"Critical Thinking" and "Intelligent Design" Bills Fail To Make It Out of Committee in Missouri

The Missouri State legislature failed to move on several bills, letting them die in committee.  The first one would have promoted "critical thinking" and allowed for opposing views and discussion of "differences of opinion about controversial issues, including biological and chemical evolution."  Here is the text of the bill, HB-179.

The second one, HB 291, is no better, since it specifically supports the teaching of ID.  It is somewhat dishonestly called the "Missouri Science Standard Act," since it carries no provisions for any scientific disciplines other than evolutionary theory.  If critical thinking is desired, why don't we apply it to all scientific disciplines?  How is it that all of the rest of science has gotten it right and the evolutionists have gotten it wrong?  Equally maddening is that all of the topics covered in the language of the bill (lack of transitional forms, irreducible complexity, reuse of proven designs) have been discredited by mainstream science.  The people promoting these bills either don't care or can't be bothered to learn any of the science involved.

Once again, more badly thought-out legislation sponsored by Republicans who don't know any better.

Hat tip to Robert Luhn. 

“Critical Thinking” Bill Fails in Missouri

Another bill couched in science language but aimed solely at evolution has failed in the Missouri legislature. The text of the bill reads in part:

The state board of education, public elementary and secondary school governing authorities, superintendents of schools, school system administrators, and public elementary and secondary school principals and administrators shall endeavor to create an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that encourages students to explore scientific questions, learn about scientific evidence, develop critical thinking skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues, including biological and chemical evolution.

Whenever I read these bills, I wonder, how is it that these legislators have concluded that every single other branch of science has got it completely right and yet the biologists have somehow completely gotten everything wrong? I am just astounded that none of these bills are ever aimed at the discrepancies between traditional Newtonian physics and quantum physics, for example. Are there not theoretical issues in that field that are controversial? Of course there are. But as long as we have legislators who don't know better, and there is always a well-funded young earth creationist machine behind it, these anti-evolution bills (for that is what they are) will keep coming.

Hat Tip to Robert Luhn
----------------
Now playing: Jean Michel Jarre - Magnetic Fields 1
via FoxyTunes

The Tennessean Weighs in on SB893

The state newspaper, The Tennessean has written an editorial on the passage of SB893, the “Monkey Bill,” called “Our View.” They write:

Does anybody think that Senate Bill 0893, as amended, is really about making our children smarter, more intelligent and better critical thinkers? No, not on any side of this argument. This bill is about wedging open a door to include a radically divisive, ultra-conservative Christian agenda disguised in politically correct language.

If the point were about making our children more critical thinkers, it would not be aimed solely at evolution. That it is ought to tell the average reader that the real purpose behind the bill is to attempt to water down evolution teaching or, in the hopes of some, remove it altogether by making its teaching so controversial that teachers won't want to bother. That is the purpose behind the bill. Those that promote it need to be honest about that.

----------------
Now playing: Bill Bruford's Earthworks - Revel Without A Pause
via FoxyTunes

Eugenie Scott on “Critical Thinking Bills”

Robert Luhn at NCSE sent me a link for this lecture by Eugenie Scott at the University of South Florida, in February of 2012 on the “academic freedom” or “critical thinking” bills. My only quibble is that it is referred to as a “Darwinism” lecture. That is like having a physics lecture called a “Newtonism” lecture.




It is bit lengthy but is very good and outlines the problem concisely including the whole false Belief in God/Evolution dichotomy.

WARNING! Around 7:30 in, she has a horrific feedback problem, after which she has fairly good stereo separation.

“Critical Thinking” Bill Passes Tennessee House

The Tennessee House voted 70-25 on a bill (HB 368)to promote “critical thinking” in science classrooms. Andy Sher of the Chattanooga Times Free Press writes:

Rep. Richard Floyd, R-Chattanooga, a bill supporter, said "since the late '50s, early '60s when we let the intellectual bullies hijack our education system, we've been on a slippery slope."

He called Dunn's legislation "a common-sense bill. Thank you for bringing this bill to protect our teachers from the other intellectual bullies."

Another proponent, Rep. Jeremy Faison, R-Crosby, said "evolution between one species to another species has never been proven. So how could you teach that as a fact?"

But House Minority Leader Craig Fitzhugh, D-Ripley, said, "I question the need for this. What are we trying to improve, what problem are we trying to solve? Or are we just creating a problem here?"

To what intellectual bullies is Rep. Floyd referring? Is he referring to the science educators who wanted to bring sound science into the classroom? The language he uses is the same as that of Don McLeroy, in Texas when he meant “they took young earth creationism out of the classroom.” Why yes, they did.

Rob Zimmer remarked that we should always invite critical thinking. He is correct, but the tortured, ill-informed response of Rep. Faison indicates that there is not a whole lot of that going on here.

----------------
Now playing: Dan Fogelberg - The Reach
via FoxyTunes