Tennessee "Teaching the Controversy" Bill Becomes Law

MrKevvy writes "The Tennessee 'Teaching the Controversy' bill was passed into law today. 'A law to allow public school teachers to challenge the scientific consensus on issues like climate change and evolution will soon take effect in Tennessee. State governor Bill Haslam allowed the bill — passed by the state House and Senate — to become law without signing it, saying he did not believe the legislation "changes the scientific standards that are taught in our schools."'" The governor adds: "However, I also don’t believe that it accomplishes anything that isn’t already acceptable in our schools."

Comments

Re:Methinks a law of unintended consequences

[Deathnerd]

Oh if only I had mod points. +1 insightful to parent

Re:Theory or fact?

[one_who_uses_unix]

How many times has evolution been shown to be accurate? The last time I checked the conditions under which life supposedly evolved have not been recreated a single time. No "live" organisms have been synthesized from primordial ooze even once. In fact, we aren't' even sure what comprised the primordial ooze.

There are plenty of theories about what the conditions might have been, however the bottom line is that we really don't know. We can only theorize about what might have been going on at the time - and that isn't based on observation (another key element of real science).

This discussion is not about whether the theory of evolution is correct, but rather whether it is a theory or a fact.

Is it reasonable to assert that a fact can be an idea that has never been observed and can not be confirmed by even a single complete test (since the conditions of the test can not be known)?

Some of the facts that are used to construct the theory of evolution are testable and observable, however the theory is an interpretation of a mixture of facts and assumptions and the theory itself is simply not a fact.

Re:Methinks a law of unintended consequences

[ArcherB]

I don't think this law does what you think it does. I believe the goal of this law is to allow teachers to present creationism as a legitimate scientific alternative to natural selection.

I'm not trying to argue one way or the other, but don't assume that religion and science are mutually exclusive. See below:

"Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done."
--Isaac Newton

Two Overrated mods! That means that at least two mods couldn't counter what I said, but didn't want others to read it.