Evolutionists: “Don’t Teach Evolution’s Weaknesses”
In a major defeat for social conservatives, a sharply divided [Texas] State Board of Education voted Thursday to abandon a longtime state requirement that high school science teachers cover what some critics consider to be ‘weaknesses’ in the theory of evolution.
Under the science curriculum standards recommended by a panel of science educators and tentatively adopted by the board, biology teachers and biology textbooks would no longer have to cover the ’strengths and weaknesses’ of Charles Darwin’s theory that man evolved from lower forms of life. Texas is particularly influential to textbook publishers because of the size of its market, so this could have a ripple effect on textbooks used in other states as well.
This is what I find so ironic about the “Evolution vs. Intelligent Design” debate. Science is about asking questions. Science is about testing hypotheses and theories. But when it comes to evolution, it is the very scientists themselves that are attempting to stifle any kind of scientific inquiry.
Notice here exactly what is happening: A panel of “science educators” recommended a science curriculum where teachers and textbooks don’t have to address the shortcomings of evolution.
For a little perspective on this, simply turn the tables and reverse the ideological “teams.” What if a panel of “intelligent design educators” recommended a science curriculum where teachers and textbooks didn’t have to address the shortcomings of intelligent design? This would be a scientific outrage!
It doesn’t even have to be about science. What if a panel of “socialist economics educators” recommended an economics curriculum where teachers and textbooks didn’t have to address the shortcomings of socialist economics? It would just be good, old-fashioned commie propaganda— that’s what.
Here’s what’s funny. Dawkins himself has said that intelligent design is a legitimate theory according to biological evidence, as long as the designers are extraterrestrial alien lifeforms. But if the designer is suggested to be some extraterrestrial deity, then all of a sudden intelligent design is a load of hogwash.
Can he seriously not see the blatant inconsistency of such nonsense? What a joke.
But as Dawkins himself writes in his first chapter of his renown polemic, he is a self-proclaimed “deeply religious nonbeliever.” Deeply religious, indeed. The vernacular term for this type of people is “fundamentalists.”
The whole point of science is to explore what we know, to dig deeper, and to ask questions. But apparently, you aren’t allowed to ask questions about this one particular topic: evolution.
Is this board of education’s decision really a defeat for “social conservatives,” as the article states? Or is it really a defeat for scientific intellectual freedom?
My name is Aaron Rathburn. I am a senior in philosophy at Calvin College, and formerly studied at Trinity School of Theology (Wales, UK). I am a husband, and father of two. This site is a collection of musings on theology, culture, and more. 
Speaking as an A level psychology lecturer in the UK, evolutionary explanations for human behaviour is an integral part of our curriculum. An important skill that we teach our students is evaluation. In a typical second year exam question on the evolution of human behaviour half the marks would be for evaluation of that explanation.
Exactly. And students are being robbed of the capacity to properly evaluate something if they are not given a proper education on the subject.
Nobody is opposed to microevolution, whereby we can see evolutionary explanations for human behavior, etc. But macroevolution has some very, very, very educated critics, that say that the evidence has to be “glossed over” to fit Darwinism.
Evaluation, as you rightly point out, is the most important part of academic endeavor. But in this instance, the evolutionists are trying to stifle anybody from “evaluating” their conclusions, and simply “glossing over” the weaknesses of the theory.
This isn’t science. It’s dogma.
I totally agree with you Aaron! I think that it is really sad that on top of the fact ID is not allowed in schools, they are now saying don’t teach the weaknesses of Evolution. That is not science. That is propaganda. More like brain washing. There are very very crucial problems with the theory of Evolution as it is understood right now. Whether on the chemical level or dealing with the fossil record etc. And the funny thing is well-respected evolutionists and agnostics are admitting this. But think that it is only a matter of time before this religous faith is shown for what it really is. A faith with no evidence!