Misleading Language in the Latest Anti-Evolution Bill in Oklahoma
State legislators revive a bill in Oklahoma that would affect teaching of evolution, presenting it as "controversial".
Misleading Language in the Latest Anti-Evolution Bill in Oklahoma
The National Center for Science Education just notified me that an anti-evolution bill in Oklahoma has been revived by the state legislature. The language in the bill claims that evolution is “controversial”, which wrongly implies that there’s controversy in the scientific community. There isn’t, of course, though some people in Oklahoma don’t like the implications of evolution for personal or religious reasons.
Here’s an excerpt from the NCSE story:
A bill in Oklahoma that would, if enacted, encourage teachers to present the "scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses" of "controversial" topics such as "biological evolution" and "global warming" is back from the dead. Entitled the "Scientific Education and Academic Freedom Act," House Bill 1551was introduced in the Oklahoma House of Representatives in 2011 by Sally Kern (R-District 84), a persistent sponsor of antievolution legislation in the Sooner State, and referred to the House Common Education Committee. It was rejected there on February 22, 2011, on a 7-9 vote. But, as The Oklahoman (February 23, 2011) reported, the vote was not final, since a sponsor "could ask the committee to bring it up again this session or next year." And indeed, on February 20, 2012, Gus Blackwell (R-District 61) resurrected the bill in the House Common Education Committee….
On February 21, 2012, just a day after HB 1551 was resurrected, the House Common Education Committee voted 9-7 to accept it, hearing no testimony from the public…
In its current incarnation, HB 1551 differs only slightly from Oklahoma's Senate Bill 320 from 2009, which a member of the Senate Education Committee described to the Tulsa World (February 17, 2009) as one of the worst bills that he had ever seen. In its critique(PDF) of SB 320, Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Educationargued, "Promoting the notion that there is some scientific controversy is just plain dishonest ... Evolution as a process is supported by an enormous and continually growing body of evidence. Evolutionary theory has advanced substantially since Darwin's time and, despite 150 years of direct research, no evidence in conflict with evolution has ever been found." With respect to the supposed "weaknesses" of evolution, OESE added, "they are phony fabrications, invented and promoted by people who don't like evolution."
The bill also mentions three other “controversial” topics - the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning. NSCE has expanded its reach to include teaching about climate change. It’s interesting that climate change and evolution are often linked together in education bills and in political discourse. Since there is no human cloning, this last item might refer to stem cell research, using the term “human cloning” to give it a sinister feel.
As for human cloning - I'm of two minds about that.— xdrta- God, I've got to get my daughter to move out of that state.— mike l
- Maybe the sponsors of the bill will get what they ask for: Biology teachers required by law to spend a great deal of time presenting the the scientific strengths of evolution. Fortunately they won't have to spend much if any time on its scientific weaknesses.— Dodd Gambit
- Maybe the sponsors of the bill will get what they ask for: Biology teachers required by law to spend a great deal of time presenting the the scientific strengths of evolution. Fortunately they won't have to spend much if any time on its scientific weaknesses.— Dodd Gambit
- Why put quotes around the other "controversial" topics? While I agree that evolution is not, and putting aside 'chemical origins of life' for lack of definition--global warming and stem cell research are highly controversial from both a scientific & ethical perspective.— Fred Berry
- There they go again.— jxxphilly
- The real issue is that this will inevitably lead to lawsuits which ultimately will have to be paid for by the citizens of Oklahoma. Don't think for one minute that Oklahoma's legislature isn't aware of this.— Aquanerd09
- Dawkins told me that he stopped debating creationists because one of them told him, after a public debate, that she agreed with Dawkins and was only debating him because she was being paid to take that side. The religious right pays people to lie all the time.
Many "global warming a hoax" experts are as fraudulent as the Discovery Institute "researchers". They take their money from a former tobaco advoacy front group and lie in the name of Jesus-- and the energy industry.— Daniel Hoffman - Misleading language? Lying creatoinists? Say it ain't so! It's a shame that these people must rely on lies and ignoring their own hypocrisy to try to control everyone. I would be quite happy to start a community for them wehre they don't have to partake of this "controversial" science at all. No tasty food, no modern medicine, etc.— Vel
In pursuit of her stories, writer Faye Flam has weathered storms in Greenland, gotten frost nip at the South Pole, and floated weightless aboard NASA’s zero-g plane. She has a degree in geophysics from the California Institute of Technology and started her writing career with the Economist. She later took on the particle physics and cosmology beat at Science Magazine before coming to the Inquirer in 1995. Her previous science column, “Carnal Knowledge,” ran from 2005 to 2008. Her new column and blog, Planet of the Apes, explores the topic of evolution and runs here and in the Inquirer’s health section each Monday. Email Faye at fflam@phillynews.com.
Reach Planet of the at fflam@phillynews.com.
