School lessons will now be impartial

Jan 27, 2009 10:08 GMT  ·  By

It's no secret to anyone that most people in Texas are very religious, and that they adopt a very strict code when it comes to their beliefs. However, at times, their zeal can be overwhelming, and thus they have ended up in a situation where the fundamental truths of the evolution theory have been contradicted by biblical quotes. Text books have been allowed to spread doubt among students, and question the internationally-approved theories, just for the benefit of some. Now, adepts of the theory of evolution have managed to obtain the removal of dangerous wording from text books, which will hopefully reduce the influence of religious fanatics on young minds.

For 20 years, Texas teachers have been allowed to abuse an erroneous formulation in school text books, which said that the class should analyze “strengths and weaknesses” of the theories presented. In fact, this was used as an excuse by teachers to inoculate doubt into the minds of youngsters as to the theory of evolution, and to push the “word of god into their minds.”

“Removing the concept of 'strengths and weaknesses,' when the supposed weaknesses are completely bogus, is a real victory,” Michael Zimmerman from the Butler University in Indianapolis, Indiana, who is a part of the campaign against creationism, says.

However, the hearings with the committee have not passed without a hitch. Creationists have managed to slip unfair amendments to various scientific formulations, such as for instance when they have casted doubt on the role of fossils as part of our history.

Instead of seeking to “evaluate a variety of fossil types, transitional fossils, fossil lineages, and significant fossil deposits with regard to their appearance, completeness and rate and diversity of evolution,” they have introduced the phrase “proposed transitional fossils,” which automatically implies that evolution is just a supposition.

“Transitional fossils are not 'proposed'. There is no doubt about their existence, so insertion of the word ‘proposed' makes that part unscientific, since it suggests a false uncertainty,” Texas Citizens for Science group campaign president geologist Steven Schafersman argues.

Another amendment invites students to “assess the arguments for and against universal common descent in the light of this fossil evidence,” an idea that infers that not all life came from the same common source.

“This change is by far the most unscientific revision, and is completely unacceptable. There are no good arguments in modern science 'against universal common descent,' which has been accepted by biologists for over 130 years, so the phrase is asking for something that authors and publishers cannot honestly supply,” Schafersman concludes.