Friday, January 28, 2005

The evolution of science standards

Looks like the state is monkeying around with our schools' science standards again. From today's Capital Journal: Science Revisions Declined.

The committee revising the state's standards for teaching science on Thursday rejected efforts to add criticisms of evolution to the standards.
What is still unknown is how the state board will respond when it receives the final report this spring. The board could change the standards as it did in 1999, when it removed references to the age of the Earth and macroevolution, or changes from one species to another.
The eight dissenting men split from the committee in December by issuing their own report recommending changes consistent with "intelligent design" -- the idea that life is too complicated to have been created by chance happenings and was more likely guided by an intelligent being. Evolution -- one of the main concepts in the current standards -- says species change over time, responding to environmental and genetic factors.
I'm as "creationist" as they come, but I don't mind the schools teaching evolution because, duh, that's what happens. We adapt to our me the proof of how awesome our God is. But PLEASE don't try to teach my children that any species has ever evolved into another species. There's no proof of that and that kind of argument, stated as fact, will confuse them because they'll learn one thing from us and something else from teachers they are supposed to trust.

The most interesting argument against macro-evolution that I've heard is in regards to the eyeball. If the point of evolution is to constantly adapt and make something better, what would have triggered the development of a partially functioning eyeball? What would be the point of starting to develop an eyeball that produces images that are blurry at best, only to eventually evolve into the incredible eyesight creatures all over the world are blessed with today? And, to take it further, this same process would have to miraculously repeat for each and every unrelated species of animal! What are the odds???

To me, it takes a lot more faith to believe in macro-evolution than it does to believe in intelligent design. If I didn't believe in the Creator God, I'd rather believe we are the result of a science experiment by space aliens than the result of evolution from pond scum.

Fortunately, we have elected a majority of conservatives to the state Board of Education now and the current panel's recommendations may not get very far.


Post a Comment

<< Home