Kansas State Board of Education chairman Steve Abrams has a commentary in Tuesday’s Eagle defending the state’s new science standards. He argues that critics of the standards are misinformed. And he claims that the new standards aren’t about biblical creation or intelligent design.
It’s true, as he says, that the board’s new definition of science doesn’t mention biblical creation. But by removing the phrase “a search for natural explanations” from the definition, the board has opened the door to the supernatural. That’s a radical change from the traditional role of science.
It’s also true that the standards don’t specifically mention intelligent design. But the “criticism” of evolution included in the standards came from intelligent design supporters. These same folks also provided the attorney and the “experts” at the board’s kangaroo court hearings last spring.
It seems clear that what is really motivating most of the conservative board members is their own religious beliefs, not good science — as there is no controversy in mainstream science about evolution. Abrams himself has said in the past that you can’t believe both in evolution and the Bible, even though millions of Christians throughout the world have no problem reconciling the two.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- DavidB on Health care reform would save state money
- DavidB on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
18 Comments
Do you think Steve and the other conservative members of the board ever listen to themselves speak? It just boogles the mind to think that they actually believe that the changes made in the standards are NOT based on religion!
Israelis and Palestinians have been dying needlessly because Bush has not brokered a solution.
Israel cannot broker a solution by itself, and the Palestinians have no power to do anything.
There are enough Israelis and Palestinians who what peace to make it happen. Over 200,000 Israelis demonstrated this week.
Bush is not doing his job.
PR is next to nothing.
On topic, Ed, on topic.The KBOE has a problem understanding much of anything if it’s not related to whatever bible they read. They gotta all be flat-earthers.
Phillip…Re-read your own post… everything in the new standards that is actually “Biblical” was added by you media spin doctors! Questioning of scientific theories is not only allowed, but good. Where would science be if noone ever questioned the theories of the day? We would still be living in the Dark Ages. If evolution is as air tight as everyone says it is, then there should be no problem with opening it up to discussion. If nothing else, it will give the scientists of the future a heads up of the research that needs to be done to shore up the weak points.What I truly believe is that if the media will stop making such a big issue… science classes will go on as if nothing has changed. Who knows a biology teacher that will start teaching creation in class at the risk a lawsuit? To truly understand a theory such as evolution, you must understand it’s strengths and it’s weaknesses. I have read and studied the standards… I don’t see the problem!
The problem with teaching ID, and telling the children that it is an alternative to evolution, is that there is NO evidence whatsoever that ID is in any way, shape or form science by any standards. (whew…one long sentence, what?)
ID belongs in the home or the church, not public schools. ID is totally based on biblical writings and nothing else. Even the bible has been misinterpreted in many areas. For instance: The miricle of the loaves and fishes, and the sermon on the mount has been disputed as to how many were actually there, if it was actually on a mount (one gospel writer says Jesus came down the mountain, one says he went up the mountain).
I am extremely concerned by a fundamentalist shift in many houses of worship and in government, as church and state have become increasingly intertwined in ways previously thought unimaginable.Fmr. PresidentReverend Jimmy CarterFrom the L.A. Times
Sam,Sure, everything in science is up for questions. There are, though, certain rules to be followed. You can’t just say it isn’t true because my daddy, Einstein, or the bible says different; you need credible evidence and a logical way to fit that evidence into existing fact. You also need that evidence to lead to predictions that what you are questioning doesn’t. Then you present it to a reputable scientific journal, for review under the same rules. Then it gets published, and all the other scientists in your field get to take potshots at it in accordance with those rules. If it makes it through all that, you then have a viable theory.ID has done none of that. They play games with terminology to try to sway nonscientists, raise questions that have already been satisfactorily answered, have presented exactly no credible evidence for peer review, and draw their authority from nonprovable sources. As it stands, it ain’t science!
JM..The standards don’t say anything about teaching ID.
Jed..If you read in the standards.. it still says by definition: “Scientific explanations must meet certain criteria. Scientific explanations are consistent with experimental and/or observational data and testable by scientists through additional experimentation and/or observation. Scientific explanation must meet criteria that govern the repeatability of observations and experiments”I would say that pretty much rules out any supernatural answers to scientific questions.
You would think that Abrams, being a vet and therefore a man of science, would know better. But obviously not.Amazing.Near as I can figure, ID means that, “Oh my, this is hard to understand. I guess some higher power set it up. Good, that means I don’t have to hurt my poor little head thinking.”
JM
Sorry, hit the wrong page.
Good post, Jed. It boggles my mind how people just don’t get it. The ID folks are no more than wolves in sheep’s clothing. Of course they have an agenda to promote Christian beliefs in the schools, otherwise why would they have put forth so much effort to challenge and change the science standards in the first place?
Sam,You think it’s not all about selling a particular religious and political agenda to schoolkids? Just wait!
A child’s mind is like an empty vessel. School is one place where that vessel is filled. To fill it with muddy water is to make the contents unclear. We own it to the children to have the clearest of information to fill their minds.
A child can not reason like a scienceist. There for to put a debate between what can be proven and what is nothing more than a simple observation. It to muddy their thinking on the subject.
Well.. all I want is for people to read and understand the standards so they will KNOW what is allowed and what isn’t.First one that has a kid come home from biology class and the teacher taught creation that day, let me know, and we can all protest together!
Again, if nothing’s going to change, then why change the standards in the first place? Why “fix” what’s not broken? If you honestly don’t believe this is an effort by the fundies to get God into the public shools, you’re the one with your head in the sand, Sam!
Call me ostrich man then!! LOL..
But of COURSE the standards are not about religion. That is why the new standards champion, Connie Morris, went on record saying that her beliefs prevent her from allowing evolution to be taught. That her RELIGIOUS beliefs make her challenge the teaching of evolution.
That is why Pat Robertson, in scolding Dover, PA, when they voted out the school board that approved ID) said anyone not accepting ID is turning their back on GOD.
Nope…no religion here…nope. Not a bit.
Ray,Actually, it isn’t about religion; it’s about culture. Religion is simply the vehicle they’ve chosen to effect their version of cultural solidarity.These people see srength in everybody marching to the same drummer, and, of course, they are sure they are the only ones that know the proper beat. Unfortunately, that’s the definition of totalitarianism.They are using religion the same way nazi’s used racial superiority and communists used the marxist class struggle to force everybody into their idea cultural perfection. It’s a form of utopian thinking, and thus foredoomed to failure.I’ve always considered our diversity, ethnic cultural and intellectual, to be our greatest strength, flexibility being tough, while rigidity is brittle. Besides, it’s a lot less boring!