Arguments about Texas textbooks is really about another book – The Bible

Last night was a public meeting on adopting biology and environmental sciences textbooks for Texas schools. The National Center for Science Education was there.

Evolution debate again engulfs Texas board.

The long-simmering battle over teaching evolution in Texas boiled over at a late-night meeting, as the Board of Education extended preliminary approval of new science books for use in classrooms across the state but held up one biology text because of alleged factual errors.

With midnight looming, some of the state education board members singled out a textbook by Pearson Education, one of America’s largest publishers, on Thursday. Many of the 20 concerns pertained to the theory of evolution. After a lengthy debate that got testy at times, the board voted to have three of its members pick a trio of outside experts to further scrutinize the book.

If the issues can be resolved, it will win approval. But if not, it will be returned to the board for consideration at its January meeting.

The NCSE twitter account caught my attention last night as the representative (I think it’s Josh Rosenau) reported on what was happening. Here is the first set that I saw – that it was going to be a late night…

Screen Shot 2013-11-22 at 9.13.50 AM

Then, they adjurned.
Screen Shot 2013-11-22 at 9.14.36 AM

Another vote is today. I applaud Pearson Education for standing up to the ridiculous changes requested by non-scientists with a religious agenda. This type of manipulation is not acceptable – it’s been struck down by several legal cases and it’s absurd to keep pushing evolution out of biology classes. For more, follow the NCSE.


Meanwhile, Creation tales are alive and well in ‘murica. But it’s a bumpy road as genetics shows that there was no “Adam” but many. Uh Oh, trouble with science again. Lexington: All about Adam | The Economist.

  12 comments for “Arguments about Texas textbooks is really about another book – The Bible

  1. November 22, 2013 at 9:38 AM

    Mulitiple Adams? Clearly the bible endorses polyandry as the original marriage.

  2. Chris Howard
    November 22, 2013 at 11:00 AM

    So maybe it was Adam and Steve, after all?

  3. LREKing
    November 22, 2013 at 12:01 PM

    Were that the case, none of us would be here today.

  4. November 22, 2013 at 1:48 PM

    More than you think. Pleasure was taken from Eve because of what she did. That clitoris could have been more like a penis than you think. God knows how much pleasure the penis gives to the male..

  5. Lagaya1
    November 22, 2013 at 2:27 PM

    I think they hold so tightly to this argument because it’s about the last scrap of religion they can impose in the classroom. When I was in school, no one ever questioned evolution as far as I can remember. But at the time, religion was firmly entrenched in everyday school life. We had prayers at assemblies, Jesus talk at Christmas, no meat served on Friday (except fish), etc. It was wrong, but no one questioned it. And at least religion interfered in ways that were more ceremonial and less substantive.

  6. One Eyed Jack
    November 22, 2013 at 3:49 PM

    Pleasure was not taken from Eve. God cursed her to pain in childbirth. Nothing about conception.

  7. Gary
    November 22, 2013 at 7:38 PM

    We should all be grateful the the heroes in Texas who fight to keep science in the Texas classrooms, year after year. The battle never ends.

  8. Michael Haydrn
    November 23, 2013 at 1:34 AM

    Thank you thank you thank you Gary for recognizing that it is also Texans who are fighting this nonsense. It’s a lot easier to just bash us all as if we were one mind.

  9. Ron
    November 23, 2013 at 6:56 AM

    Like many rational people, I do not understand the debate or even why there is a debate. Creationists generally accept that the planets orbit the sun and that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. Were they to use the same rationale on these matters that they take on biological origins, surely they would be arguing that the Earth is flat and also the center of the solar system, if not the Universe. Yet they do not ascribe to many biblical views pertaining to other matters, why draw the line here at evolution? Is God too stupid to map things out in advance? Being of infinite knowledge and foresight, can He not see what will ultimately result from humble beginnings? Certainly an all seeing and all powerful God could do anything. It takes a limited human to misunderstand the infinite. Such egos. And they accuse scientists of playing God while they pretend to know His mind from the accumulated scraps of ancient tales? Ha!
    I am not a religious man by any definition, but if I believed in a God, it would be one who was able to create a dynamic, evolving universe with endless possibilities. I refuse to believe in a god without an ounce of imagination. Surely to limit a Creator in such a way would bring his wrath upon me. Maybe that is why the proponents of this weak and limited god are so unhappy.

  10. November 24, 2013 at 6:17 PM

    I am always befuddled by why religious people feel so threatened and need to announce their religion in all settings. I have a Catholic background. As I recall, part of the reason The Church (there is only one) opposed Galileo was because of a fear that common people would lose faith if they knew the Earth revolved around the Sun. How foolish: no one lost faith in God because of that. People of faith should have more of it.

  11. MisterNeutron
    November 28, 2013 at 2:10 AM

    Spellcheck fail: They adjourned.

  12. T.A. Lee
    December 2, 2013 at 12:36 PM

    A lucid, rational analysis of the “debate”. I have felt this way for years. Thank you for expressing it in such a clear, direct manner.

Comments are closed.