Monday's debate, One Person's View and Recollections

By James R Williams

 

Several have asked for a brief outline of the State board of Education debate on Monday. This is from my notes and not exact, but covers allot of it.

 

The Columbus Veteran Memorial hall seats 4000, it was about 40% full. Panelists were:

 

  • Jennifer Sheets - President of Ohio School board - Moderator
  • Dr. Wells - Molecular and Cellular Biologist, Embryologist, Discovery Institute Seattle
  • Dr. Meyer - Physicist, Historian, Discovery Institute Seattle
  • Dr. Krauss - Physics Professor Case Western Reserve Univ.
  • Dr. Miller - Biology Professor Brown University & Author of several High school Biology Text books

 

The state will soon be updating science requirements for standardized testing and curriculum. The debate was not religious. The State currently avoids teaching Darwinism as origin of man to some extent. This will probably change no matter what, but the real debate is whether "Intelligent Design" will be allowed in the scope of curriculum along with Evolution as an alternate theory and whether teachers will be allowed to teach about the flaws in Darwin's work etc.

 

Each panelist got 15 minutes to present their side.

 

Dr. Wells gave a good background on errors in text books and errors in materials used to support Darwin (examples of diabolically altered diagrams and photos were the Heckle Embryos & Peppered moth photos). He pointed out that those faked drawings of embryos were claimed by Darwin to be his greatest evidence at the time. He also pointed out that there is considerable controversy in the scientific community (ie. Cambrian explosion etc.) and they want to hide it from the students. He pointed out how teachers need to be allowed to point out the error and differing points of view. He told of a teacher named Dehart who was forbidden to tell the students about the text book errors (news clipping I think). He showed the bacteria flagellum (cool animated slide of acid driven microbiological motor at cellular level) and other obvious detailed designs. He pointed out that Design is logical, not religious (all day neither accused anyone of religion).

 

Dr. Krauss came on too strong, was over agitated and unable to speak without sputtering somewhat. He stated that the whole process (the debate) was diluting science rather than serving it. He said that the two from the Institute represented a special interest fringe group. He attacked with a not so great quote from Hugh Ross (thanks Hugh). He also stated that ID (Intelligent design) is an assault on science itself. He stated that there is no controversy in the Scientific community over the FACT of evolution. He claimed that ID was only in books. Anyone can publish a book, but these ideas had never been subjected to peer review in periodic journals which he described as the most important part of the scientific method as peers can argue and everyone benefits. (contradicted himself, since he had previously stated that this debate was not useful to science at all).

 

Dr. Meyer brought things back a rational sounding argument sighting various books such as Demski, Behe, etc. which are some of the best books recently published against Darwin. He pointed out that many ID articles were submitted to periodic journal and offered a bibliography of 40 examples. He also pointed out that Newton, Copernicus, Darwin etc. all used books, just like Behe to get their word out. He also pointed out that in a recent Zogby Poll 71% said we should teach ID along with the current material. He also pointed out that Constitution and the new Federal Education policy HR-1 (no child left behind) call for it. Finally he said that we need to consider the best explanation of origins, not just the best naturalistic explanation as they do now.

 

Dr. Miller somehow sounded smarter and nicer than everyone else, even though his first move was to call Dr. wells a fraud for exaggerating, misquoting, omitting facts etc. in his books and his opening statements. He put up rebuttal that seemed to show that no doctoring of photos was done and stated that the Heckle embryo errors were fixed years ago and books he publishes today contain no such errors. He said that if Behe was such a good book, it would have caught on in the scientific community and in two years it has not. He continued with an argument that if there's a good designer, why so many species died off and why so many changes and where are all the new species coming from? He had a slide showing an idea box, then below it, a review box, and then a rebuttal box then a proving box down to a final box where the state puts it into the curriculum. His next slide showed how ID advocates wanted to skip all the middle steps and go from the idea straight to the state to put it in the books. It was clever and well presented. He finalized by inviting the State of Ohio to log onto it's own Ohio Academy of science website and get the facts on what Ohio thinks.

 

The second hour was Q&A from school board members.

 

Q How could we define science so as not to limited it to what we can measure ? A Dr. Wells said Science is the search for truth Dr. Krauss said it's the search for what's not true and by the way HR 1 wording had no mention of Darwin etc. Dr. Meyer said oh yes it does Dr. Miller said you can do it (without measure) and then hooked up his lap top and put the text of HR-1 on a computer search program (on the screen) and showed that there was no occurrence of the word Darwin in it. It turns out it's actually in some addenda that wasn't there when Bush signed it (ouch).

 

Q What should be do to excite the students? A Darwinists didn't actually answer the actual question, but Dr. Meyers and Dr. Wells said "Let them see the controversy"

 

Q What's the difference between Marco & Micro Evolution A All handled this straight forward

 

Q Compare ID & Evolution with respect to the Cambrian explosion. A Dr. Krauss said hard bodies weren't around yet Bla bla bla. A hand drawn slide (by miller) was put on overhead, each used the same slide to say the opposite thing Q Are there gaps in our information? What do they mean? A All agreed that there are gaps. Krauss says, yeah but you can't just fill em with God! Miller quoted Thomas Jefferson something like "It's error itself that needs Government to help it into law" Miller claimed that if there was a designer, he couldn't get it right & things just kept dying and he made different ones Wells read an example letter where his article was being rejected because the periodic journal was only accepting evolution based science articles. Krauss just made fun of him and said that's the scientific process!

 

Q How do advances in genetics effect this debate A Dr. Wells gave a long speech including his experience with frog embryos. he said if you fiddle with genes with can't make anything but a dead embryo or a crippled frog Dr. Krauss scolded him by saying that those who were being healed of disease by fiddling with genes would disagree (ouch)

 

Q What does Evolution say about origins of life A Dr. Miller admitted that we still don't know and read from his H.S. text book which says it doesn't answer Dr. Meyer pointed out that the origin of DNA and RNA is like a computer program except more complex than any yet written. He then pointed out that when Bill Gates wants a program he doesn't hire wind, rain and erosion to write the software... he hires designers!

 

respectfully submitted,

 

James R Williams 

 

P.S. It is important for citizens to provide feedback to three different state leaders who need to be encouraged to exercise their leadership. The timing on this is very critical as this will go into state law in the months ahead.

 

Senate Bill 1 passed last spring under VERY INTENSE pressure from Republican leadership and the Governor gave the State Board of Education a deadline to write the new science standards.

 

We NEED oversight from the General Assembly to protect Ohio's students from highly politicized policies that will require students to show mastery of evolution-as-fact concepts. The majority of the public responses to the Ohio Department of Education's writing team asked for balance and fairness in teaching these concepts to students. At the February 2002 meeting of the writing team, it was clear that they refuse to change the standards based on the public's response.

 

Perhaps you would call:

 

Ohio House Education Committee Chairman Jamie Callender [R-70] 614-466-7251,

Speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives Larry Householder [R-78] 614-466-2500 or

Governor Taft 614-466-3555

 

To request that HB 481 and HB 484 be permitted to have immediate hearings. Speaker Householder and Governor Taft need to support Chairman Callender's scheduling of the bills for a hearing or they won't be scheduled. This is the reality if the legislative issue is a controversial one.

 

Some people are more comfortable sending emails, but sometimes it is more effective for phones to ring throughout the day. If you send email, PLEASE consider a follow-up phone call - if only to make sure your email was received and will be passed along.

 

Chairman Callender: rep70@ohr.state.oh.us

Speaker Householder rep78@ohr.state.oh.us

Gov Taft  Governor.Taft@das.state.oh.us