+ We need to allow FULL education on ALL issues:  I have four more years of public school left, and I don't believe it's right to be taught only the "strengths" about a theory. If a theory is to be taught to Texas's students, I want to hear all sides of it.  - A high school student

+ Evolutionism:  I have studied this issue for 30 plus years and it is my conclusion that Darwinism now faces major scientific problems. I have 35 years of college teaching experience, mostly in the life sciences including biology. Students have a right to hear this evidence. I have never taught "religion" and do not advocate such teaching in a science class. This is a science issue and we must stick to the science.

+ I support the use of real science which always looks at the strengths and weaknesses of everything under consideration. (M.D.)

+ Why is there controversy over retaining the language "strengths and weaknesses" in the Science TEKS?  Truth always triumphs over error.  Why is there fear?   Why will it hurt a student to see the strengths and weaknesses of Evolution?  What needs to be hidden?  I ask that you let the truth of this theory be known rather than present it as fact.  Give our students the opportunity to make up their own mind after analyzing both sides.  Please reconsider your vote. 

+ Teach Both Sides:  I am a HS teacher...My students may not all agree....but when we discuss the strengths & weaknesses of evolution. it  certainly sparks creative thinking...and isn't that what we as teachers are suppose to do? 

+ Please retain the "strengths and weaknesses" clause in the Science TEKS.  The heart of scientific investigation is following where the evidence leads.  The Pre-Cambrian explosion and absence of transitional fossils warrant further inquiry.  Please encourage our children to learn not let them be indoctrinated.

+ I was taught at a tender age that evolution was a done deal (I am 74). Only recently did I have the desire to seek out evidence of creation. I was astounded at the available material. I guess the forces of atheism and Satan are so strong that most people are unable to keep an open mind. It took a tremendous effort of will for me to admit that I had been brainwashed to accept Darwin (& friends) without question!

+ I am a retired college professor who included lectures on philosophy of science in my classes.  Genuine science requires consideration of both the strengths and weaknesses of all theories.  Please retain the strengths and weaknesses approach that has served us well for many years.  There are many scientific (not theological) problems with Darwinism.  To accept Darwinism uncritically is to make it a religion in itself.  Thank you.   

+ Teach Brilliantly!  Teach Weaknesses!: 
For students: 

• Why did Charles Darwin say that the sight of a peacock feather sickened him?  And why did von Neumann laugh at Darwin's theory? 
• Stephen Jay Gould explained that his "Theory of Punctuated Equilibrium" is "supported by the lack of evidence in the fossil record"; investigate.
• Supply the original subtitle of Darwin's "Origin of Species" and speak to the sociological implications of his words "...Nature, red in tooth and claw."
• State the Great Cosmological Question and wrestle with it in small group. 
• Come to class tomorrow prepared to articulate a definition of "irreducible complexity". 

INTRIGUE STUDENTS!  TEACH WEAKNESSES!

+ Teacher input:  I believe that a few teachers who want "strengths and weaknesses" eliminated are trying to speak for a large number of us who do not.  Please do not think the educational community wants this change. I have recently retired from teaching the gifted and talented science classes at our campus.   Removing strengths and weaknesses would be a step backward and would weaken our science curriculum, not strenthen it. 

+  Having studied biochemistry, I discovered that legitimate science disproves random evolution. A change in a single protein, of which there are innumerable in each cell, results in cell death. Thus evolution it flawed at best and a complete lie at worst. Therefore, education that teaches evolution without its flaws is a censorship of true science. Teaching sterile evolution leaves the populace intentionally ignorant.

+ Force discussion of strengths and weaknesses:  Unlike a lot of people, I know the details of the wording.  The problem with the new wording "analyze and evaluate," is that it is possible to analyze and evaluate only one side of the issue.  If a teacher were to analyze and evaluate only the strengths of a Tempur-Pedic bed, that child would later have no understanding as to why his parents won't let him have one.  The fact that the cost of the bed was never brought into the "analyze and evaluate" disscussion makes it to where he does NOT have a balanced understanding.

+ Strengths AND Weaknesses are good for students to learn! 
Dear Board Members,
Please be fair and unbiased in allowing both pros and cons of theories to be taught in our schools.  Part of a theory is that it cannot be totally proved, thereby necessitating both strengths and weaknesses in the teaching process.  Give students the ability to choose for themselves what they believe from educated, unbiased teaching rather than teaching only 1 theory, that cannot be proven without a doubt.  Thanks for your serious consideration.

+ Any one who has studied evolution and Darwin knows that anything man has discovered is not perfect. Therefore to not present both sides of evolution shuts down rational thought.  Is that stupid or is it more of the same planned dumbing down of our children. America's most important resource.(Ph.D.)

+ Teach Both Strengths AND WEAKNESSES of Evolution!

+ Please let Texas schools teach strengths and weaknesses on evolution and design. One reason is compelling above all (in my opinion) DNA cannot be explained by evolution. It is important that iur students and future citizns receive a well-rounded education. Thank you.

+ I know that pleasing everyone is impossible. We have had good resuls with the question of creation vs evolution for a number of years.  It has been a challenge to the students to dig into the information available and make up their own minds.  Please dont take away their incentive to explore and make personal decisions by blocking discussion on both sides of this subject or other subjects.

+ Teach Both Sides:  Although I teach in a Christian school, I still teach the strengths and weaknesses of Creation and Evolution.

+ I certainly object to the recent move toward presenting Darwins' therory as fact.  Is is very much suspect, and should be given its rightful place in the classroom.  That place is a presentation that it is a theory, and nothing more.  It is so far from fact, that it has to be crammed down our students throats by force feeding rather than rational thinking and decision.

+ I am simply appalled that persons would be against studying strengths and weaknesses of any theory. This sounds like brain washing students rather than allowing them to think independently. As a retired chemical engineer, this simply amazes me. In my days as a student, this would never have been an issue.

+ If evolution cannot withstand scrutiny then is it really worth believing in?  Are we to become robots programmed to think only certain thoughts that are approved by the government? 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

In case you missed it, some selected results from the 2009 Zogby International telephone poll (a "gold standard" among polling techniques and companies) are shown below.

+++

+++

+++

In light of this report, it seems reasonable to ask who the eight "teach-evolution-only-and-as-fact" members of the SBOE are representing and why they have voted to censor the discussion of "strengths and weaknesses" from the classroom.  Perhaps you should write them and ask them.  Replies may prove interesting.[2]

[1]  Report on 2009 Zogby Poll about Evolution and Academic Freedom, Center for Science & Culture, Seattle, Washington.
[2] SBOE members voting with the Darwinists, ACLU, and secular humanists to censor weaknesses from the TEKS standards were Rick Agosto (San Antonio), Lawrence Allen (Houston), Mary Helen Berlanga (Corpus Christi-McAllen-Brownsville), Bob Craig (Midland-Odessa-Lubbock-Amarillo), Pat Hardy (Ft Worth, Weatherford), Mavis Knight (Dallas), Tincy Miller (Dallas), and Rene Nunez (El Paso),

+++

origin.of.life@strengthsandweaknesses.org