Posts
Utah Board of Education Defies Buttars
The Utah state Board of Education has adopted a position that fully supports the teaching of evolution.
From the NCSE:
Continue ReadingAbout a dozen scientists in attendance endorsed the statement, telling the board that "intelligent design" is not good science. Duane Jeffrey, a professor of biology at Brigham Young (and NCSE board member) compared "intelligent design" to astrology and pyramid power, while Gregory Clark, a professor of bioengineering at the University of Utah, told the board, "Intelligent design fails as science because it does exactly that -- it posits that life is too complex to have arisen from natural causes, and instead requires the intervention of an intelligent designer who is beyond natural explanation. Invoking the supernatural can explain anything, and hence explains nothing."
At the meeting, Buttars told the board that he intended either to introduce legislation calling for the teaching of "intelligent design" or arrange for there to be a referendum on next year's ballot. He told the Deseret Morning News that his "Academic Freedom Act" would "enhance the effectiveness of science education while at the same time ensuring that students are given credible alternative explanations for the origin of life on earth"; the newspaper quoted the act as saying, "We believe that excluding recent scientific discoveries simply because they run counter to the Darwinian model of origins is not good educational policy." [What discoveries? Calling something "complex" is not much of a discovery - LDS-SR.]
Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. has also expressed support for science and the exclusion of intelligent design from science classes.
The board of education's statement is also available here. (Scroll down.)
Way to go Utah! ...so far.
2 comments:
Cayblood,
It seems to me that if people's belief is obvious, then a stronger case can be made that including it is pandering. What purpose does it serve other than to sow doubt in students' minds about the validity of what they are going to learn? You can decide for yourself which way is politics; the bland statement you suggest wouldn't bother me. But can you say that Sen. Buttars is motivated by a desire for excellence in science, not a mix of religious/political activism (with a healthy dose of bullying)?
To say that God created the earth (you cite Duane Jeffery) is like hearing in an archeology class, "Some people believe Jesus was a historical person and walked from the temple to the Mount of Olives." Perhaps not objectionable.
Intelligent design says, "Yes, and we have found a few of his footprints!" That's a mighty big claim, of which the overwhelming majority of scientists (including religious ones) are not convinced.
If you want more of my views on intelligent design, see the top of my sidebar.
Cayblood,
I think that any self-respecting teacher would feel morally obligated to help his/her students at least have a basic awareness of the variety of beliefs that are out there. This is not something that I would dedicate more than a few minutes to as a preface to teaching evolution...
I have no particular objection to this, and I think the statement the Utah board of education adopted allows for it.
Intelligent design might mean different things to different people, but as defined by the Discovery Institute--the think-tank that is responsible for pushing this debate lately--it has concrete meaning.
In the Utah context, Buttars may not really care how the DI defines the issue, but his bullying and flagrant disregard for science--"I realize that is a dramatic statement, so to be clear, let me restate: There is zero scientific fossil evidence that demonstrates organic evolutionary linkage between primates and man"--is disturbing and I don't think it should be tolerated.
Post a Comment