Evolution Wins as Creationists (Accidentally) Switch Sides in Florida

[Stitch]

The Florida Board of Education officially upheld evolution yesterday.

The board didn't quite mean to do that, of course. In a 4-3 vote, the Board accepted a proposed curriculum that replaced all references to evolution with the phrase "the scientific theory of evolution." In so doing, the board inadvertently made evolution central to public school science education, and also, almost incidentally, mandated education on just what constitutes a "scientific theory."

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/02/evolution-wins.html

 

[Wowbagger]

I hope evolution is taught, throughout biology lessons, as a central core for understanding the subject, instead of being tacked on, at the end, as a "bonus chapter", like it was in my High School days.

 

[wahrheit]

Is this because Creationists usually think that "theory" means something like half-baked brainchild?

 

[Upchurch]

It may be that I just didn't get enough sleep last night, but what was the accident? What were they trying to do that they accidentally ended up with this?

 

[X]

I think they wanted to cast evolution as "just a theory".

Not sure, though.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

It may be that I just didn't get enough sleep last night, but what was the accident? What were they trying to do that they accidentally ended up with this?

They had meant to replace all instances the word evolution with Bull****. Forgive us, Lord, for swearing, but just utter bull****. Quite a typo, really.

 

[Stitch]

I think they wanted to cast evolution as "just a theory".

Not sure, though.

That pretty much sums it up. What worries me, is that there are people, apparently lacking in such a basic level of education, making decisions about how the next generation of kids should be educated.

 

[~enigma~]

I think they wanted to cast evolution as "just a theory".

Not sure, though.

That's what I get also. Now that it's a scientific theory it must really hurt creationists something fierce since their crock is just a theory.

 

[tsg]

I just love it when people's own idiocy bites them in the ass.

 

[X]

Courtesy of Pharyngula, comes new of the reaction of the beloved Discovery Institute.
They don't seem very happy.

 

[godless dave]

Funny though the OP is, that's not exactly what happened. The Panda's Thumb has been covering this for a couple months now. Some of the people at the state Board of Education seem to know what's what. Adding "scientific theory of" was a "compromise" with the creationists.

 

[chris epic]

I hope evolution is taught, throughout biology lessons, as a central core for understanding the subject, instead of being tacked on, at the end, as a "bonus chapter", like it was in my High School days.

You know, I have a 10 year old nephew. He's a good kid. He goes to a Christian school. I started quizing him in the car yesterday:

"Who invented peanut butter"

Carver

"Who invented the light bulb"

Edison

"Who developed the theory of Evolution"

Huh?

 

[Frozenwolf150]

Funny though the OP is, that's not exactly what happened. The Panda's Thumb has been covering this for a couple months now. Some of the people at the state Board of Education seem to know what's what. Adding "scientific theory of" was a "compromise" with the creationists.

The creationists still shot themselves in the foot though, due to their misunderstanding of what a theory is. Stating the obvious here. It's true that a theory is not a fact, but that's because a theory consists of many facts, which have had to pass the rigorous testing demanded by good science, so a theory would be more accurately regarded as a category of facts. What creationists also fail to realize is that a theory actually occupies the highest echelon of scientific knowledge. We just don't call them "laws" anymore, although even that was a matter of semantics: if our understanding of an aspect of the universe is accurate enough to pass the test every single time, we might as well call it a law.

 

[steve s]

"Who invented peanut butter"

Carver

Tell your nephew that Carver didn't invent peanut butter.

And Darwin developed the theory of natural selection to explain the fact of evolution.

Steve S.

 

[fuelair]

I hope evolution is taught, throughout biology lessons, as a central core for understanding the subject, instead of being tacked on, at the end, as a "bonus chapter", like it was in my High School days.

I was lucky, got the basics in HS Bio (but had already picked it up and was reading real stuff - back in 1959-60) (antimatter about the same time, topology and lasers a year earlier) (Reading World Book instead of paying attention in class kind of got me going in a lot of areas - but also in trouble when I was caught sneaking to the back of the room to grab a volume iduring the fourth grade.) I LOVE Science!!!

Evolution will depend on where the order of Instruction places it - not where the teacher wants to place it in the year. We will see where it is put!!

 

[fuelair]

That pretty much sums it up. What worries me, is that there are people, apparently lacking in such a basic level of education, making decisions about how the next generation of kids should be educated.

That's what happens when teachers/subject specialists don't get to determine what should be taught and how it should be taught with no interference from the ignorant who just want information to be turned into propaganda.

 

[Olowkow]

Tell your nephew that Carver didn't invent peanut butter.

And Darwin developed the theory of natural selection to explain the fact of evolution.

Steve S.

True, he didn't invent peanut butter...

Peanut butter was invented and reinvented many times during history. Peanuts were known as early as 950 B.C. and originated in South America. The ancient Incas used peanuts and were known to have made it into a paste-like substance.

Picky, picky picky... Carver "popularized" peanut butter, but did not patent it because he thought all foods were gifts from god.

 

[kev]

From the Discovery Institute Link above:

"While it is good that students will learn about evolution, these standards will make for bad science education because they elevate Darwin’s theory to a dogma that cannot be questioned. . . ."

"One good aspect of Florida's new standards is that their section on the Nature of Science states that students should “use critical and logical thinking, and the active consideration of alternative scientific explanations to explain all the data presented.”


Dogma??? Seriously? How is it possible that a group of people can see something so absolutely ***backwards?? And now, the Discovery Institute is the great purveyor of critical thinking skills in children? I wonder if they would be equally eager to have children SPECIFICALLY taught to "use critical thinking skills to consider alternative scientific explanations" for all of the "data" presented in religious texts as well? I think it is a great idea to use evolution/creationism as an example of utilizing critical thinking skills to sperate the science from myth - it may be one of the finest examples available for demonstration.

 

[genesplicer]

I hope evolution is taught, throughout biology lessons, as a central core for understanding the subject, instead of being tacked on, at the end, as a "bonus chapter", like it was in my High School days.

It is the core of my curriculum. I teach evolution every day to my 7th graders. It relates to all areas of life science, so it is the central theme around which all else revolve. I haven't had many complaints.

Of course, here in California, it is one of 7 Standards that MUST be taught during 7th grade. For more information, here's a link to our Science Standards:

http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/scgrade7.asp

 

[pgwenthold]

I love the audacity of calling the National Academy of Science "dogmatic." 'Cause, you know, those members of the Academy are too stupid to think for themselves, and just follow the crowd.