Evolution Must Be Taught in Public Schools

[Biochemist]

Originally Posted by Erasmus00

I think this rather hits the nail on the head. Gravity is both a fact (things fall) and a theory (general relativity). Evolution is both a fact(living things change over time) and a theory (natural selection/Darwin, etc), as Stephen Gould elegantly told us.

Now we agree. My caveat is that usually (I think) when folks say "Evolution" they actually intend to say "Darwinian Evolution."

But I think you and I are on the same page.

[Galapagos]

New Anti-Evolution Film Stirs Controversy - Yahoo! News

Don't know if this has been posted elsewhere yet, I thought it was funny:

New Anti-Evolution Film Stirs Controversy

Dave Mosher
LiveScience Staff Writer
LiveScience.com Fri Apr 4, 1:40 PM ET

NEW YORK - A handful of journalists filed into a small theater at the Park Avenue Screening Room here last night to see a preview for "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed." The 90-minute documentary-style flick features Ben Stein, a comedian, lawyer, actor and former speechwriter. It is a movie about the so-called debate between supporters of "intelligent design" and Charles Darwin's scientific theory of evolution.
ADVERTISEMENT

Filmmakers proclaim in press materials that Stein "discovers an elitist scientific establishment that has traded in its skepticism for dogma" during the course of the movie through interviews with scientists and anti-evolution advocates.

Some scientists, however, are outraged about the conduct of the filmmaker during production and screening and the film's effort to tie Darwin's ideas to Hitler. One prominent scientist who is in the movie has since called it shoddy and sinister.

Intelligently designed

Intelligent design, or ID, holds that life on Earth is so complex that evolutionary theory can't explain the complexities, so life must have been designed. Scientists see it as creationism veiled in pseudoscience, an effort with religious backing designed to generate the appearance of controversy among scientists about Darwinian evolution where there is none.

ID has made headlines in recent years in Kansas, Ohio and Michigan as school boards and courts contested its teaching in public schools alongside evolution, which is a scientific theory holding that new species appear via gradual changes in inherited traits and mutations. In 2005, a federal judge barred a Pennsylvania public school district from teaching ID in biology class.

The basic principles of evolution nor ID are clearly explained in the movie.

"Expelled" is smattered with gloomy scenes of the Berlin Wall's construction, the Holocaust and other World War II-era footage, with Stein arguing during the course of it that a handful of academics have been persecuted for their beliefs that run counter to the scientific establishment.

Many of the ID supporters and sympathizers Stein interviews in the movie, however, were let go, not offered tenure or other career incentives because of expired contracts, improper publishing ethics and other conduct unrelated to their religious views, according to university and institution spokespeople who appeared in "Expelled."

Stein claims he "encountered many more [academics] who didn't want to appear on film," because of their fear of being persecuted.

But among the millions of scientists currently working in schools and institutions across the world, thousands of whom are trained evolutionary biologists, the overwhelming consensus is that evolution is a well-supported theory backed by observations in several fields using multiple lines of evidence.

Foul play?

Scientists interviewed in "Expelled," namely evolutionary biologists Richard Dawkins of Oxford University and Paul Zachary "PZ" Myers of the University of Minnesota and author of the blog "Pharyngula," have been crying foul since the movie's name was changed last year.

The two have written on their Web sites and blogs that the original film was called "Crossroads: The Intersection of Science and Religion" based on correspondence with Mark Mathis, the movie's associate producer at Rampant Films. But in late 2007 the movie title was changed to "Expelled" for marketing reasons, the producers reportedly said.

In a press release issued by Premise Media, which has also helped finance "The Passion of the Christ" and "The Chronicles of Narnia" movies, film producer Walt Ruloff claims the makers avoided distorting interviews.

"The incredible thing about 'Expelled' is that we don't resort to manipulating our interviews for the purpose of achieving the 'shock effect,'" Ruloff said.

But Michael Schermer, editor of "Skeptic Magazine" and an on-screen interview in the movie, said Stein and Mathis asked him the same question a dozen times during his interview for the film to extract an answer they were looking for.

"In frustration I finally said something like 'Do you have any other questions to ask me or do you keep asking me this question in hopes that I'll give a different answer?'" according to a statement by Schermer on richarddawkins.net.

Questionable claims

Dawkins, Myers, Schermer and others are also outraged by the claims in the movie, especially that Charles Darwin's evolutionary theory is partly responsible for Nazism and the Holocaust.

In the film, after Stein is told of this purported connection by several ID supporters, who also tell him that Darwin's ideas of species fitness led to U.S. eugenics programs in the 1920s, Stein stares down a dimly lit statue of Darwin in London's Natural History Museum.

During a March 28 telephone press conference for "Expelled," Myers snuck in on the call and confronted the filmmakers about the issue. "Have you ever heard of a pogrom?" Myers asked. "Those have been going on for centuries." (A pogrom is an organized massacre of helpless people.)

On his Web site, Dawkins wrote that the Darwin-Nazi association is a fallacy.

"The alleged association between Darwinism and Nazism is harped on for what seems like hours, and it is quite simply an outrage," Dawkins said of the series of scenes in the movie. "Hitler was ignorant and bonkers enough for his hideous mind to have imbibed some sort of garbled misunderstanding of Darwin but it is hardly Darwin's fault if he did."

Expelled or uninvited?

During a March 20 screening of "Expelled" at the Mall of America in Minneapolis, which Myers registered to attend via a public Web site with his family, he was asked to leave by security while standing in line.

The security guard said a film producer gave the orders to remove Myers from the theater.

According to various news reports, producers accused Myers of being a "gatecrasher" - someone trying to attend an event uninvited - but he was registered for the event via the open, online registration process. But Dawkins, who also registered to attend the screening, saw the documentary without incident along with Myers' family.

"It's an incredible piece of inept public relations to expel somebody ... from a film about expelling people for their opinions," Dawkins said during a videotaped discussion with Myers, "a film in which [Myers is] present, and acknowledged and thanked in the acknowledgements at the end of the film."

The overall mood of the film, as its makers assert, is satirical and sarcastic - and almost always at the cost of the scientists backing evolutionary theory. When Dawkins discusses scientific hypotheses for the seeding of life on Earth from another planet, for example, the film quickly displays black-and-white movie clips of flying saucers and aliens.

Dawkins said in the video on his Web site that he was unimpressed with the artistic direction of "Expelled."

"I'm not a professional filmmaker myself but I've had a lot to do with making documentaries," Dawkins said. "This was a very, very shoddy, poor, inartistic piece of work."

Dawkins also noted that images of guillotines, firing squads and other reactionary film clips that flashed between the words of sources especially garnered his dislike. "It was worse than just artless, it was also quite sinister," he said. "It was a bad film in every way."

"Expelled" opens in theaters nationwide starting on April 18.

[InfiniteNow]

A few pages back.

Evolution Must Be Taught in Public Schools

Evolution Must Be Taught in Public Schools

[Galapagos]

Florida Citizens for Science Blog Archive Judiciary review

I don't know what to say about this. I'm a Floridian, and tomorrow our Senate Judiciary Committee is meeting to decide on whether or not to pass the "academics freedom act".
Here are some excerpts from the meeting packet quoted in the above blog:

The bill is silent on who determines whether the teacher’s presentation on scientific information meets the definition and is therefore afforded protection under the act. Presumably, the determination would be made by the school district, but this is not stated. Additionally, the definition appears to encompass a wide range of information within the protected presentation by the teacher. The bill suggests that the only requirement is that the information is relevant to the science standards pertaining to evolution, and that the information is presented objectively. Again the bill is silent on who defines the objectivity of the scientific information presented. The administration and the teacher may have different views on the objectiveness of the information presented.

It is unclear under the bill if a student’s performance in a science class will be measured upon his or her own view or position on evolution, or by a consistent standard applied to each student. The ambiguity may create unanticipated problems with student evaluation and grading in science classes.

It should also be noted that, because evolution and countervailing theories are subject to intense controversy, objective presentation of scientific information critical of the theory of evolution may be difficult to achieve in the classroom. If at any point objectivity is abandoned, it is possible that a court could determine that the state is promoting religion in violation of the Establishment Clause.

While a student maintains free speech rights, as indicated above, those rights are not without limitation. It appears that this provision in the bill may be interpreted to expand the rights of students in excess of the First Amendment.

A teacher’s statements in class during instructional periods are part of the curriculum and regular class activity and thus subject to reasonable speech regulation.

At best, it just seems like a tremendous waste of our tax dollars to even discuss something so ridiculous. At worst, the minds of thousands(probably more like millions) of children are going to be systematically stifled.

[HydrogenBond]

I discussed this in another evolution and ID discussion; it has to do with the very first assumption of evolution, and why it is not possible. That first assumption has to do with the random appearance of first life.

If you look at life, one thing that is different about life, compared to inanimate matter such as rocks, is life gains energy value. For example, if we compare a seedling to a tree, the final state of the tree stores more energy value. The rest of nature moves toward lowest energy. While life moves in the direction of increasing energy.

What that implies is, at the inception of life, the random life inception event not only had to assemble the bio-materials to make life, it had to do that in an environment that was totally geared toward lowering energy. What that implies is the earth would be aborting the early energy gaining affects of life such that the unlikely random event would have to occur a bunch of times at a bunch of steps in the process, making random unlikely.

In other words, if we assume an inert earth, the formation of life might occur randomly, since as it forms, it can remain in that state for further steps toward evolution in the direction of increasing energy. But if we include an earth that is moving everything else toward lower energy, this countering potential is getting stronger and stronger, relative to the growing life, causing an increasing potential for reversal at each additional step. Unless there is a logical potential that keeps overcoming this countering potential, it would require a large number of random events at many steps in the process, such that the probability gets almost impossible. This interactive dynamics suggests the need for a logical potential that will keep trying, via natural law, until it gets over the hump to make life. Evolution is built upon a cornerstone of improbability.

[Galapagos]

Bad news in Florida:
Florida Citizens for Science Blog Archive An early account of what happened

In a move that now sends the deceptively named “academic freedom” bill to the Florida Senate floor, the Senate judiciary committee voted 6-3 to approve it.

Florida Citizens for Science Blog Archive Media Alert

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Florida Citizens for Science and a coalition of stellar science organizations will present an exciting roundtable discussion on current legislative threats to science curriculum in Florida’s public schools. The panelists will address why the so-called “Evolution Academic Freedom Act” introduced in the state House and Senate is bad for science education in Florida and the growth of Florida’s economy

WHO: Florida Citizens for Science and coalition members

WHAT: Roundtable Discussion with the following:
> Dave Campbell, high school science teacher
> Maryann Fiala, Executive Director, American electronics Alliance (AeA) Florida Council
> Dr. Harold Kroto, Nobel Prize Winner Chemistry 1996, Florida State University Dept. of Chemistry and Biochemistry
> Vic Walczak, Legal Director, ACLU of Pennsylvania, Lawyer in 2005 landmark case Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District challenging the teaching of intelligent design in public schools.
> Ann Lunsden - Dr Lansden is professor of biology at FSU. She is a past president of the National Association of Biology Teachers.
...

The event is an opportunity for the community to address the bill, which singles out evolution for special treatment and exposes school districts to liability if teachers and students inject their religious beliefs into the science classroom in the guise of “science.” This bill takes control of the curriculum away from education professionals. It is a red herring designed to suggest that discrimination exists where it does not, and to draw attention away from the subject matter of creationism. No law is required to authorize the teaching of scientific fact.

Participating organizations: American Society for Human Genetics (ASHG), American Association of Anatomists (AAA), American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB), Genetics Society of America (GSA), National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT), and Society for Developmental Biology (SDB).

[REASON]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

Evolution is built upon a cornerstone of improbability.

And your post is supported by a foundation of Communion Wafers.

[Essay]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

I discussed this in another evolution and ID discussion; it has to do with the very first assumption of evolution, and why it is not possible. That first assumption has to do with the random appearance of first life.

If you look at life, one thing that is different about life, compared to inanimate matter such as rocks, is life gains energy value. For example, if we compare a seedling to a tree, the final state of the tree stores more energy value. The rest of nature moves toward lowest energy. While life moves in the direction of increasing energy.

What that implies is, at the inception of life, the random life inception event not only had to assemble the bio-materials to make life, it had to do that in an environment that was totally geared toward lowering energy. What that implies is the earth would be aborting the early energy gaining affects of life such that the unlikely random event would have to occur a bunch of times at a bunch of steps in the process, making random unlikely.

In other words, if we assume an inert earth, the formation of life might occur randomly, since as it forms, it can remain in that state for further steps toward evolution in the direction of increasing energy. But if we include an earth that is moving everything else toward lower energy, this countering potential is getting stronger and stronger, relative to the growing life, causing an increasing potential for reversal at each additional step. Unless there is a logical potential that keeps overcoming this countering potential, it would require a large number of random events at many steps in the process, such that the probability gets almost impossible. This interactive dynamics suggests the need for a logical potential that will keep trying, via natural law, until it gets over the hump to make life. Evolution is built upon a cornerstone of improbability.

What does evolution have to do with the origin of life?


HydrogenBond,
This is sorta off-topic, but I've enjoyed your thoughts and observations about entropy. I think this idea has much more to do with the origin of life than we realize; but as noted, this is pretty off-topic on a thread about evolution. Someone should start an "Entropy & Life's Origin" thread.

IMO...
When thinking about these ideas, you always need to 'kill off' all the life before looking at net changes (closing the system). This zero's out the negative entropy of life.

But...
Metabolism ultimately converts sunlight into food, and again into usable energy, plus lost heat.
All along the metabolic pathways, there is lost heat (entropy).
Turning light into heat is an inescapable net result of metabolism.

It is not life itself, but the process of living that achieves a net entropy gain.

[Galapagos]

Atheist Nation | Atheist Videos | Flying Spaghetti Monster Expelled | Video 01159


FSM expelled parody video. kinda funny.

[Essay]

Originally Posted by Galapagos

Atheist Nation | Atheist Videos | Flying Spaghetti Monster Expelled | Video 01159


FSM expelled parody video. kinda funny.

Yes, thanks.
It was very faithful to Ben's trailer.

....linked to that clip was:
Atheist Nation | Atheist Videos | Sam Harris makes a joke and a point. | Video 01168

I wish I could see the whole discussion!