Future speaker, intelligent design believer

You knew the overwhelming support of Florida's proposed new science standards - especially the part about requiring evolution as a key "big idea" that kids must understand to grasp science - couldn't last for long.

First, several Polk County School Board members voiced their opposition. The grassroots foes soon started to speak more loudly, too. Then came the big news that Donna Callaway, a State Board of Education, shared the view that evolution needs some balance in schools.

Now comes state Rep. Will Weatherford, the Wesley Chapel Republican who's already lined up enough votes to become House speaker in 2011. Asked if he supported the evolution-only approach, Weatherford told the Gradebook, ""I'm not a big fan of that."

"I'm not a scientist, but I will tell you in general evolution is one of the theories. To show it from just one perspective and say this is more important or more accurate than the rest, I'm not so sure I'm in favor of that," Weatherford said.

He continued on to state he believes students should learn about all the major theories and be allowed to decide for themselves.

"Intelligent design is something I'm personally a fan of, and something I personally believe in," he said. "But I don't want to see that jammed down their throats, either. It shouldn't be slanted one way or the other."

Comments

[Randy Goggin]

Here is a good link in which Johnathan Sarfati, Ph.D. responds to the Scientific American article that attacks creationism and intelligent design:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/scientific_american.asp

[Rugburn]

That list is as meagre as it is pathetic. Mathematicians? Engineers? Doctors? They know as little about evolution as the layman.

Irreducible complexity is a philosophical argument in much the same vein as "what came before the big bang?" You can only argue that something appears to complex and irreducible; you cannot prove or test it.

Such "arguments" have no place in science. It does not matter what came before the big bang to science, nor should it. This is true for any similar topics that are, and always will be, highly speculative.

[John]

No matter what you believe here's what will happen. Two or three morons with eyes on higher office will throw a bone to the religious conservatives by supporting I.D.

That's fine.

The only problem is this bone will result in the state spending enormous amounts of cash in legal fees as the situation is wrangled through the courts and ultimately decided as it always is. There is so much case law supporting evolution only education, there is no judge in the state who likes their judicial record relatively overturn free would say otherwise.

All this discussion will do is cost a bunch of money and time to end up right back where we are now.

I look forward to seeing you all on the flip-side.

[Tim N.]

To all the haters,

A perfect example of the decline of American society is how we can't seem to carry on a dialogue without it being riddled with immature insults and personal attacks. Many of the previous comments and I’m sure there are more to come, display a bitterness and coldness of heart that saddens me. You may not want to hear this but I will pray for each of you.

[Randy Goggin]

Here is a list of scientists who no longer believe in neo-Darwinian evolution:
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=660

Here is a another list of doctors who have dissented from new-Darwinian dogma:
http://www.pssiinternational.com/list.pdf

These men and women are not stupid; nor are they ignorant of the evidence. While I do believe that creationists have arguments that they could present in the classroom, such as the question of the reliability of radiometric dating methods, catastrophic interpretations of certain geological features, etc., intelligent design seeks to focus only on the question of design and the arguments against evolution. Can evolution explain how irreducibly complex information, structures, and systems are created in the biological world? Where are the thousands of intermediate links between the major animal groups and within those groups? Is the belief that chemicals formed into irreducibly complex lifeforms even plausible?

[Rugburn]

"No! All you need to understand is scientific method. If it's not testable, it's not science."

One cannot effectively hypothesize without knowledge of one's subject. If it's not testable it's not science: correct. If it IS testable...it still MAY NOT be science.

[kjw]

Excuse me, Florida Native, can you define hypothesis? Without creative thinking there wouldn't be any!

[taxmemorethentakemyhome]

I believe if we threw more money at teachers they would teach better. Just a theory.

[Florida Native]

"The point is that much science is beyond those without years of study behind them."

No! All you need to understand is scientific method. If it's not testable, it's not science.

"How can we foster creative thinking in our children if we tell them just one story without asking them to explore other options."

No! Science is not about "creative thinking." It's about hypothesizing, testing, theorizing, testing some more. Science is not and should not be force-feeding "facts" to kids. It should be about teaching scientific method and showing how the method is applied by scientists to use facts and evidence---not creative thinking---to add to our understanding of the world and the universe.

Jeez...apparently they haven't been teaching science correctly since I learned the scientific method from Miss Walder in high school biology.

[kjw]

When I was in grade school I was taught that evolution was one of the theories to explain the existance of life on earth. There were and are other theories, non of which, including evolution, have been proven. I don't think that it is wise to teach only one theory as an absolute truth. Science IS following curiousity to prove a fact, is it not? How can we foster creative thinking in our children if we tell them just one story without asking them to explore other options. It is possible that there is a little truth in all theories. None should be taught as absolute truth, and teachers should not be afraid to explore other possibilities.

[Dennis]

Good links Tom.

Here's another of my favorites. Scientific American addresses the 15 most common creationist/ID nonsense questions/positions. The creationist/IDers use these same tired old, debunked arguments so often that we could just refer to them by their number! "Bubba just used a #1 again!"

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=3&catID=2

[tom]

All of those benevolent religious zealots who would love nothing more than a state religion... Ahh, yes, the memories flood back...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_wars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_persecution

Even Soviet Russia which banned all religion substituted the State as religion and persecuted all heretics.

That's why I am proud to live in the land of the free. Don't take that away from me because your belief system demands otherwise.

[Tom]

Here are some interesting articles from Cecil Adams at the Straight Dope. You don't have to like his snarky attitude, but his research is top notch..

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mevolution.html
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mbigbangmyth.html
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mmicromacroev.html
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mevolutionreply.html
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/061110.html

[Rugburn]

I love it when armchair scientists dismiss one hundred years of concerted research with one sentence. Why not question relativity? Isn't it equally outrageous that displacement in space affects the passage time? Madness to think so! The point is that much science is beyond those without years of study behind them. Let the scientists do their research and teach science, and go bother Hollywood instead.

[IfitstaxexemptIbelieve]

I read through all the comments thinking I would learn more about G.I.P.U.. If they're invisible how do you know they're pink? Is that where the "faith" part comes in? Are we talking "Mary Kay" pink, or are shades of red ok? And the size thing, does "Giant" mean the biggest, or is this just a relative term? Has invisibility even been proven yet or is it just a theory? I believe we deserve answers to these and many more questions before allowing G.I.P.U. to be taught in our schools. Maybe someone could drop off a phamplet with more info.?

Kay, put the pipe down.

...no, really. That's the most amazing analogy I've ever heard.

[jl]

Nice try Kay, that old watch in pieces in a box story has been around longer than time - no pun intended. I had a professor use that as an example back in 1957. It is a great story, but you should not have called it your own. Plus, who would believe a rolex?

[Kay]

You don't have to be religious to believe in intelligent design. I put a rolex in a box in a zillion pieces and no matter how hard I shook the box, jumped on it and slammed it against the wall, that rolex never became whole. Sorry, I just can't believe that something so complex was the result of an explosion. It makes no sense to me at all. Which is why they should teach all theories in school because if they just teach evolution, many will lose interest because they just can't believe it.
Majical

[jl]

This has been so entertaining during this break in my day, yet sad at the same time that there are so many uneducated out there. As a supporter of teaching "science" in the science classroom, I only have one complaint. For those of you who are blaming FL or the south for the ignorant, let me tell you that I fled the great state of Connecticut 10 years ago and have never looked back. I was not raised there, but moved as an adult and thought I was on another planet. What a bunch of backwoods, xenophobic, arrogant, close-minded people. How it got to be a blue state is beyond me. They have a lot of people fooled. Moral of the story - ignorance is everywhere education is not.

[Andy]

Let the voters decide. Creationists err Intelligent Designers win this round.

[Mark]

I'm a fan of Led Zeppelin. Should that be taught in the schools, too?

Or, maybe students should study science, rather than what some politician is a fan of.

[Marc]

Yes, miracles should definitely be tought in schools as well, not just the virgin Mary showing up on the Clearwater office building but don't forget the pancake last week that had both Jesus and the Virgin Mary on it as well. That should definitely also be added to Science textbooks next to in-Intelligent Design.

[Tom]

Do ANY - and I mean ANY - of these ID boosters in our state government even bother to check the Constitutional rulings handed down by the Supreme Court or other federal courts before they even bother to propose these inane ideas?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epperson_v._Arkansas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwards_v._Aguillard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLean_v._Arkansas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster_v._New_Lenox_School_District
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peloza_v._Capistrano_School_District
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District

Oh, and it's not just here...

Here's a European ruling...
http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta07/ERES1580.htm

Again, building on yesterday's blog...

There are established scientific processes and theories. Evolution (and genetics) are backed by more than 100 years of research. No, there is no half chimp-half human fossil out there holding a banana in one hand and a briefcase in the other. That's now how evolution works nor is it described that way. It's accepted around the world as the standard. Water runs downhill because the evidence says so. That's what happens with evolution.

So, you wanna teach creation/ID in school? WHOSE creation story will you use? Hindu? Sikh? Buddhist? Shinto? Native American? Norse? Greek? Roman?

NO. They want the Judeau-Christian creation story told. Why? Because in their self-centered, selfish interpretation of their faith, anyone who doesn't believe their way is going to hell. And, if they can 'save the souls' of Florida's school children by pushing their agenda down the kids' throats, they win.

If they want to teach people about their beliefs and value systems, volunteer at your own church/mosque/temple/whatever on your own time. Tell them whatever you want to. But, keep our public school tax dollars from violating the establishment clause of our Constitution. God knows, we have much more important funding priorities than this.

If the state wants to continue to push this nonsense just to 'make their moral point,' please consider that Florida is in the middle of a HUGE budget crisis. From Key West to Pensacola, money is tight and it's only getting tighter. I certainly hope that these fundamentalist lawmakers and officials are passing the hat do pay the legal fees to defend their beliefs in the court system, because the evidence is pointing to their creationist/ID rot being thrown out by the courts - at GREAT expense.

I don't want dime one of my tax money going to promote their own personal beliefs.

[Fred]

"Why not have it in the schools, pro-choice folks?"
If that's the case, shouldn't we teach all theories in school?
Why is ID the other one?
I belong to "The Church of the SubGenius".
www.subgenius.com/slaq.htm#manifesto
Anotherdmbblonde, do you also support my beliefs being be taught in public school?

[anotherdmbblonde]

I love that we are able to have our own opinions. And since none of us were there at the creation of the world, and have been unable to re-create it, the scientific theory really can't be proved. Yes there is evidence, but nothing can be proven really. Choice is always a good thing, right? Why not have it in the schools, pro-choice folks?

I personally believe that the Christians should leave their God-bubble and instead of studying to be pastors, should study science, and then come out with their conclusions. We might all be blown away! :)

[Dave]

Hey disgusted, how about the "miracles", such as the Virgin Mary's "appearance" in Clearwater back in the day? We should DEFINITELY teach our students about miracles in Science class! Dont you agree? Come on! Forget natural phenomena, we have works of "G-d" going on here. Forget the lab analysis! You CANT question G-D's miracles man....

[Disgusted]

In response to the converse, I think we need a concerted effort to inject science into the church. As a start, how about requiring laboratory analysis of any wine claimed to have been turned to blood, and any bread claimed to have been turned to flesh? Or requiring the preaching of evolution alongside Genesis since the two (or three) accounts are, apparently, equally valid?

Dear God, please fly me north or west.

[Fred]

Here, I'll make it simple:
Rule #1: A scientific theory must be testable. It must be possible in principle to prove it wrong.
That eliminates "Intelligent Design" as a scientific theory.

[Fred]

Please, for the love of your "God", please read this link explaining what a "Scientific Theory" is.
www.astronomynotes.com/scimethd/s2.htm
"ID" is not a scientific theory.

[Jinfla]

First thanks for the entertainment, some witty remarks kept me reading all the comments today.
Thanks to all the educated contributors, they make me feel a little easier driving on our public highways.
I guess I should also thank the more religious of the ID contributors; hopefully they all have those pretty fish on the back of their SUVs so I can keep a safe enough distance away from them.

[Dave]

If ID should be taught in the classroom, then I believe that the theory that Aliens conducted a biological experiment fusing their DNA with chimps should be taught in the classroom as well. Look, anybody in the past that maintained superior technology was ALWAYS considered "Gods" by inferior humans. Take for example, The Spanish Conquistadors vs. the Mayans. So why would the theory that Aliens created humans, placed us in this "Ant Farm" of sorts, and from time to time decided to descend in their "chariots of fire" for SCIENTIFIC observations be so freakin loony? Is it as loony as ID? Faith is faith, right? Science belongs in the classroom. Religion belongs at your place of worship. Nuff Said

[Florida Native]

You asked:

Who created God? If the world is so damn complex that someone had to create it, who created the creator?

Mark Twain said (and I agree):

God created man in his own image, and man, being a gentleman, returned the compliment.

[Ms. Galore]

The best thing about this "discussion" is that those of us who reject "creationism" and the various leaps of faith (and ignoring of logic) required to subscribe to the belief that some benevolent "God" "created" our planet and all life on it are no longer social pariahs. Used to be that we of little or no faith were scapegoated and scorned. Finally, the tide is turning (because of gravitational forces, perhaps) and the God Squad is becoming less and less influential.

[Rob Holiday]

These religious people crack me up. Every religion just hand picks what they want to believe/follow from another religion. Sure, OK, religions had to have a beginning, but from then on, it was "adjusted" to fit the times. Where is the consistency?

One of the stupidest, most simple minded comments: "If you want proof of God just look around." Just because you can't understand something, doesn't mean it comes from the super-natural. If you could take any modern devices or medical cures back 2000 years, you would be considered a god. Only because people from that time can not comprehend what you take for granted. That is what people still do today about things they don't understand.

[Jigsaw]

Who created God?

If the world is so damn complex that someone had to create it, who created the creator?

It's just the same logic. What's the answer?

[Dave]

How stupid does a person have to be to not even understand the scientific meaning of the word "Theory?"

You just show off your ignorance and refuse to learn why you're wrong.

Sad, stupid people. Just keep praying that maybe one day the evil scientists will go away and the world can live in ignorance forever!

Idiots. I am embarrassed to be an American. We are the laughingstock of the world, because of ignorant fundamentalists who refuse to learn science (see the guy above who refuses to learn what a "scientific theory" means).

You are sad, shameful, ignorant fools.

[Chris W]

Tim N and Jason Phillips are just regurgitating stuff they've memorized without understanding it. Forgive them, for they know not of what they speak.

[JLO]

I just can't stop myself. It's too funny.

Irony Alert!

colleen: "ok, darwins theory of the evolutionary tree? who created the tree?"

Ok, intelligent design's intelligent designer? who designed the designer?

[Dennis]

Colleen:

What do you mean who created the tree? The "tree" is nothing more than a graphical depiction of how life branched. WE created the tree as a tool to describe visually how life evolved.

[JLO]

Irony Alert!

FLBobcat: "Nice to see all the evolutionists emerging from their caves today . . . all hail to Xenu!"

If religious people would just stay in their caves they wouldn't have the opportunity to attack the valid scientific process.

Oh, but it was science and applied scientific theories that brought us out of caves.

And as for "all hail anything" - that sounds pretty religious to me.

All hail to the invisible man who lives in the sky and is watching you!

[colleen]

ok, darwins theory of the evolutionary tree? who created the tree?

[Dave]

See what happens when you dont exercise your right to vote? You get an idiot like THIS elected. Wow... Religion is NOT science. There are various types of theories which currently exist regarding how the universe was created and as long as they are ALL based on science and NOT the supernatural, they should be taught in the classroom. Yes, I believe in God, but like it or not, he is STILL a supernatural being. Leave religion and fantasy at the Temple, Church, or wherever you practice your faith and please leave REAL science where it belongs, in the classroom, lab, etc... PS Why is it that its ONLY the Christians supporting this ID concept? You never find fellow Jews standing on their "soap box" screaming about how ID should be taught in the science classrooms! Whats even funnier is that ID is based on OUR book, The Torah, or as Christians call it, The Old Testament as opposed to their book, the NEW Testament... Weird. Thank you, now move along...

[Dennis]

Jason Phillips:

Learn what a theory means in science. It can be found in any elementary level science book.

[Dennis]

Tim N.: Evolution is most certainly science. It underlays all of biology. It is supported by all of biology. It uses the scientific method. Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it not science. I've studied and worked in science for many years, including a graduate degree in biology. I've also read lots of books on evolution, and lots of the tripe put out there by the creationist/ID crowd.

By the way, evolution is NOT anti-god. It may be anti-YOUR chosen view of how your god operates, but it certainly is not anti-god. Many millions of Christians and other religious people understand this very obvious point and accept the fact of evolution.

[Mike]

Oh boy ...

Jason Phillips: What does The Second Law of Thermodynamics have to do with a theory that attempts to explain organization of matter? Your rebuttal would have some credence if you had instead referenced the Law of Conservation of Matter, which states that matter can neither be created nor destroyed (i.e., mass remains constant) within a closed system, although it can be rearranged. Seeing that the earth is a closed system, and that evolution is nothing more than an increasingly adaptive rearranging of extant matter, I would still suggest you hammer out your details a bit better.

You speak of entropy and the creation of heat in any transaction from high-quality to low-quality energy; evolution deals strictly with organization of matter from single-celled organisms through the complex multi-celled organisms that exist today. Energy is dealt with in ecology and the processes of photosynthesis and the food chain. But thanks for playing! You win a copy of The Origin of Species.

[Mike]

Oh boy ... Jason Phillips: What does The Second Law of Thermodynamics have to do with a theory that attempts to explain organization of matter? Your rebuttal would have some credence if you had instead referenced the Law of Conservation of Matter, which states that matter can neither be created nor destroyed (i.e., mass remains constant) within a closed system, although it can be rearranged. Seeing that the earth is a closed system, and that evolution is nothing more than an increasingly adaptive rearranging of matter, I would suggest you hammer out your details a bit better. You speak of entropy and the creation of heat in any energy transaction; evolution deals strictly with organization of matter from single-celled organisms through the complex multi-celled organisms that exist today. Energy is dealt with in ecology and the processes of photosynthesis and the food chain. But thanks for playing! You win a copy of The Origin of Species.

[Tim N]

Reed, The problem with your assertion is my point exactly. Evolution is NOT science. It never has and never will be. I'm just looking for a little balance. If you want to teach Anti-God (Evolution) in school you should also teach Pro-God (Creation). I'm not talking about teaching Christianity or any other religion in school. I'm talking about the concept of creationism.

[FLBobcat]

Nice to see all the evolutionists emerging from their caves today . . . all hail to Xenu!

[paul]

We are now living in the 1950's. Welcome to Florida, home of the ignorant, less educated, regressive government and citizens. Forget science and math, let's cater to the bibles of a few and put ourselves behind the rest of the country in education and culture. Now only if they could figure out how to get the gay people out of here, it would be a mecca for the bible thumpers. This is absolutely pathetic. First Rhonda Storms and her fanatical anit-bikini bar, county ordinances against gays, religion focused tactics and now govt officials proposing how science is taught. Unreal. Completely shameful to push your religious agendas on others. Govt needs to shut up and lower my property taxes and insurance. Not be king of the land and tell me where I came from.

[JLO]

Tim N: "Scientific evidence has all but proved that Darwin’s theory of evolution is just plain wrong."

No, all the related scientific evidence confirms the theories of Natural Selection and Common Descent.

The only one who is consistently proven wrong is you.

Jason Phillips: "You intelligent evolution supporters that think you all are doctorates of both evolution vs. creationism, I am here to inform you of that I believe the last time I checked in the Webster's dictionary for the meaning of THEORY, it means that it might NOT be true either??"

Wow, your ignorance speaks so loudly that I can hardly hear what you're trying to say.

However, if you'd like to know more about how a scientific theory and a hypothesis differ, take a basic science class.