A Mississippi lawmaker has introduced a bill that would require textbooks to include a disclaimer describing evolution as a “controversial theory” and advising students to keep an “open mind” to other explanations for the origin of life.
Rep. Gary Chism introduced the legislation, House Bill 25, earlier this month. The bill has been referred to two committees, Education and Judiciary A.
The proposal, if enacted, would require the State Board of Education to include the 200-word disclaimer on the inside front cover of textbooks that include evolution topics.
“The word ‘theory’ has many meanings, including: systematically organized knowledge; abstract reasoning; a speculative idea or plan; or a systematic statement of principles,” the opening paragraph of the bill states. “Scientific theories are based on both observations of the natural world and assumptions about the natural world. They are always subject to change in view of new and confirmed observations.”
“This textbook discusses evolution, a controversial theory some scientists present as a scientific explanation for the origin of living things. No one was present when life first appeared on earth. Therefore, any statement about life’s origins should be considered a theory,” the proposal continues.
Ivor Biggun wrote “Oh, by the way, when the rapture comes and you see me floating toward heaven, I’ll be sure to wave at you all there stuck on earth.”
The rapture already happened, and both of the true Christians were taken. Sorry, but you weren’t on the reservation list. God crossed your name off when Santa told him you were on the “naughty” list.
Over here in Europe we think it is an excellent idea that US schools teach “Creationism” instead of evolution. We also hope that very shortly after they replace Astronomy with Astrology, Chemistry with Alchemy and Geology with Divining. After which they will have no need for Physics, Engineering, Mathematics, or very shortly after that – Electricity!
Only joking folks!
I do find it horrific that these people haven’t the forethought to see the consequences of their actions on American science in twenty years time.
Are they so frightened of what the clear light of reality would do to their beliefs that they would condemn their children to a new dark age?
Evolution is only controversial until you actually look at the fossil record and see that some have even been able to predict exactly what type and age of rock to look in to find an unknown fossil of a particular type, as in the case with Tiktaalik.
Evolution is only controversial until one asks why we need new flu shots every year. Hint: It is because of the evolution of new germs.
Evolution is only controversial until one asks why medical research is done on rats, monkeys, and chimps. Remember, the question is not whether it would be ethical to test on humans first. The question is why testing on other animals yields useful results. Hint: It’s because we’re related.
Evolution is only controversial until one asks why the rods and cones in our eyes are backwards, causing the bundle of nerves to go through a spot in the retina and giving us a blind spot in each eye. Note, this is only true of mammals. Squid and Octopi also have complex eyes and their rods and cones face forward.
Evolution is only controversial for those who have evolved in such a way as to have no brain in their heads.
I lived for a time in Texas and, as Molly Ivins used to point out, in the state legislature you could often hear “Thank God for Mississippi!” Meaning that in SO many areas, Texans weren’t the worst state out of 50; Mississippi was usually worse. Areas such as: infant mortality, literacy, life expectancy, median income, median education, teacher/student ratios, pollution levels (Louisiana often “won” this one), infrastructure investment, and a zillion other “quality of life” measures.
Sometimes it seemed (sometimes still seems) Texas is trying hard to catch “up”.
The best place for religious wingnutts to propagate foolish thought is with morons.
Hmmm, I wonder which states immediately come to mind?
yeah because you can never be sure about all the facts we have. Put the same disclaimer on the bible, and then we will talk.
Ivor, what pisses me off that the wingnuts who want creationism in science are proselytizing in schools. You cannot do that in the USA, they know it, so they’ve written several semi-believable lies in an effort to push the agenda.
Too many people don’t understand what you wrote…science and religion can coexist if you need them to. There are plenty of scientists who are religious, and they’re fine with evolution.
Evolution is controversial mainly in the US, I think the rest of the world accept it as the most accurate theory, and consider hard core creationism as a fairy tale. I can’t believe the most powerful country in the world still has those issues (and still is not using metric).
And to creationists: just why can’t God have created life using evolution? Who are we to place restrictions on Him, assuming He is some kind of parlor magician who not only made life out of nowhere, but has been trying tu deceive us, HIS CREATION, by planting false fossil evidence?.
#38–fik==you are lucky to live in a culture where “these” religious types aren’t so emboldened to spout their idiocy. The thumpers come in many varied hues and colors. My own favorite is that “nothing in the bible conflicts with Science” or “Old Earth Fundies.”
You see, “a day” can mean whatever god wants it to and the 6 days of creation could have taken place 5 Billion years ago and evolution in fact has taken place “since” the act of creation.
This convinces a few people who tend to take these things at face value. With no knowledge of the real world, no immediate inconsistency comes to their minds.
Its a social/psycho phenomenon for sure.
People, people, why can’t we all just get along? I propose a compromise. Let the textbook disclaimer go through, as long as they’re willing to accept a similar disclaimer on every copy of the Bible.
Since a number of scientific and psychological terms have been thrown around in this discussion, I thought I would add another one. I think you might guess where this applies.
“COGNITIVE DISSONANCE: A psychological term denoting the mental state in which two or more incompatible or contradictory ideas — e.g., enjoying smoking and knowing it to be unhealthy — are both held to be true. While a person who is successful at keeping them in suspension might be said to have a high degree of negative capability — implying that the conception has a potentially useful role to play in psychological criticism — a person who is not successful may simply be repressing one of the ideas in favor of the other, thus producing dissonant discomfort.”
#41–Jeff==you’ll have to point out to us lexicologically challenged just who in this discussion can hold two ideas at once.
Ivor Biggun, I’m taking my dogs to obedience school. So my question is, are they old enough to learn about Jesus?
I’d hate to see them left behind during the rapture.
I have to admit, I’m glad that they putting a notice in the book. It’s crazy that so many people teach macro evolution like it’s fact. There simply isn’t proof for it, even Darwin would claim his theory is bogus today.
# 44 adaml52 said, “It’s crazy that so many people teach macro evolution like it’s fact.”
What do you mean? There are tons of 1/2 cow, 1/2 whale fossils all over the place.
Paddy-O (facetiously) wrote “There are tons of 1/2 cow, 1/2 whale fossils all over the place.”
Somehow YOU wound up with the blowhole. Go figure 😉
# 46 Gary, the dangerous infidel said, “Paddy-O (facetiously) wrote”
Yes, I was joking. That’s all that’s left to do when talking about macro evolution.
#38 – Fik,
Evolution is controversial mainly in the US, I think the rest of the world accept it as the most accurate theory, and consider hard core creationism as a fairy tale. I can’t believe the most powerful country in the world still has those issues (and still is not using metric).
100% correct. I have a hard time with this too … and I live in the U.S. There are many indicators in this, the worlds wealthiest nation, that are more indicative of developing nations than developed democratic ones. I have no idea why this is the case. It simply is.
Religiosity is far higher in the U.S. than any other developed democratic nation.
Violent crime is far higher in the U.S. than any other developed democratic nation.
Infant mortality is far higher in the U.S. than any other developed democratic nation.
Life expectancy is lower in the U.S. than any other developed democratic nation.
Income disparity is far higher in the U.S. than any other developed democratic nation.
All of these are indicators of developing nations, not developed democratic ones. These make no sense. Unfortunately, observable facts need no explanation, they simply are. And, the facts are that the U.S. has many factors in common with developing nations rather than developed democratic nations.
#43 – QB,
Ivor Biggun, I’m taking my dogs to obedience school. So my question is, are they old enough to learn about Jesus?
I’d hate to see them left behind during the rapture.
Sorry QB, it is very clear in the bible that pets will not get caught up in the rupture with you. That why the good godless folks at Jesus Pets have provided a perfect solution.
http://jesuspets.com/
Don’t forget to read their customer agreement. It’s a classic!
http://tinyurl.com/atx5ft
#44 – adaml52,
I have to admit, I’m glad that they putting a notice in the book. It’s crazy that so many people teach macro evolution like it’s fact. There simply isn’t proof for it, even Darwin would claim his theory is bogus today.
Wow … it’s amazing how quickly one can define oneself as an apologist by uttering a simple phrase. Calling it “macro evolution” would almost make you sound intelligent, if it wasn’t such an obvious tip-off that you’ve read way too much on apologetics and failed to understand the difference between scientific proof and legal proof or between science and poorly calculated probabilities.
Anyway, here’s a couple of articles on observed evolution in human time frames. Thought you might find them interesting, if you can comprehend them.
http://tinyurl.com/ynprgx
http://tinyurl.com/6f5ka8
#45 – Paddy-trOll,
What do you mean? There are tons of 1/2 cow, 1/2 whale fossils all over the place.
Damn you’re stupid. You really don’t have a freakin’ clue do you?
You should not try to look for intermediates between species that are not closely related. Whales and cows obviously can’t interbreed and split from each other many millions of years ago. But, if you want to look for 1/2 whale 1/2 land mammal intermediates, we’ve found them. Curiously enough, they happen to be right at the right age to be during the time of the split. It’s funny how that happens again and again and again and again and again in the fossil record.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambulocetus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilosaurus
#44 – adaml52,
#45 – Paddy-trOll,
Exactly how do the two of you explain the find of Tiktaalik?
http://tinyurl.com/bjgrlq
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiktaalik
Note the important text from the first link.
Having read Your Inner Fish, by Neil Shubin, and having read the details of how he looked for exactly the right type and age of rock to preserve fossils from the right time period and then that he went there and found a fossil that fit neatly between fish and land animals with the precursors of limbs with one bone at the shoulder, two bones from the elbow to the wrist, and then lots of blobby bones that would later become fingers, the pattern followed by all terrestrial vertebrates ever since, I can only assert that this is exactly the type of testable prediction that science can make and religion cannot.
How do you see it otherwise?
# 52 Misanthropic Scott said, “Exactly how do the two of you explain the find of Tiktaalik?”
Same way the lungfish s explained.
How do explain the complete absence of what would constitute the other 99.9999999999999999999% of missing fossil record?
Alex, I’ll take how stupid can you be for $300.
Answer: “How do explain the complete absence of what would constitute the other 99.9999999999999999999% of missing fossil record?”
Alex: What is the normal action of decay?
So the issue is ALL ABOUT stupid RELIGION, lack of SCIENCE, and the sleazebag POLITICIANS who take advantage of the former and disrespect the latter.
Just about everyone involved should be voted off the island.
That explains why they choose to live on the edges of the Mississipi river.
# 55 bobbo said, “Alex: What is the normal action of decay?”
Yep, full whale and full cow fossils are resistant to decay. This has got to be the stupidest post you’ve made to date…
#53 – Paddy-trOll,
# 52 Misanthropic Scott said, “Exactly how do the two of you explain the find of Tiktaalik?”
Same way the lungfish s explained.
Which would be how exactly? Do you not see that you have not even made an attempt to answer the question? How do you explain the accurate prediction of where to search for just such a fossil find? This is not a lungfish. This was not known to exist other than by evolutionary principles that it must. The time frame for the formation of the rock was predicted by evolution. Then, the actual fossil was found. Go ahead explain that as you would a lungfish.
I dare you to actually try this time.
How do explain the complete absence of what would constitute the other 99.9999999999999999999% of missing fossil record?
Exactly where did you get your number? Do you have a source for it? No. You never have a source for anything. You just make shit up as you go along.
As for the rather detailed fossil record that we do have as well as the holes we have in it, well, it may come as a shock to an idiot such as yourself, but most animals don’t fossilize on death. If they did, carnivores couldn’t exist.
That said, the fossil record is quite a bit more detailed than you would expect, if you took the time to read anything on the subject.
#57–Paddy-O-Dumbshit==you are aware that the argument about lack of intermediate fossils is emblematic of how stupid the young earth fundies are right????
Coincidentally, the whale evolution “used to be” one of the cited examples for proof of young earth position. As the false arguments based on the ignorance of “god in the gaps” gets knocked down over time what with god sending the blessed rain to wash away the dirt revealing his true plan for us all, I believe the argument has moved on to soft tissue evolution. Soft tissue doesn’t fossilize so this will probably be your winning argument for the years to come.
Alex: No bobbo you are wrong. The correct question is: “WTF is Paddy-Zero.”
# 58 Misanthropic Scott
You support a theory that demands something to be true that has been to not be true.
So, again,
“How do explain the complete absence of what would constitute the other 99.9% of missing fossil record?”
The onus is on the proponent and this point.
As I thought. You have no answer that resurrects the discredited theory.
Let me know when you have a provable answer…
“Were evolution not supported by such a vast and compelling body of hardened science, the latter option would be viable.” /// Nature Spirits make so much more sense than the sky God. No–somehow the infection of mono-theism took root in the cultures of man. I’ll bet there are other worlds similar to our own who worship Mother Earth with much better results.