Top of the world looking down on creation

Texas public schools are at it again.

On Monday, the Austin American Statesman printed a story about a charter school operator and the questionable science curriculum that they are teaching with regard to evolution. I use the description “questionable” as this is what the God Squad would like you to believe. The fact of the matter though is that they are undermining science with religion, using the specious idea that science is “questionable” and they are promoting “critical thinking skills” to the student body.

The article can be found here:  http://www.statesman.com/news/news/critics-say-students-are-taught-creationism-in-two/nc3hC/

The schools in question are Lanier and Travis High Schools whose biology curriculum states: “Many leading scientists are questioning the mechanisms of evolution and are disputing the long timeline required for the evolutionary process.”

Experts say that this is an outright lie. Further, they say that discrediting evolution in such a manner, undermines science, and “…invites students to consider creationism as an alternative.”

It is not.

The Charter School operator, Responsive Education Solutions' CEO, Chuck Cook says that their “…science curriculum teaches evolution, noting, but not exploring, the existence of competing theories,…”

There are no “competing theories"; this very idea is an affront to science and does a disservice to students.

Responsive Education Solutions receives $80 million in state and federal funding, and has been served with a cease-and-desist letter by at least one national advocacy group, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and could be open to lawsuits for violating the First Amendment.

The Texas State Board of Education has been under fire for nearly a decade with regard to it’s stances on science and social studies standards. These problems, though lessened in recent years, are still under scrutiny for their bowing to pressures from the public to make political and religious based curriculum the standard in Texas public schools, as opposed to fact based, scientifically and historically accurate teaching.

The Board’s response to this brewing “controversy” is to point to their own 2009 Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) guidelines which state: “In all fields of science, analyze, evaluate, and critique scientific explanations, by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing, including examining all sides of scientific explanation, so as to encourage critical thinking by the student.”

Responsive Ed’s Cook responded in a letter to staff and parents that, “Our science curriculum does examine all sides of the scientific evidence relating to evolution - both for and against - just as we are required to do by the [Texas standards] for biology.” This in their effort to provide a “…balanced look at differing opinions on the theory of evolution…”.

Nice try Mr. Cook, but “opinions” have no place in the realm of scientific study, and there is no legitimate science that goes "against" the theory of evolution.

Kenneth Miller, a professor of biology at Brown University and author of the very textbook approved by the state of Texas for biology education, says that the standards explicitly require the curriculum to be centered on scientific - not supernatural - explanations. The textbook contains no mentions or allusions to creationism.

Yet Responsive Ed’s curriculum crosses the line into the realm of religion, creationism, and intelligent design. The section called Origin of Life includes the bible quote, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth.” This does not appear in the textbook, and Miller points out that, “The TEKS standards are quite specific in requiring the scientific explanations.”

The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly, going back to the 1960’s, that teaching creationism in public schools is a direct violation of the First Amendment. Rob Boston, spokesman for Americans United for Separation of Church and State has said that by requiring science teachers to explore “all sides” of evolution, the state of Texas has invited them to talk about creationism.

This allows personal opinions to be compared with the scientific method, a wholly deplorable notion in and of itself.

“The court rulings are crystal clear”, says Boston, “Another thing to consider is that charter schools are public institutions. This curriculum, it fits in with the more modern attempts to bring creationism into the schools.”

Likewise, activist Zack Kopplin questioned Responsive Ed’s curriculum in an article on Slate.com, were he accuses them of teaching “stealth creationism” by seeking to discredit evolution. “They will give you evidence for it [evolution], but, right after that, say the evidence is weak,” he told the American Statesman, “They undercut all the evidence they provide.” He went on to state that students are “…likely to see creationism as an alternative, so it’s effectively teaching creationism in the classroom.”

The Austin Independent School District is conducting a review of the curriculum, going through it line by line, in an effort to see “…what’s been taught each day.”

So, given this story, and the consistent stupidity displayed by all official governance starting with the Board down to the very teachers in the classroom, I think it is time to go over a few facts…

First and foremost, scientific theory can be tested. A theory exists based on not proof, but the body of evidence that supports a theory. Evidence acquired through extensive testing, experimentation, and observation. Theories such as gravity, plate tectonics, and evolution are real. They have withstood rigorous and extensive testing, experimentation, and observation, all of which support the theories in question. There are no competing theories to these, nor does evidence exist that disprove these theories. That is why they are theories and not hypotheses.

Creationism however does not even rise to the level of scientific theory or hypothesis. Testing cannot be performed. Experimentation cannot be performed. Observation cannot be performed, only explained away with theology. If creationism were theory, it would provide evidence of the existence of god, ending religious and spiritual inquiry altogether with concrete explanations of the divine.

It has not.

Second, evolution does not compete with religion. There is nothing to stipulate that evolution is not a part of a grand design, or that it is. It cannot stipulate one way or the other, because again, scientific theory requires examination, experimentation, and observation. It can examine, experiment, and observe the evolution of species, but has not unequivocally determined the origin of the existence of life on Earth or throughout the universe. Evolution neither confirms or denies the existence of god, or a grand design. But, it doesn’t try to.

The flip side of that equation though, is that creationism and intelligent design in fact do deny evolution. They stipulate that evolution is unscientific, and largely an atheist attack on faith. God created the universe and gave man dominion over the Earth and all of it’s flora and fauna. For, it is written…

These views are not only antithetical to scientific theory and exploration, but in my opinion, border on criminal negligence. Stupidity has no place in public schools, and creationism - as “theory” - is just plain stupid. Anyone affiliated with a public school that spreads this ignorance should be banned for life from any contact with the public school systems, including membership in the PTA.

Third, the state guidelines stipulate: “…analyze, evaluate, and critique scientific explanations, by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing, including examining all sides of scientific explanation…”. I would posit first that students do not have the ability - no matter gifted they may be - to do this using the scientific method. I would also posit that one can analyze evolution, and even observe it in action, however they cannot do so with creationism. Therefore, creationism cannot be evaluated scientifically, and has no place in a science classroom.

Fourth, it is a false equivalency to pose this as “controversy”. There is no controversy when putting science side-by-side with theology. This is an apples to oranges comparison, and by calling it “controversial” it tries to make an apples to apples comparison. It is not.

Parochial schools, many of which provide fine educations, such as top notch Catholic high schools and universities, do not make such “controversy”. Students are taught science in science classes - including the theory of evolution - and are taught theology in philosophy courses. This further attests to the fact that evolution and religion are not incompatible, and can exists in their own forums.

Fifth, this only serves as a solid argument for a national curriculum. There is a reason why American test scores and educational development lag far behind many other nations. Local and state control of schools give way to school boards being populated with “Flat Earthers”, housewives, religious leaders, and people with political agendas. These are the same people who question whether or not sex education courses should be "medically accurate". I shit you not; this is a topic of discussion right now in a nearby school district.

These people have no place setting curriculum. They might effectively manage school districts, but the material taught in schools should be designed by people in the respective fields of science, math, history, and English; not by people who have no background, therefore no credible or pertinent knowledge of such subjects.

Lastly, in a secular society, religion should not be a concern of public schools. No accommodations should be made with preference to any religious activities. Prayer groups should not be allowed, dietary restrictions should not be allowed, and gender segregation should not be allowed. It is not up to the schools to make sure the religious lead a life of piety, it is the responsibility of the pious. The only time that religion should ever be mentioned in school outside of the personal opinions of the student body, should be in a philosophy class, where it can be discussed in relation to other religions and spiritual movements. Not taught, but discussed.

Schools have a responsibility to society. We need to continually encourage them to meet those responsibilities, and not allow them to churn out ignorance disguised as science.