WISH-TV has an article entitled Creationism clears Ind. committee. By a vote of 8-2, the Senate Education committee has endorsed SB 89 which allows schools to teach creationism as science.
Teach creationism as an unscientific religious idea? Fine. Turtles all the way down, if you like. But, science? No.
Once again, scientific theory does not mean “wild-ass guess.”
A scientific theory is a set of principles that explain and predict phenomena. Scientists create scientific theories with the scientific method, when they are originally proposed as hypotheses and tested for accuracy through observations and experiments. Once a hypothesis is verified, it becomes a theory.
Evolution meets this definition. Creationism, arising mostly from stories written down by our bronze age ancestors, does not.
This action seems a bit opposite the claims for passage of RTW that would promote Indiana as business friendly and other measures claiming to be a great site for advanced businesses–then pass an educational initiative that would make any advanced business say “what” kind of science education program is Indiana promoting. This in the state seeking bio-science oriented state status.
*sigh* Well, Doug- Can this stand as an Exhibit ‘A’ as argument for getting government out of schools?
“Creation Science”
Isn’t that cute? They’re making up their own non sequiturs now. Next thing you know they’ll be crossing the street by themselves.
Scientology will demand equal time in education next.
Hopefully I’ll get a separate post up before long on this, but the Creationism-as-Science legislators should make themselves aware of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District.
The legal bill – $2 million (settled for $1 million.)
I didn’t read the proposed statute, but my question is it
“allowed” or is it “required”?
South Bend recently tried to give away land that the City had purchased for $1.3 million for $1 to the new St. Joseph’s High School
which is being built. The land was to be utilized for a football stadium and for parking, with the ruse that the Catholic High School would allow public high schools to borrow the stadium for events and that
this was supposed to be one aspect of new commercial development. Several property owners challenged that giveaway. The city lost in Judge Miller’s Court. An alternative method was eventually achieved (a price somewhat closer to market value of the land). Legal fees for ACLU haven’t been announced. The City Attorney decided to go back to solely private practice after the Mayor decided not to run for re-election. A fiasco for the City.
I don’t think I have ever been more embarrassed to be a resident of the state of Indiana as I was when I saw this passed even just in committee.
Maybe the Senate will redeem itself by voting it down unanimously but I doubt they will show that much intelligence.
The theory of evolution is still only a ‘theory’: ‘the present is key to the past’ motto. Textbooks usually base much of their theory on convenient suppositions to satisfy their predetermined conclusions. My Websters defines it as ‘conjecture or guess’ as well as aforementioned language. I see nothing wrong with challenging current theory, and the classroom is a great place to explore this. I don’t see how theorists should ban alternative viewpoints. Let students decide what to believe.
Paul,
Brush up on the definition of Scientific Theory versus the definition you are using.
Seriously.
Evolution is a scientific theory and, therefore gets taught in science class. There are conditions that an idea has to satisfy to merit that label. Just because Websters has a definition for non-scientific theories doesn’t mean that you should put conjecture into science classes and call it a theory because the word “theory” happens to crop up in both places.
Teach them about the scientific approach to understanding the world and the non-scientific – maybe in a history class on the Enlightenment or something – and let them decide what to believe there. Students are free to be taught about and believe phrenology, astrology, and alchemy – but none of those amounts to science and also shouldn’t be taught as science.
It also needs to be pointed out that the mere fact that evolution occurs at all has progressed well past the theory stage to uncontroversially accepted fact (at least, among those who don’t put on ideological blinders). There are theories as to how it occurs, but the fact that it does occur at all is not really something that is seriously questioned.
Evolution is a biological theory the way wave theory is used in physics. It’s necessary to understand the fundamentals of evolutionary theory in order to understand biology. A scientific theory must explain and predict phenomena, and it must testable through observation and experimentation. Teaching creationism in biology classrooms not only violates the establishment clause (since the only basis for it is religious belief), it subverts the students’ ability to understand that biology is a systematic discipline, based upon the application of evolutionary theory, and worse yet, it subverts the teaching of what constitutes the scientific method. If you don’t think that’s a bad thing consider the middle ages. They had Christianity a-plenty, along with the inquisition, the plagues, and the hundred year war – but no scientific method. Getting back to wave theory – I’m wondering how our bronze age ancestors felt about light. Oh, that’s right…”then there was light” – an explanation deemed sufficient for their purposes. Perhaps we need to update physics course to include a creationism theory taught alongside wave theory. After all, it’s only a theory.
Besides, if you wanted to “challenge current theory”, why would you choose to challenge it with a collection of folk tales that are thousands of years old?