted into public education curriculum.
 
My old biology professor took a week off every other year to go and yell at people in the capital about evolution. I wonder if anyone will take his place.
 
I really don't think it matters much what makes it in the textbook.

Science teachers are going to teach science no matter what the book says.

I know in my school, our science teachers rarely even open the book. It's all through labs, notes, power points, etc.

What will matter is any changes made to the TEKS standards, which dictate what is on the TAKS test, which is how schools are judged and that actually can change the behavior of teachers and change what they will and will not teach.

But the book really doesn't matter.
 
For some reason, I think the Doctor would not like it if I, as a geologist, got on some Texas Dentist board, and started making policy...like stopping the use of fluoride because it makes you gay.
 
Flouride makes you gay? I did not know that!

Or.... to take a page out of McCleroy's playbook....It's not really that our science cirriculmn knows that Flouride makes you gay. It's more that we need to make sure textbooks leave open the possibility that Flouride might make you gay....
rolleyes.gif
 
Think about it from a strengths and weaknesses prospect.

Strength: No evidence or peer-reviewed study exists that says that fluoride doesn't make you gay.

Weakness: Gay men like to take warm fluid in their mouths, swish it around, spit (when told) and dribble it over their chin while a man stands in a dominating authoritative pose above them. I know, I've watched these videos extensively- for research. How is that not indoctrinating our children to becoming gay?

There you have it.
 
This is going to be a Kansas-like embarrassment. This year, the SBOE determined the curriculum for English for the next ten years. A group of academic professionals, teachers, politicians, etc., had worked for years on a proposed changes to the curriculum based on best practices and results from around the country. The conservative members of the board decided they didn't like it because they want separate instruction on grammar; so, over one night, they developed a proposal based on the recommendation of a conservative, right-wing consulting firm. The proposal went before the Board for about an hour before it was voted on and the one created overnight won over the objection of all the professionals who worked for years on the topic.

English was supposed to be an easy one. Everyone predicted crazy ******** with science, but if that is how the board dealt with English, let's sit back and watch them put Genesis into 7th grade science as the definitive explanation of where we came from.
 
McLeroy is not only proof that evolution is real, but that it's slower for some tribes than it is for others. He is an intellectual loser of the highest order.
 
My biology textbook had a section on the weaknesses of evolutionary theory. I can't remember how it was phrased, but that was the gist of it. I wish the textbook had stated the truth that evolution was one of the most highly tested and reinforced scientific theories.

Maybe I should petition for an additional paragraph in textbooks that says, "People who question evolution are usually ignorant fucktards." Would be more accurate than their "weaknesses" ********.
 
I really don't mind someone having strong religious beliefs, but they come under philosophy or religion, not science. How can someone with these beliefs be high up in an education job? They shouldn't have that job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top