![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
brdgt
Stickers Put in Evolution Text Are the Subject of a Federal Trial
By ARIEL HART
The New York Times
November 9, 2004
ATLANTA, Nov. 8 - A federal judge began hearing testimony on Monday about whether the Cobb County School District should be allowed to leave stickers in biology textbooks saying that evolution was "a theory, not a fact" and should be "approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered."
In a lawsuit against the district, the American Civil Liberties Union is arguing on behalf of five parents that the stickers violate the constitutional separation of church and state.
The school board says the stickers, which do not mention creationism or religion, are nothing more than a neutral gesture to parents who have lost their battle against teaching evolution in the public schools.
The stickers were placed in the textbooks in 2002. The books include a thorough treatment of evolution, and the stickers were intended only to "acknowledge that it may hurt some people's feelings," said E. Linwood Gunn, a lawyer for the board.
In 2002, Mr. Gunn said, the board dropped a policy prohibiting the teaching of human evolution in classes that were required for graduation. "For years we had an unconstitutional policy and nothing was ever said about it until we tried to correct it," he said. "It's a little bit ironic."
Kenneth Miller, a Brown University professor who is a co-author of the biology textbook, testified that he feared that singling out evolution told students "we are certain of everything in this book except evolution."
"What bothers me," Professor Miller said, "is it plays on the popular understanding of the word 'theory,' which is like a hunch, not the scientific understanding."
Marjorie Rogers, a parent and self-described "six-day literal creationist" who led a drive that prompted the stickers, said she was not advocating the teaching of religion, but just more theories besides evolution, which she said was disputed science. "I just want an even footing, if there's any kind of science to support it," she testified.
Judge Clarence Cooper of Federal District Court will rule after the bench trial, which is expected to end this week.
See - this is indicative of a major problem with Creationists and how they persuade seemingly rational people to accept Creationism in school - Americans are not learning science comprehensively enough in schools to know what a "THEORY" is, and that it does not mean "unproven." The problem is that kids aren't learning ENOUGH SCIENCE, not enough religion!
Creationists focus on the last definition listed here, when evolutionary theory is best described by the first definition:
the·o·ry
1. A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
2. The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fine musician who had never studied theory.
3. A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
4. Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.
5. A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.
6. An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.
By ARIEL HART
The New York Times
November 9, 2004
ATLANTA, Nov. 8 - A federal judge began hearing testimony on Monday about whether the Cobb County School District should be allowed to leave stickers in biology textbooks saying that evolution was "a theory, not a fact" and should be "approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered."
In a lawsuit against the district, the American Civil Liberties Union is arguing on behalf of five parents that the stickers violate the constitutional separation of church and state.
The school board says the stickers, which do not mention creationism or religion, are nothing more than a neutral gesture to parents who have lost their battle against teaching evolution in the public schools.
The stickers were placed in the textbooks in 2002. The books include a thorough treatment of evolution, and the stickers were intended only to "acknowledge that it may hurt some people's feelings," said E. Linwood Gunn, a lawyer for the board.
In 2002, Mr. Gunn said, the board dropped a policy prohibiting the teaching of human evolution in classes that were required for graduation. "For years we had an unconstitutional policy and nothing was ever said about it until we tried to correct it," he said. "It's a little bit ironic."
Kenneth Miller, a Brown University professor who is a co-author of the biology textbook, testified that he feared that singling out evolution told students "we are certain of everything in this book except evolution."
"What bothers me," Professor Miller said, "is it plays on the popular understanding of the word 'theory,' which is like a hunch, not the scientific understanding."
Marjorie Rogers, a parent and self-described "six-day literal creationist" who led a drive that prompted the stickers, said she was not advocating the teaching of religion, but just more theories besides evolution, which she said was disputed science. "I just want an even footing, if there's any kind of science to support it," she testified.
Judge Clarence Cooper of Federal District Court will rule after the bench trial, which is expected to end this week.
See - this is indicative of a major problem with Creationists and how they persuade seemingly rational people to accept Creationism in school - Americans are not learning science comprehensively enough in schools to know what a "THEORY" is, and that it does not mean "unproven." The problem is that kids aren't learning ENOUGH SCIENCE, not enough religion!
Creationists focus on the last definition listed here, when evolutionary theory is best described by the first definition:
the·o·ry
1. A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
2. The branch of a science or art consisting of its explanatory statements, accepted principles, and methods of analysis, as opposed to practice: a fine musician who had never studied theory.
3. A set of theorems that constitute a systematic view of a branch of mathematics.
4. Abstract reasoning; speculation: a decision based on experience rather than theory.
5. A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment: staked out the house on the theory that criminals usually return to the scene of the crime.
6. An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.
