Censoring questions about evolution. Why?

I ran across this article and found it interesting that activists don't want any questions of weaknesses or analyzing of Evolutionary Theory conducted within Schools.

darwiniana.com...
In January, the evolution lobby convinced a slim majority of the board to tentatively remove the required teaching of “weaknesses” from the standard. Now the same activists are demanding that the board cut the words “analyze and evaluate” from the high school biology standards dealing directly with evolution. It is the Darwinian activists who are picking the fight.

These proposals represent an extreme attempt to censor the science curriculum and will harm the interests of both students and science. We must not permit scientific data to be concealed to serve a political agenda.

Evolution activists have raised a string of phony issues. They claim that board members are trying to insert creationism and a “young earth” into the science standards. Completely false. Remember, it is the Darwinian extremists who are attempting to change the existing science directives. Under the existing standards there has not been a single reported case of a teacher using the standard as a pretext to teach religion, creationism, or anything other than science.

The phoniest issue of all is the assertion that evolution has no scientific weaknesses, which is a claim few scientists would make among themselves. In January, the board was presented with more than 100 articles from mainstream scientific publications documenting unresolved problems in contemporary evolutionary theory. These problems include the inexplicable origin of information contained in DNA molecules, irreducibly complex biological features, geologically abrupt appearances of new life forms in the Cambrian Explosion, fossil record gaps and intractable origin of life chemistry.

You can read the full article here:darwiniana.com...

Any thoughts on this? Or opinions?

In January, the board was presented with more than 100 articles from mainstream scientific publications documenting unresolved problems in contemporary evolutionary theory.

Anyone got a link for these?

It's unfortunate activists are resorting to such tactics, why can't people keep an open mind instead of just outright ignoring any and all evidence to the contrary?
It's this kind of attitude that kept people thinking the earth was the center of the universe for so long. Reminds my of that your unamerican reteric if you don't support the president b.s.

They are doing this to head off the Creationists, however I have to wonder why it is not OK to just say "we don't really know".
How about an alternative theory - that Earth was "seeded" with life from other planets?
It would be helpful if the gov. would just openly admit that those "UFO's " that are not eartly creations are those of Extraterrestrials.

reply to post by dnaobs


Yes, this type of censorship isn't just related to Evolution, it comes in play whenever anyone including other scientists question accepted science. ie; Global Warming, Human Cloning, etc..


Here's an example of a state passing a law to protect against this type of censorship:

article.nationalreview.com...
To the chagrin of the science thought police, Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal has signed into law an act to protect teachers who want to encourage critical thinking about hot-button science issues such as global warming, human cloning, and yes, evolution and the origin of life.

Opponents allege that the Louisiana Science Education Act is “anti-science.” In reality, the opposition’s efforts to silence anyone who disagrees with them is the true affront to scientific inquiry.

Originally posted by OhZone
They are doing this to head off the Creationists, however I have to wonder why it is not OK to just say "we don't really know".
How about an alternative theory - that Earth was "seeded" with life from other planets?
It would be helpful if the gov. would just openly admit that those "UFO's " that are not eartly creations are those of Extraterrestrials.

I think ANY censorship of something that isn't even religious is wrong. I don't agree with religion being taught in the classroom, of course not.

They should be able to discuss ANY theory (not related to religion) in the classroom, as well as it's weaknesses.

Not sure about the ET theory, but it was supported by a nobel prize winning scientist so why not?

It was always odd to me why religion feels it must fight evolution. It would be much easier to say yes its true because god made it that way. It's funny how god is supposed to have no limits yet they limit his power by saying that it isn't possibly true.

reply to post by whoshotJR


This vote was about teaching "strength and weaknesses" in ANY theory. It has nothing to do with religion.

No matter what anyone's beliefs are, we shouldn't censor information about theories that ARE taught in the classroom.

I don't think creationism or ID should be taught in school. That isn't what this is about though.

Originally posted by B.A.C.
reply to post by dnaobs

 

Yes, this type of censorship isn't just related to Evolution, it comes in play whenever anyone including other scientists question accepted science. ie; Global Warming, Human Cloning, etc..

Agreed. The biggest error of the types of arguements is that it turns something scientific (peer reviewed and ran through the scientific method) like evolution into the very thing these people are trying to rid our education system of.... that being religion. For science to be accurate and for it to truely benefit mankind all observable evidence (pro AND con) must have equal clout. Young minds are impressionable and we live in a free society that has prospered from scientific discovery, therefor the details that these religious evolutionary types want to have omitted from the textbooks that they deem detrimental to THEIR views, quite possibly could have inspired some young future biologist to make some great new discovery that refines or changes the current paradigm. I myself find either evolution or E.T. seeding currently the most probable explainations for the origin of life. HOWEVER I will not follow either of those theories to the gates of hell, nor will I ignore any evidence that might disprove them. That would be very un-scientific for anyone to do because it implies faith(of the burying your head in the sand type). With that, I do believe claims of traditional omnipotent creation has no place in the classroom, the U.S. constitution is very specific about that.

Originally posted by B.A.C.
This vote was about teaching "strength and weaknesses" in ANY theory.

Perhaps you can enlighten us as to which other scientific theories you believe have weaknesses that would fall under this proposed action in Texas?

If trying to teach the facts is what passes for censorship these days, then I'm for it. As others have pointed out BAC, what other theories do you want students to see the weaknesses of? Newtonian mechanics completely fall apart in several cosmological phenomenon. Germ theory has it's holes as well, though I'm sure you've readily accepted antibiotics at some point in your life.

The basis of a high school science class is to introduce fundamental concepts of whatever field they maybe studying that year (Physics, chemistry, biology, etc). By the "Standard" teachers would spend so much time explaining "Alternative" theory that it'll cut into class time.