Wesley:
>If proponents of some idea claimed to be scientific should
>ever resort to the legislatures and courts to prevent any
>competing idea from being discussed in the classroom
>(Tennessee v. Scopes), cast vague doubts about a competing
>idea (various "textbook disclaimers"), or to mandate the
>teaching of their own view as if scientific (Arkansas Act 590
>and similar), I would urge students to be skeptical of
>whatever was being advanced politically rather than through
>scientific peer review.
Hi Wesley,
Then Darwinists could ensure that ID was never mentioned in peer review
articles, right? That might have been the strategy of the high school
mentioned below, but I think it backfired. Its spring, and I wonder how many
students would have bothered with supplementary reading in biology? Maybe a
half dozen would have taken a look at a couple. Now, since the articles have
been banned, you can bet all the students have run off copies from the
internet and are clandestinely bootlegging them around behind the gym. And
not just biology students! Kids who couldn't stand to dissect a dead frog
have their curiosity aroused.
Since the local paper is running a poll on the matter, even the parents are
acquiring a little biology education.
Long after ID is the majority assumption in the US, England will be stuck in
the dark age of "random mutation and natural selection". Why? England
doesn't have an ACLU.
Below are excerpts from the newspaper article:
Bertvan
http://www.skagitvalleyherald.com/daily/00/may/28/a1dehart.html
Skagit Valley Herald, Sunday,
School officials throw extra science materials out of class
Teacher has been at center of local evolution debate.
Recently DeHart, the science teacher accused two years ago by the
American Civil Liberties Union of bringing God into the classroom, found
some new evidence pointing out alleged flaws in research done to support
Darwin's theories. And DeHart wanted to introduce that evidence to his class.
Principal Beth Vander Veen refused to allow DeHart to introduce five
articles -- all from mainstream publications -- to supplement the biology
course curriculum during the last three weeks of class when the students
study evolution.
Vander Veen had to leave town Friday after deciding to reject DeHart's
choice of supplemental material and couldn't be reached for comment. She
had made her decision to deny that additional reading material after having
the five articles reviewed by the school district's lawyer and by the head
of the high school science department.
DeHart has been in the public eye since 1998, when the ACLU accused him of
teaching the theory of intelligent design. That theory assumes the world is
too complex to be anything but the plan of an intelligent agent, which the
ACLU believes borders on teaching creationism in a state-funded, public
school. When Superintendent Rick Jones took over in 1998, he told DeHart to
stop teaching intelligent design.
The five articles that DeHart wanted to introduce this month do not promote
the intelligent design theory. The articles were rejected, in part, because
several
of them were not peer reviewed, or widely accepted by the scientific
community,
Jones said. One article was an opinion piece from the journal "The Scientist."
Jonathan Wells, who has a Ph.D. in molecular and cell biology and is a
senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, authored two of the articles
DeHart wanted to share with his class to supplement the evolutionary unit
of his 34-week biology course.
"Basically, these articles have to do with science and there's no
intelligent design related on these works. But these put doubts into the
kids' minds.
one of the articles DeHart wanted his class to read was written by Stephen
Jay
Gould, a zoology and geology professor at Harvard University and a noted
authority on Darwin's theories.
DeHart maintains that he has no problem with evolution. "Evolution is
true," DeHart said. But he said questions have been raised when some of
Darwin's theories are examined under the microscope.
"And it's only when both sides (of the Darwin debate) are looked at can we
come to a clearer understanding," DeHart said.
DeHart's supporters say they see no reason why the high school biology
teacher can't be allowed to introduce articles into the classroom which
might further the debate on Darwinian theory.
"We don't want to cut evolution short," said businessman Jerry Benson. "We
just want to add a day or two of something else."
Benson is treasurer for the pro-DeHart group called Skagit Parents for
Scientific Truth in Education. Last week, Benson presented petitions to the
Burlington-Edison School Board with the signatures of 1,800 people
throughout Skagit County who supported what DeHart was teaching in his
classroom.
Two of DeHart's students also presented signatures to the board from 145
students who wanted to show support for their biology teacher.
The local paper is running the following poll on its front page:
Do you think Burlington-Edison High School biology teacher Roger
DeHart should be allowed to present materials in class which present flaws in
evolution theory?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 29 2000 - 05:18:28 EDT