Missouri: the newest front for "intelligent design" peddling.

[Direckshun]

http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dai...ri_schools.php

Rick Brattin, Who Wants Anti-Evolution Lessons In Missouri Schools: "I'm A Science Enthusiast"
By Sam Levin
Thu., Feb. 7 2013 at 7:00 AM

Missouri Representative Rick Brattin, a Republican, has introduced a bill that would mandate schools across the state give "equal treatment" to the theory of evolution and so-called "intelligent design," which is similar to creationism.

Why?

"I'm a science enthusiast," he tells Daily RFT. "I'm a huge science buff."

He's not, however, much of a Darwin fan.

Meet House Bill 291, the so-called Missouri Standard Science Act, which "requires the equal treatment of science instruction regarding evolution and intelligent design."

What would those requirements look like? As per the bill, full text below:

Textbooks covering any scientific theory of biological origin must devote equal treatment to evolution and intelligent design. Physical evidence must support the teaching of prehistory, and any conjecture about occurrence, causes, dates or lengths of time must be presented as theory or hypothesis, as defined in the bill. Naturalistic processes in prehistory must be duplicated by analogous naturalistic processes, as defined in the bill. False theories or hypotheses must be identified as false.

Brattin explains to us, "I just believe that there are more theories than one in science."

What the bill does, he says, is mandate that teachers and instructional material "distinguish what is, in fact, theory and what is, in fact, empirical data.... There's so much of the theory of evolution that is being taught as fact...things like the primordial ooze."

He adds, "With theories, they need to have equal treatment, objective treatment, not one brushed aside."

The one he doesn't want brushed aside is intelligent design, an alternative theory of life to natural selection.

Critics of these kinds of measures across the country argue that proposals to insert creationism or intelligent design into the classroom are generally tied to thinly veiled religious agendas and, you know, undermine the theory of evolution.

But his bill has nothing to do with religion, Brattin says. In fact -- it is the opponents who are being religious in their stubborn support of evolution.

"This is like their religion," he says. "They believe this wholeheartedly.... They believe you are attacking what is absolutely one hundred percent true. I've had numerous college professors within biology, school science teachers...who say they are not allowed to teach any type of theory [like intelligent design].... They are banned from the science community."

Brattin argues that he is motivated to put forward this bill because he believes in science.

"This isn't preaching that God designed this," he says. "This is saying, it had to come from some sort of intelligence."

He cites the complexity of even the simplest forms of life and the molecules that make them up.

"The naysayers keep involving religion," says Brattin, who also introduced this bill last year. "This has to do with science. This is about testable data in today's world."

[Direckshun]

Here's the bill: http://www.scribd.com/doc/124233664/House-Bill-291

[Otter]

is it sad to be the first to reply to your own post so much?

[HonestChieffan]

Sucks to look at an issue from different perspectives.

[Cephalic Trauma]

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan

Sucks to look at an issue from different perspectives.

Totally agree. They should form a task force to increase the number of theories with no empirical evidence for the sake of objective science.

When we teach the theory of gravitational force, we should also teach the children about the theory of antigravity. It states that we could potentially be floating, but there's no real evidence for it quite yet. Therefore, we will defer to the theory of gravitational force, for now.

[Cephalic Trauma]

No takers? Damn. I'll email this guy and see if he's on board. It seemed plausible when I thought it up.

BTW, I'm a science buff.

[suzzer99]

Republicans just don't get it. This bill is going to win over a bunch of people that would never have voted Democrat in their lives, and turn off everyone else. But then they'll just blame their dwindling numbers on the "moocher class" who wants everything for free. It could never be the fact that fundamentalists who believe this stuff are dying off in droves and it scares away everyone else. Repeat cycle until irrelevance.

There are plenty of things Democrats are doing right now that I don't like it all. I believe in social safety programs, but I think they're mushrooming out of control. I think public-sector unions have way way too much power right now, and are choking the life out of cities and states. If Republicans ever become truly fiscal conservative, and drop all this anti-science, religious meddling in peoples lives crap, I would seriously consider becoming a republican. Oh yeah, and stop talking about raising defense spending when we already spend more than the rest of the world combined. Do those things, and I will vote Republican, I promise.

[Prison Bitch]

I'm pretty sure the majority of Missouri voters believe in the Creation story but I could be wrong. Or belive they co-exist. I think only a minority believe a big bang caused life.

[LiveSteam]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

I'm pretty sure the majority of Missouri voters believe in the Creation story but I could be wrong. Or belive they co-exist. I think only a minority believe a big bang caused life.

Does Missouri have a Dave Lane belt?
They sure as hell have a bible belt

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by Prison Bitch

I'm pretty sure the majority of Missouri voters believe in the Creation story but I could be wrong. Or belive they co-exist. I think only a minority believe a big bang caused life.

Yes and a majority of Missouri voters probably couldn't tell you what PI represents. So what's your point? People who are mostly ignorant of science should not be able to outvote actual scientists on scientific issues. That's the path to Idiocracy. Educators by definition should know more than the people they are educating.

There's nothing wrong with teaching that the origin of life on earth is still something of a scientific mystery, because it is. But evolution, and the fact that the earth is much older than 10,000 years old, is proven to exist beyond any reasonable scientific doubt.

We teach plenty of other science in schools that we know to a lesser degree of certainty than we know evolution exists, or the age of the earth. It's only when scientific consensus collides with religion that problems start to arise.

[Buzz_TinBalls]

[suzzer99]

Much more reasonable and likely.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

Yes and a majority of Missouri voters probably couldn't tell you what PI represents. So what's your point? People who are mostly ignorant of science should not be able to outvote actual scientists on scientific issues. That's the path to Idiocracy. Educators by definition should know more than the people they are educating.

There's nothing wrong with teaching that the origin of life on earth is still something of a scientific mystery, because it is. But evolution, and the fact that the earth is much older than 10,000 years old, is proven to exist beyond any reasonable scientific doubt.

We teach plenty of other science in schools that we know to a lesser degree of certainty than we know evolution exists, or the age of the earth. It's only when scientific consensus collides with religion that problems start to arise.

Hey man, I accept evolution as probable. I think it should be taught in schools, and I'll take my kids to church to learn religion. I'm agreeing with you.

[|Zach|]

Stupid people are stupid.

[RNR]

They should teach astrology and alchemy also~