E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Erik Schelzig / AP
Rep. Bill Dunn, left, and Rep. Harry Brooks, both Republicans from Knoxville, during a House session in Nashville, Tenn., on Monday. Dunn is the main sponsor of a bill seeking to allow teachers to question evolution.
Activists were waging a last-minute battle Thursday to scuttle a bill that they say would gut science education in Tennessee by allowing public schools to cast doubt on widely-accepted scientific principles, including biological evolution and climate change.
"What it does is bring the political controversy into the classroom, where there is no scientific controversy," said Larisa DeSantis, who teaches in the Department of Earth and Environment at Vanderbilt University. "It’s scary, as a parent and as an educator."
DeSantis spoke to msnbc.com from the office building of Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam just before delivering a petition signed by more than 4,000 citizens calling on him to veto HB368. The bill easily passed the state Legislature and now awaits the governor’s signature to become law. Haslam has indicated he would probaby sign the legislation.
The bill says the goal of science education is to help students "develop critical thinking skills." It says the General Assembly has found "the teaching of some scientific subjects, including, but not limited to, biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning, can cause controversy" and says instructors should feel free to explore the "scientific weaknesses" in these theories.
The bill's sponsor, Republican Rep. Bill Dunn of Knoxville, a self-described conservative and Catholic, has said the bill is about "objective scientific facts."
Secularists and scientists argue HB368 is an attempt to introduce religious beliefs such as creationism or "intelligent design" as science, thereby undermining broadly accepted scientific principles and hurting students' education.
"As a science teacher I would say there is no controversy over evolution or climate change in the scientific literature," said DeSantis.
"Sure, we argue about the details. But these are core ideas … that are not controversial."
Critics have dubbed the legislation the "Monkey Bill," a reference to the "Scopes Monkey Trial" of 1925 -- a landmark legal case in which the state of Tennessee charged high school science teacher John Scopes of violating a law barring the teaching evolution in public schools. Scopes was a test case for the American Civil Liberties Union, which wanted to challenge the law which had been spearheaded by a Christian fundamentalist in the Tennesee legislature. Scopes was found guilty and the law remained on the books until 1967.
National organizations urged the state and the governor to jettison the bill.
Among the groups that have announced opposition are The National Association of Biology Teachers, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute for Biological Sciences and the Tennessee Science Teachers Association. The bill has also been lambasted by secularists and civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, as a violation of the church-state divide.
"This legislation, which perpetuates the teaching of non-science with a seemingly neutral approach, allows creationists to continue to make unfounded attacks against evolution," states a letter sent Thursday to Haslam from the nonprofit Americans United for Separation of Church and State .
The letter also criticizes two other Tennessee bills that are on the governor’s desk — one that would allow the 10 Commandments to be displayed in public buildings, including schools, and another that would allow teachers to take part in prayer and religious activisties before and after school.
Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United, said believes all three bills will face constitutional challenges if they become law. He said he hopes the governor will veto the legislation, if only for practical reasons.
"I think a lot of governors do understand that there are consequences about passing legislation that so clearly violates the constitution,” Lynn said. “It’s up to him now and I hope he balances (that). They shouldn’t be paying for lawsuits when there are plenty of other things to pay for in Tennessee."
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Leave a Comment:
If you hold your breath, you can actually hear IQ's dropping if you face south!
As an atheist (I have no idea what the hell we are doing here and don't know if it really matters), and a fourth grade teacher, I actually support this bill. It doesn't ban the teaching of evolution, global warming, or anything else for that matter. It only encourages that there is continuing debate on these theories. Remeber, these are theories and theories are not proven fact. Otherwise they would be called laws. Critically thinking about, and debating, these theories is the only way they can ever be proven or disproven. If there is to be intelligent debate, students should be made aware of all the theories being presented (including intelligent design) and allowed to come to their own logical conclusion about their beliefs. Whenever one of my 4th grade students (many of whom are Christians whose parents take the bible as the literal truth) challenges my teaching on these theories, I acknowledge intelligent design as an alternative theory, and then focus on the defenition of a theory. I encourage them to learn about all the different theories and talk to their parents. Then they will be equipped to make their own decision.
So what do you think makes ID refutable? If it is indeed a viable, testable theory it must admit refutation like any other theory. Evolutionary biology is testable, refutable and survives those checks again and again.
How can you refute ID? I think you are just wasting brain sugar on the hopeless. ID deserves no place in a scientific discussion, period.
Evolution is only a theory.
Then again, so is Gravity
You obviously don't know what Theory means in a scientific context.
I love it when ignorant conservatives say "that is only a theory";
It shows that they truly do not get what this is all about.
Personally, I believe that the Theory of Evolution is correct. Clearly I believe in the Theory of Gravity. Furthermore, if you read my posts, you will see I am in no way a conservative. Still they are theories. Neither one can be proven with the evidence that exists today although it clearly points in that direction.
theory
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theory%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dca-pub-6997024981641612%26adU%3Dwww.eclinicalworks.com%26adT%3DMeaningful%2BUse%2BEHR%26gl%3DUS&usg=AFQjCNExIJY8cbAAuEakFsLEzsMuXSKmKg">Ads by Google
the·o·ry
noun \ˈthē-ə-rē, ˈthir-ē\
plural the·o·ries
Definition of THEORY
1
: the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2
: abstract thought : speculation
3
: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art <music theory>
4
a : a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action <her method is based on the theory that all children want to learn> b : an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances —often used in the phrase in theory <in theory, we have always advocated freedom for all>
5
: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena <the wave theory of light>
6
a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : conjecture c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject <theory of equations>
See theory defined for English-language learners »
See theory defined for kids »
Examples of THEORY
Origin of THEORY
Late Latin theoria, from Greek theōria, from theōrein
First Known Use: 1592
Merriam-Webster on Facebook
Join Us
on Twitter »
on Facebook »
Bookstore: Digital and Print
Merriam-Webster references for Mobile, Kindle, print, and more. See all »
Other Merriam-Webster Dictionaries
Browse the Dictionary
Browse the Thesaurus
Browse the Spanish-English Dictionary
© 2012 Merriam-Webster, Incorporated
Browse the Medical Dictionary
Browse the Concise Encyclopedia
Sorry, Dave, but you are being illogical. Now matter what the colloquial sense of theory encompasses, one clear requirement on a scientific theory is testablility, or better yet refutability. Creationism and ID do not meet these tests, or if you think so, then show me how they do!
Evolutionary biology, Einsteinian gravity (GR), Maxwell's electrodynamics, modern quantum mechanics all meet these tests, and have survived many, many attempts to overturn or strongly modify them. This is not to say that there aren't holes to fill in or even new branches to be discovered, but that a very substantial amount of study has confirmed these theories or models of the rules of our universe.
The use of "only a theory" is totally wrong with respect to scientific work, because all real theories are living things in the context of their tests. The pejorative "only" can certainly apply to ID and Creationism, however, since these are only bullsh*it!
Maybe we all missed the point here. I agree with your belief on intelligent design. It is clearly hoakum. Still, it is not the schools (government's) place to interfere with religion.
No we need not interfere with religion, unless religion wants to interfere with us and force feed non-science into a science class. There are good and proper venues to discuss religion in a public school setting if the locals will support it, viz. comparative religions.
dave,
No, this is just an inch away from the Creationist Museum in No. Kentucky, just south of Cincinnati. It apparently draws on expert background, the Flintstones, as it shows man and dinosaur living together. An expanded version will soon offer the Ark of Noah, with a $75mil KY state loan.
How about we abandon the Mexican wall fence program and start with isolating Tennesee, Mississippi and maybe Kentucky. And yes, I am a Christian. One with a rational, logical and discerning mind.
Didn't someone forget hateful and biggoted too? I didn't see that mentioned.
Why are they afraid? If the children are taught HOW to think instead of WHAT to think then there is nothing to fear. Instead they want to teach children WHAT to think because it seems they fear teaching them HOW to think.
Our public schools are pathetic and that is proven in their dismal performance. We have a third world public education system. And all the 'activists' want is more of the same drivel they spoon down the students throats. Teach children how to think for themselves, don't spoon feed ideologies.
"Why are they afraid? If the children are taught HOW to think instead of WHAT to think" ?
creationism is teaching HOW to think ?
"Instead they want to teach children WHAT to think because it seems they fear teaching them HOW to think."
This has been what the public school system is all about from the get go.
Read some Alfie Kohn please.
How about feeling free to explore scientific weaknesses in the Bible? I'd be all for that, if the Bible's mentioned in school at all. And certainly scientific weaknesses in anything they want to propose as alternatives to evolution, climate change, etc.
How about the earth going around the sun? Want to get into that one? Why not?
Ah Religious Shenanigans. There never Cheeky and fun. I wonder if the Catholic priest are still shuffling child molesting priest about like nuts in a shell game? Or even better how the lack of teaching people that certain forms of contraception can also help spread disease. Even better didn't the Caholic Religion finally admit that the earth wasn't flat in about. Oh, what was it the late 1990's this is what nearly after almost 2000 years after the birth of Christ. WWJS = What Would Jesus Say? And wasn't he even out their talking to the destitute members of society that needed it. Instead of sitting about in a Church preaching damnation and hell fire. Instead of doing things like what Falwell, and Swaggart did fleecing their flock. Ah,k that good old religious upbringing. People think that Jesus dying for their sins gives them Sinners Credit. Now not saying it's all religious people their are a lot of you who actually do some good and are progressive thinkers as well. Don't let your teachings limit you to the progression of the rest of society. If laws can change over time then the laws of your bible have to change as well. I mean don't people interpret it anyhow. So, that means your not following it word for word. Think about.
Folks, you are wasting your time trying to convince any of these right wing religious throwbacks that science and religion are completely different subjects.
To them, there is no science, there is only what they believe. Facts, logic, evidence, math are wholly unconvincing. They are unable to see truth as something that is verifiable. The idea of hypothesis and proof has no meaning to them. They "prove" their "theories" simply by believing them. And they truly think that science works the same way.
That's why these people gravitate to the right, because actually looking at the evidence, connecting the dots, understanding causality and logic, grasping the concepts of math.. are not part of their thinking.
You can not win an argument with these people. NO MATTER how much proof you put in front of them, they will only continue to dig in their heels and believe what they believe because they believe it.
The best rational people can do is get involved and never let any of these people ever ever be in a position to do stupid things that we all have to live with.
what is it about the south that produces small minded ignorant morons who feel they have to control every thought unless god, jesus or some other magical monkey is involved?
The South should be our cheap,uneducated,unhealthy labor force we need to compete with China.
Now that they are getting more anti-abortion bills you got your numbers and with getting rid of education (a dude made us) you get your willing.
Way to go Tenn , your right up there with MS with turning back time , when is slavery coming back ? better work on it South.
The world is still flat to them too.
Good Christians and members of other faiths argue this too. Letting only those who seek to politicize their faith to claim the religious mantle is inappropriate. And it would be good to seek position of the Catholic Church in these matters if you are going to state that the bill's sponsor is Catholic.
Did the leadership in that place go stupid?
always have been
The pledge of stupidity is still being forced on kids everywhere, even in so called "progressive" schools.
I was told by an art teacher (who just got some big award from Slick Barry Inc.) that he would "make the kids do the pledge of stupidity everyday if I could" and then assumed the real stupidity of the pledge of stupidity was because it had the word "god" in it , so do not think backwoodass teachers are only in the south.
Google "The Bellamy Salute" to see the real pledge of stupidity from it's origins.
Children should not to have to pledge their loyalty to the country they live.
No one should have to pledge for any reason EVER.
There is a thing called Liberty and pledging goes against it's very definition (Liberty:Freedom from Govt control or coercion) and I will replace the word "Govt" with "any".
It would be more appropriate for teachers to pledge to their students every morning that the teacher will do his/her best to help students understand the world they live in and to help them master the tools they will need to make the world a better place than they find it.
It seems like this country is getting dumber and dumber.
Been going on for a long time.
It's the South folks where dumb and dumber is a highly cherished art form. Where Christian evangelicals rule and Creationism is a known fact. Global warming is a main stream myth and the world is flat. Welcome to the group that wants to run the entire US.
I would like to point out that it is possible to question and challenge the theory of evoloution without having an alternate explanation. It seems like everyone in this thread assumes that to be against evolution is to be automatically in a mindless sychophant to religion.
Is it the case that people so want to hold on to the current paradigm that they won't engage in reasoned debate, but rather force the detractors to put up an alternative and then ridicule them? Where is the pursuit of scientific truth in this approach?
I agree with Sarah-3043284 that idea/story of creation and the reasoning around "intelligent design" are not a form of science. They do not propose a theory with primitive concepts, axioms, and testable hypotheses. But I also give some intellectual merit to certain "facts" that are at odds with evolution.
Are you all familiar with The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas S. Kuhn?
How about "Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution Is Wrong"
You can criticize evolution on the merits of certain facts that don't support it, but you can't credibly claim that it's not the best working conceptual framework we have without offering one in its place that holds up better to scrutiny. Creationism/ID do not meet that standard. Claims to intelligent design not only rely on unscientific assumptions to begin with, but the "evidence" used to support it lacks validity on its face, more often than not.
There is no scientific basis for a "challange" to the theory of evolution (actually Darwin's theory of natural selection). There is only refinement. No legitimate scientist would claim to know everything about his/her subject of specialty, and since there is always more to learn, science moves on and nothing is ever absolutedy finished. A hypothesis only becomes a theory after a tremendous amount of evidence and rigourous testing. So called "intelligent design" cannot be backed with evidence of any kind and there is nothing to test.. It is religion not science.
My God; can these people possibly achieve a lower level than their present state of stupidity. I can't even imagine this level of insanity controlling the curriculum of schools.
I can just hear their lesson now. "There can't be fossil fuel because everyone, who reads The King James Bible knows there is no such thing as a fossil. That black substance pumped from the ground was put there by God on the third day.
And the climate is getting warmer because Jesus is coming again...real soon; and Jesus will take all the good people (those that don't believe in evolution and/or use birth control) to heaven and the rest will burn up here on earth. He will punish those non-believers real good, just like he does with hurricanes and tornadoes.
Oh, there is the bell. Be sure to practice your pistol shooting and read your Bibles tonight and remember that God loves you... but not those gays, lesbians and Muslims."
Grumpy,
Excellent parody on some of the stupid that can be so prevalent today.
I'm usually not too impressed by creationists, but there are several christians in Manila that are going to allow themselves to be nailed to crosses tomorrow in a display of their devotion. If any of you creationists are interested, I'm a pretty good carpenter and will not only build the cross, I'll even supply the material. Just let me know if any of you are interested...
In science, when we discover new things, evident that contradict our understandings and beliefs, we make changes accordingly. Religion would never allow this regardless of evidence and discoveries.
Some scientists believe that today's states evolved from states like Tennessee, but there is a "debate" amongst them, with other scientists believing God created Tennessee 10,000 years ago.
*sigh*...are we going down this road, again? We all know this is going to be smacked down in court, just like the past half-dozen such laws have been crushed, including the case from a couple of years ago in which a conservative judge appointed by a GOP president practically laughed these creationist idiots out of the courtroom.
There is no doubt how this is going to turn out. Why do these mouth-breathing morons insist upon wasting everyone's taxdollars with this lunacy?
Because they are incapable of accepting that life is only temporary. They desperately fight for validation of their belief in eternal life. Republicans play on their desperation. Playing to people's fears is all the republican party has, really. Take away the gun nuts, the delusional religious extremists, and the ignorant, uneducated hillbillies and the republican party would be finished.
Since the universe recycles everything. Could it be that the consciousness of a person be recycled as well? Perhaps the Budists have something there.
Not sure that makes any sense Ed, a person's consciousness relies on a functioning brain which rots in the ground and turns into worm food.
This bill is as dumb as islamic fanatics blowing themselves up with innocents in the name of Allah to make a (no) point, but to take power. Church is for Sunday mornings, with the proper attitude the rest of the week.
This bill is regression.
IF there is to be a discussion of the reality and existence of evolution and science and global warming, then there must be a discussion of the reality of GOD and the Bible and Christianity and creationism.
If there must be empirical proof of evolution, then there must be empirical proof of God and creation.
If you want to teach your children to be stupid, you can start your own schools and tell them all of the hair brained baloney like this you want.
For the many who adhere to the notion of Creationism or Evolution as conflicting theorys, please see post #2.9 which provides three unique clues to think about...Scientifically, one theory is the best evidence proving the other
PS: I adhere to no religion
If you preach creationism in my school, can I teach science in your church?
Cameron,......Of course.....A very wise man once said, "Truth and knowledge are sometimes fleeting, solutions and answers are sometimes bizarre, but only through open minds can truth and knowledge flow, close minds most often serve as harbor to fear and ignorance." .....With that in mind, I do think it would be educational to allow for exploration of other conflicting theories in order to expand students knowledge, but I am opposed to teaching any form of religion.
In my opinion, Creationism and evolution are intertwined, but not in the nature presently taught by any religious sect.