Crazy Christian Creationists Want Biblical BS Inserted Into Science Texts

Read Time:2 Minute, 9 Second

Cuckoo creationists, whose job it is to “advise” the state board of education’s Texas Education Agency, are no longer even trying to hide the fact that they want to insert pseudo-scientific material grounded in religious beliefs into public school science textbooks.

creationist's logic

Terrence Stutz of the Dallas Morning News reports that evolution detractors appointed to the review boards are urging the textbook publishers to ignore the Supreme Court (along with science) and push Creationism, or be rejected.

A nutritionist, one of the panelists reviewing the biology textbooks, said that “creation science based on biblical principles should be incorporated into every biology book that is up for adoption.”

Religious conservatives serving on state textbook review panels have criticized several proposed high school biology textbooks for not including arguments against Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution.

The review panels include several creationists. They urge the State Board of Education to reject the books unless publishers include more disclaimers on key concepts of evolution.

One reviewer even suggested a rule requiring that each biology book cover “creation science.” That would run counter to a 1987 U.S. Supreme Court ruling. The decision banned the teaching of creationism in public school science classes.

“I understand the National Academy of Science’s strong support of the theory of evolution,” said Texas A&M University nutritionist Karen Beathard, one of the biology textbook reviewers. “At the same time, this is a theory. As an educator, parent and grandparent, I feel very firmly that creation science based on biblical principles should be incorporated into every biology book that is up for adoption.”

“Now the veil is dropped,” Dan Quinn of the Texas Freedom Network writes. “Some of the reviewers are clearly oblivious to the fact that teaching religious arguments in a science classroom is blatantly unconstitutional.”

The National Center for Science Education and Texas Freedom Network found that the Creationists on the textbook review boards have also:

• asserted that “no transitional fossils have been discovered”

• insisted that there is no evidence for a human influence on the carbon cycle

• claimed that there is no evidence about the effect of climate change on species diversity

• promoted a book touting “intelligent design” creationism as a reliable source of scientific information

• denied that recombination and genetic drift are evolutionary mechanisms

• mischaracterized experiments on the peppered moth as “discredited” and as “fabrication[s]”

Due to the size of the Texas market, textbooks tailored to the state’s standards could actually be used across the country, making the ramifications of the Creationist influence even greater.

Many thanks to RightWingWatch for story contributions.

About Post Author

Professor Mike

Professor Mike is a left-leaning, dog loving, political junkie. He has written dozens of articles for Substack, Medium, Simily, and Tribel. Professor Mike has been published at Smerconish.com, among others. He is a strong proponent of the environment, and a passionate protector of animals. In addition he is a fierce anti-Trumper. Take a moment and share his work.
Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

11 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
10 years ago

“Always look on the bright side of life…de dum, de dum de dum de dum” 😉

Marsha Woerner
Reply to  Norman Rampart
10 years ago

Monty Python is always right for philosophy 🙂

Jess
10 years ago

Sad thing is, if they manage to do this other states will be pulled into it. Texas does a lot of the textbook publishing for many other states because they are so big. I’m just glad CA doesn’t buy books from there, we actually have science classes free of this religious bullshit.

Bill Formby
10 years ago

I was watching a special the other night on the Nat Geo channel about New Zealand where there some species there that are found nowhere else in the world. The Kiwi, for example. Then I thought about Madagascar where the are a number of species that are found nowhere else in the world. I was wondering then how in hell did the creationist account for these occurrences. Actually I could also throw in Australia. How did these particular species develop the way they are, to the habitat they live in separated from the rest of the world if not by evolution. How can they still believe that the entire world was flooded, destroying all life forms except for what this guy put on his boat when a number of the species were located 8,000 to 9,000 miles away from him. It is beyond my imagination, unless they believe in the theory that aliens were the Gods then some of their stuff might make sense. Have you ever noticed the similarity between the drawings of the Egyptians and the Predator in the movie. Really spooky.

Wolfkiss
Reply to  Professor Mike
10 years ago

Of course it’s a theory. The problem is that the word “theory” is widely misunderstood. And strictly speaking, science never proves anything. It only disproves a hypothesis or theory, then develops another hypothesis and begins to test that one.

Contrast that with religion, where testing and even questioning is unthinkable.

Reply to  Wolfkiss
10 years ago

Once the hypothesis is proven it’s no longer a theory. It’s not the “theory of evolution” any longer. It’s just “evolution.”

Marsha Woerner
Reply to  rowdy62
10 years ago

The word “proof” is another that’s misunderstood and misused. In the scientific sense, things are not “proved”. As for evolution, there is a huge amount of evidence that points to it, but it still, theoretically, could be dis-proved. It’s not likely to happen (huge understatement), but some evidence of, for instance, marsupials dating back to the supposed flood, in that part of the world, COULD be found. Similarly, if there were evidence found of a human having been eaten by a dinosaur, it would dis-prove that humans and dinosaurs were not around at the same time. None of this is likely to happen, but it COULD. But truly, “proving” in the scientific sense, as opposed to the mathematical sense, really doesn’t happen. As I said, ALL of science is theories. That’s why the use of the word “theory” is meaningless in this discussion. (For further discussion, see Karl Popper and falsifiability in Wikipedia)

Marsha Woerner
10 years ago

Fortunately, my kids are both high school age, or the younger one will be next year, and they had parents that are both scientists. And were pretty vocal about Christianity versus science. I feel really really sorry for anyone who will be introduced to any of this as science! Yes, evolution is a theory. SCIENCE, in general, is a THEORY! That’s what science IS. By DEFINITION, it’s dis-provable! That’s just one of the differentes between science and religion. But seriously, how can you CALL creationism science?

10 years ago

Why is it no longer surprising that the religious wackos do not understand the difference between “theory” and “hypothesis”? Moreover, they are not even remotely embarrassed to reveal their ignorance. Actually, they seem to be proud of it. ” ain’t no heathen egghead. Ah’m jest a good christian boy. God said it, I believed it. ‘Nuff sed.””

Quinn
10 years ago

If any of my children were actually taught this religious nonsense I would take them out and home school them.

Previous post 3 Crazy Conspiracy Theories
Next post The Continuing Adventures Of Billy No Mates : FIGHT! FIGHT!
11
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x