+++
For Immediate Release
January 5, 2009
TBSE Critiques Misleading Propaganda Obscuring Education Issues
The Texas Freedom Network’s Attempted Deception Exposed
SPRING, TEXAS - A non-science activist group, called the Texas Freedom Network, (TFN), has been promoting a survey purporting to say that there is essentially no controversy over origins or how they are taught.
The elected Texas State Board of Education will soon review a draft revision of the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) for K-12 science. Supporters of Darwinian extremism are attempting to remove current language requiring students to examine the "strengths and weaknesses" of scientific theories.
The fundamental issue regards how science is conducted and should be taught. The Texas Freedom (for their far-left agenda only) Network, (TFN) asserts that without replacing the long standing Texas requirement to teach the strengths and weaknesses of scientific theories religious dogma will be taught in science classes. The fact that religion is not yet being taught instead of science and that Texas has had this requirement for two decades clearly emasculates that argument. This is not just a controversy over origins or how evolution is taught although that controversy is real. This argument goes to the root of the scientific method. Science always advances by investigating where current understanding falls short. Students deprived of that knowledge will be unable to compete in the 21st century.
In a transparent attempt to support their campaign TFN has conducted and has been promoting a clearly biased and misleading survey. TBSE feels it is critical for the public to see how TFN’s "results" compare to other polls across America, which have been conducted by unbiased and nationally recognized pollsters. (In contrast, TFN not only picked their own pollster but they also supplied the list of people to survey!) Any researcher, if results turned out to be as anomalous as the red points nearby (which are the TFN data), would double check before even releasing the information.
For the record, the other five polls, conducted by reputable polling organizations, were:
1. Zogby America 2001
2. Zogby Ohio 2002
3. Cleveland Plain Dealer 2002
4. Zogby Texas 2003
5. Steinberg California 2004
6. TFN Texas 2008 (handpicked)
Further, over one-half of
their hand-picked group (consisting of known pro-evolution segments of academia)
did not respond at all. While some undoubtedly just didn't care, it is not a
stretch to suggest that at least some of those who did not respond chose not to
do so in order to avoid possible persecution (see the "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed"
documentary for more examples).
Think about it: A pro-evolution-only-as-fact group of non-scientists asked
questions known to ruin careers of scientists who do not agree with their
viewpoint and then touted its results as "science". Why should you and I or
policy makers listen?
Is this science? A TBSE volunteer remarked that, “It sounds more like a
stifling of free speech and scientific inquiry. Is this what these particular
Texans call Freedom within their "Network"? They certainly are NOT "mainstream"
in their thoughts as they claim.”
Professional Polls Show Teaching Weaknesses
Enjoys a Wide Range of Support Across America
The issue of teaching weaknesses of or alternatives to evolutionary dogma to our
children is a clear winner across the landscape of America . Gallup polls
routinely show that only a small minority (typically less than 15%) of Americans
actually believe, even after decades of
nearly exclusive evolutionary instruction, that a purely naturalistic
materialistic evolution is capable of explaining life.
The Zogby polling group specifically examined whether weaknesses to or
alternatives to evolution should be presented, or whether evolution should be
presented in public schools exclusively. In August of 2001, they found that 71%
of those polled agreed with the statement that "Biology teachers should teach
Darwin 's theory of evolution, but also the scientific evidence against it."
Only 15% agreed that "Biology teachers should teach only Darwin 's theory of
evolution and the scientific evidence that supports it." That poll goes on to
examine the question of "When Darwin's theory of evolution is taught in school,
students should also be able to learn about scientific evidence that points to
an intelligent design of life." 78% agreed with the statement, either strongly
(53%) or somewhat (25%). Only 13% disagreed, either strongly (8%) or somewhat
(5%).[i]
Later in Ohio , even in the face of withering fire from those that would
ultimately censor weaknesses in evolution from schools, Zogby found that 65%
thought that "Biology teachers should teach Darwin 's theory of evolution, but
also the scientific evidence against it." Only 19% agreed that "Biology
teachers should teach only Darwin 's theory of evolution and the scientific
evidence that supports it." Similarly on the question of "When Darwin's theory
of evolution is taught in school, students should also be able to learn about
scientific evidence that points to an intelligent design of life", 78% agreed
with the statement, either strongly (55%) or somewhat (23%). Only 13%
disagreed, either strongly (10%) or somewhat (3%).[ii]
Similarly, the Cleveland Plain Dealer conducted a poll during their
controversy. It showed, among other things, that only 13% of respondents agreed
with a purely naturalistic explanation of life, only 8% would agree that
teaching biologic evolution exclusively was correct (59% would specifically
teach both evolution and intelligent design (Ohio's issue), another 15% would
teach weaknesses of evolution but not intelligent design).[iii]
The most recent confirmation of this specific to Texas was conducted by the
highly revered Zogby polling organization. It found that a remarkable 75%
agreed that "The state board of education should approve biology textbooks that
teach Darwin's theory of evolution, but also the scientific evidence against
it." In another question specifically addressing whether the board should
enforce the existing requirement to teach both strengths and weaknesses, 82%
agreed. Yet another question tested whether biology teachers should teach both
sides, and 76% agreed! The last question was not specifically related to the
question before the Texas SBOE, but asked if Intelligent Design should be taught
alongside evolution, and a whopping 84% agreed either strongly (64%) or somewhat
(20%). The most likely to agree included 18-29 year olds and Hispanics.[iv]
Summary of Polls
|
Teach Strengths and Weaknesses of Evolution |
State Board of Education Should Enforce Teaching Strengths and Weaknesses |
Teach Evolution and I.D. |
Against Evol. and I.D. being taught |
Teach Evol. Only |
Zogby USA August 2001 |
71% |
|
78% |
13% |
|
Zogby Ohio 2002 |
65% |
|
78% |
13% |
|
Cleveland Plain Dealer 2002 |
74% |
|
59% |
8% |
8% |
Zogby Texas August 2003 |
75%/76% (Q 2b/5b) |
82% |
64%ST |
7%ST |
18% |
(SW=Somewhat Agree, ST=Strongly Agree)
Zogby further found that younger Americans
were even more likely to reject naturalistic evolution than those over 65 years
of age.
In short, thinking Americans, in spite of the censorship of scientific evidence against evolution from the classroom, in academia, and in public television, have and continue to reject neo-Darwinian evolution as inadequate.
More information may be found at http://www.strengthsandweaknesses.org/PressKit.htm and other pages on the TBSE website.
[i] Zogby America Report, communicated from he Zogby polling group to the Discovery Institute, as archived at URL http://www.discovery.org/articleFiles/PDFs/ZogbyFinalReport.pdf.
[ii] Zogby Ohio Poll, communicated from he Zogby polling group to the Discovery Institute, May 8, 2002 , as archived at URL http://www.sciohio.org/OhioZogbyPoll.pdf.
[iii] Poll by the Cleveland Plain Dealer , reported June 2002, as archived at http://www.sciohio.org/CPDPoll.htm.
[iv] Views of Texas Residents on Teaching Evolution, communicated from the Zogby International polling group to Discovery Institute, Sept. 8, 2003, archived at: http://www.strengthsandweaknesses.org/ZOGBY.Texas.2003.pdf.
+++
+++
Press only:
press@strengthsandweaknesses.org
Teach more evolution, not less—strengths and weaknesses—and let the fittest theories survive.