Home > Education, Religion > Science, School Boards, and Texas

Science, School Boards, and Texas

March 31st, 2009

Recently, the Texas State Board of Education voted on new state standards for science education. This would not be a big deal except that this is one of the arenas where creationists are trying to get their religious dogma implanted as “science” in the classroom. While the board rejected language which would have required science teachers to discuss “strengths and weaknesses” of scientific theories–the latest code-wordplay creationists are using in their campaign to dismiss evolution and give credence to creationism–they did approve some of the creationist language.

One example was a requirement to “analyze, evaluate, and critique scientific explanations” based in part on “examining all sides of scientific evidence of those scientific experiments.” Again, sounds reasonable, but this language is not intended to actually analyze scientific findings honestly, but is instead language to open the door for creationists to allow their science teacher brethren to introduce faulty creationist critiques of standard scientific theories, or to force non-creationist teachers to cover such topics against their will. It is not surprising that, just coincidentally, topics that were at the forefront of this “analysis” were evolution and the age of the universe–the two areas most important to creationists.

One reason all of this has been happening in Texas is that the board’s chairman, Don McLeroy, is an unabashed creationist who can’t understand why those darned scientists are fighting all of this. “Somebody has to stand up to these experts,” he stated on a video; “I don’t know why they’re doing it.”

One of the issues McLeroy wants discussed is the “complexity of the cell,” a standard creationist argument against evolution. In barely veiled language, new standards bring up the idea that cells are too complex to have evolved by mere natural selection. The problem with this is that there has never been any scientific research which supports this idea. There is no evidence that in any way proves that natural selection is too “unlikely” to have built DNA and life itself. It is nothing more than intuition, a feeling–creationists look at the structure of a cell and simply conclude that it’s too complex to have arisen naturally. No statistical analysis of chemical reactions, no calculation of the mass of organic material over time considering certain chemical reactions, etc. Just, “that doesn’t look right,” and presto!–it’s science.

McLeroy also tipped his hand when he made a statement about why he felt genetics trumped evolution: “Genetics goes back to a Christian monk who did precise data.” This should not be too surprising to those who understand the views of some of the more extremist conservative Christians, who believe that nothing is of value unless Jesus figures into it somehow. To paraphrase the Mike Myers SNL sketch, “If it’s not Christian, it’s crap!” Like this “expert” on morality, two completely indistinguishable acts can be as different as saintly good and Hitler-level evil depending only upon whether or not they were done by someone with Christ in their hearts.

Then there was discussion on “sudden appearance” of new species in the fossil record, another standard creationist argument which essentially says, “if we haven’t found it yet, it doesn’t exist.” It is equivalent to waking up and looking outside to see the ground is wet, but because you didn’t witness the rain last night, then that calls into question the whole “rain” theory and so we should instead give serious consideration to the theory that god magically makes the ground wet overnight without precipitation.

This is one of the major problems with school boards: they are a political organization that can be populated with, well, anyone who can win a school board election. If you’re a conservative and see no problem with that, remember that Michael Moore’s first serious job was on a school board–to which he was elected at age 18. School boards can be populated and run by people who are not only not educators, but wish to use the education system to promote their personal, political and religious agendas. You hear talk about how you don’t want politicians to make decisions about your health care, but apparently with education, there’s no problem.

Seriously, school boards should be done away with, and serious educators–with the required qualifications you would expect in any profession–given the authority to decide curricula. The whole creationists-running-school-boards thing, from Dover to Kansas to Texas and beyond, is simply a running example of why this should be.

Categories: Education, Religion Tags: by
  1. Troy
    April 1st, 2009 at 14:16 | #1

    Seriously, school boards should be done away with, and serious educators–with the required qualifications you would expect in any profession–given the authority to decide curricula. The whole creationists-running-school-boards thing, from Dover to Kansas to Texas and beyond, is simply a running example of why this should be.

    Then you risk the over-centralized Japan system.

    School boards are exercises in democracy, and democracy is messy. Granted, the Scopes trial was 80-odd years ago, but I would hope in another 80 years reality will have finally won over these clowns.

Comments are closed.