Slashdot Mirror


12 Florida Schools Pass Anti-Evolution Resolutions

Several sources are reporting that twelve school districts in Florida have passed resolutions against the teaching of evolution. Out of all the arguments, however, one administrator seems to have gotten it right: "Then, the final speaker, Lisa Dizengoff, director of science curriculum at Pembroke Pines Charter School's east campus, angrily reminded the crowd that after all the carping over evolution, no one had gotten around to addressing the state's lackadaisical, last-century approach to science education. 'All I heard was this argument about evolution,' she said, disgusted that so many other problems had been preempted by a single controversy. 'The kids lost out again.''"

13 of 871 comments (clear)

  1. Fundies again by dosius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The 21st Century... The new Dark Ages, when religion is high and education is low.

    -uso.

    --
    What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
  2. Opposed to facts by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oscar Howard Jr., superintendent of Taylor County's School District, and Danny Lundy, vice chairman of the School Board, spoke in accents from that other Florida. ''We're opposed to teaching evolution as a fact,'' Howard said, adding that his School Board and 11 others have passed resolutions against the imposition of evolution in the school curriculum.
    Before the "It's just a theory" folks start up, I'll point out that a theory is a model to explain the facts.
    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    1. Re:Opposed to facts by xstonedogx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ...it is still a theory unless and until cold, hard proof can be found.

      No, you're just perpetuating the ignorance.

      A theory can be well-supported by evidence or not. It can be proven false by any example which shows it is incorrect. It cannot be proven true, though, because we could discover something in the future for which the theory cannot account.

      Creationists essentially argue that since science cannot prove evolution it is a belief system. They promote evolution as 'scientific dogma', intentionally ignoring the fact that science adapts with new theories to explain new phenomena (i.e. science admits when it is wrong). They do this (specifically using ignorance of science's use of the word 'theory' - as you note) to argue that since the theory of evolution is taught, all 'equal' theories (which neither creationism nor ID really are) must be taught as well.

  3. La la la la, I can't hear you! by Entropius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... seems to be the sum total of evidence against evolution.

    http://xkcd.com/54/ is appropriate right now.

  4. Re:A perfect argument for school vouchers by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't have any kids and my tax dollars go to public schools. If I have to help pay for them, then parents with kids in private school have to help pay for them.

    If you want to send your kids to private school, that's your right. That doesn't mean that you get to take funds away from public schools.

  5. The Religious Mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have studied theology in some depth. I am familiar with apologetics and all the classical defenses put forth to support the integrity of specific, popular, religious beliefs.

    For all the philosophical rambling, none of them, absolutely none of them, escape this simple indisputable fact:

    All religious teachings are provided to us by humans.

    If God Himself appeared next to me and handed me a copy of the Bible, that would be one thing. But instead, a human handed to me. And, in fact, a human wrote every word that is in it. This notion of "divine inspiration" (which is supposed to remove the element of human fallibility from the Bible) was communicated to me by...wait for it....A HUMAN.

    I can agree in principle with the presumption that faith in God is well-founded, and faith in human reason (i.e. the theory of evolution) is not so well-founded. However, to put faith in the teachings (or books) of any religion is to put faith in human reason.

    There is no denial, only rationalization.

    1. Re:The Religious Mind by raybob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "...science can't escape the fact that ultimately it is merely a *description* of the universe it doesn't tell us the true nature of the universe or even what 'nature' is."

      "All natural laws are merely descriptions of ..."

      You are missing a key concept here. Scientific theories are more than descriptions, they collectively form a 'model' of the observable world. As such, they may be used as predictive tools, which is not true of religious dogma. Given a certain set of conditions, outcome X will occur.

      Religion, on the other hand, is descriptive of past events, and assigns causal relationships where there aren't any. Think of miracles - they can't be predicted, there's no evidence finding for a supernatural cause, and given the same set of initial conditions, the miracle can't be reproduced.

      So evolution, natural selection, species environmental dynamics, etc. as a body of knowledge can be used to predict to a certain extent. Not exactly --what-- will occur, but that change in species characteristics will occur (speciation, see here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html) due to selection processes over time that have as their genesis factors such as isolation, mutation, interbreeding, etc.

      Science is an axiomatic, rigorous, and predictive model, whereas religion is interpretation of history to fit a non-rigorous faith-based viewpoint.

  6. Re:So....... by Amorymeltzer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know, to be honest, I'd really like to suggest a title change for the articles concerned - "12 Florida Schools Pass Anti-Science Resolutions."

    That's really what's happening. The theory of Evolution is one of the most heavily supported things in the scientific world, and passing laws against it speaks exceptionally loudly about the given parties ability to discern fact from fiction, intelligence from hand-waving, and most importantly, critical thinking from anything else. They're not just rejecting evolution, they're rejecting the process of science as a whole.

    --
    I live in constant fear of the Coming of the Red Spiders.
  7. Re:Opposed to teaching Evolution as a fact.... by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The "it's only a theory" comment is a pretty classic example of an etymological fallacy; invoking an older or more looser usage of a word in an attempt to undermine a more narrow or professional usage. In this case, they attempt to equate the definition of theory as a "claim" or "guess" with the very narrow and strict definition of the word as it is applied by scientists. It's simply another variant of the older sticker trick that was tried, and every time it comes up, a court sees through the bullshit and lies (it's ironic how deceitful and immoral all these good Christian folks become) and rule that the Creationists/IDers have distinctly religious motives.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  8. What really sucks is, this isn't really religion. by riseoftheindividual · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I mean, this argument over evolution has religious roots, but I can't help but stare in disbelief at believers who waste their energy over this argument. What difference does it make if every school in the country teaches God created the earth when you look at most religious people and the only way you can tell they have religion is their loud harping on evolution and abortion and hatred of homosexuals, atheists, and people who don't share their faith? There's no compassion or any of the other virtues you occasionally hear touted as being part of religion coming from the people behind these movements. No love of truth. No love of others as they love themselves. Just know it all venom and a desperate need to defend dogmas no matter how silly they sound defending them or what new lows of deception they have to sink to in their defense.

    I have to ask those believers, is this what Jesus would do and be about? I'm working my ass off to make sure my kids can go to the finest private non-religious schools available. They can raise their kids in 3rd world ignorance, but I can make sure my kids aren't.

    --
    Patriot - A fan of expanding government power and spending while not wanting to pay higher taxes.
  9. Re:Opposed to teaching Evolution as a fact.... by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First of all, your arguing against inference. Have you ever seen an electron? Did you ever see your great-great-great-great-grandparents? Did you ever meet anybody that spoke Proto-Indo-European? No, but you can infer these things from the evidence.

    As to evolution, of course you can observe it. We have nylon-digesting bacteria now when nylon didn't even exist before the 1930s. I was just reading about pupfish in Death Valley who have gone through a radical process of speciation since the valley dried up after 20,000 years ago.

    If you wish to dip into some sort of solipsism or epistemological nihilism, be my guest, but what you're really doing is denying that any knowledge can be gathered that is reliable. You might as well deny that yesterday ever happened, and that the universe began at midnight, and everything is just fake memories. Just remember, if you want to deny or question evolution "because I've never seen it", then you have to be fair and basically call into question *all* knowledge, because everything is susceptible to such an argument.

    If you actually want to learn something about evolution, then I recommend going to http://talkorigins.org/ where there are dozens of articles dealing with all manner of evolutionary problems and explanations, with full citations so you can go to a library and check for yourself.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  10. Re:Opposed to teaching Evolution as a fact.... by Suicyco · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This boils down to people arguing about things that they didn't observe, and can't really know. Creationism (at least the Christian kind) requires faith that something written thousands of years ago by people who also didn't witness the events is true. "Evolutionism" requires faith in the work of hundreds of scientists interpreting the present and making educated guesses about the past. No one saw man created out of dirt and breathed to life by God, but by the same token, no one saw a single-celled organism spring to life in the primordial soup and continue re-writing itself until it became a human.


    Of course we have seen it. Its all around us. Its in the fossil record. By your logic, nobody has actually seen galaxies evolve because they are looking into the past via the fossil record of the universe - radiation (light, xrays, etc.)

    Evolution can be easily traced back to the earliest creatures capable of leaving imprints of themselves behind. The entire process of developing lungs, limbs, spines, etc. etc. is all right there. Each step of the way. It is not a mystery. Just because it doesn't happen in a timespan and a place you personally can witness doesn't make it not so. The sun didn't form before your eyes did it? Did the mountains spring up so you could witness? Is geology a supposition? An educated guess?

    You can demonstrate evolution in the lab with bacteria. You can demonstrate complex hydrocarbons doing all sorts of magical stuff in the lab (how life came to be in the first place.)

    Tracing the biology of animals of this planet is a well known, well documented science. It is FACT, because the facts are right there in front of the entire worlds eyes, should they choose to look. Fish moving onto land, developing lungs, etc.

    We have broken down the DNA code very well at this point, and can trace our origins that way as well. We can see where we differ and what we share with trees, worms, bacteria, dogs and elephants. Natural selection (the mechanism behind evolution) is everywhere as well. Look at dog and cat breeds. Cattle. Plants. Insects. You name it, you can change the creature itself by breeding.

    Evolution is science. It is what the facts tell us. This is not a philosophical debate. There are no two sides. It is not a guess. It is about stupidity and blind faith. You can't reject evolution any more than you can reject combustion, or gravity. If people DO reject it, they are simply being ignorant and stupid. Plain and simple.

    Basing "science" on something written thousands of years ago by people who were so far from us in their knowledge of the world is ridiculous. It is absurd. Why not simply observe the world? Observe what is right in front of our faces, and learn from it.
  11. Re:What really sucks is, this isn't really religio by wiredlogic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well said. You have my applause.

    Really, this sort of behavior boils down to tribalism. People have a need to identify themselves as part of a group and what better way to do that then to contrast yourselves with those who are outside of your group. This is why some people glom onto fanatacisim for professional sports teams or fall victim to fashion trends. It's all about establishing your group identity. The Japanese have a notably complex system of in-groups and out-groups and expected behaviors when interacting with people in and out of your many groups.

    The foaming at the mouth evangelicals love to portray themselves as under perilous attack by secular heathens despite the fact that North America has an overwhelmingly Christian culture and it isn't going away anytime soon. This is all part of the rhetoric established from the time that Christians really were a minority group who had to withstand the oppression of other dominant groups. Just once, I whish these fools could put themselves in the shoes of a Hindu or Buddhist immigrant to realize what it truly feels like to be a little fish in a bowl of sharks.

    Of course this is one of the many problems with modern Christianity: it is permeated with an air of anti-intellectualism. You shouldn't try to question the "truth" as given to you by people serving as intermediaries for God (or direct from the KJV Bible for the literalists). To do so would be to admit that you don't have enough faith and without faith you're going to hell so just shut up and believe everything we tell you to believe in. We have things like idiot Protestants claiming that Roman Catholics aren't real Christians. (WTF?) People like Pat Robertson are lionized by millions and yet he openly expresses hatred for non-Christians. Somehow these people can claim to be followers of Jesus and yet they conveniently fail to realize the core meaning his teachings.

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.