There’s good news today, dear reader. Another creationist bill has gone down in defeat. We first wrote about it back in January: More Crazy Legislation — This Time in Texas.
Today’s news comes from our friends at the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), written by Glenn Branch, their Deputy Director. His post is titled “Strengths and weaknesses” bills die in Texas. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:
When the Texas state legislature adjourned sine die on May 29, 2023, a pair of identical bills that would have harmed science education, House Bill 1804 and Senate Bill 2089, died in committee. If enacted, the bills would have amended the state education code to require that instructional material adopted by the state board of education “present a scientific theory in an objective educational manner that: (i) clearly distinguishes the theory from fact; and (ii) includes evidence for both the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of the theory.”
Nice going — the dumb things just died in committee. Glenn says:
Clause (i) appears to reflect a common misconception about facts and theories. “In scientific terms, ‘theory’ does not mean ‘guess’ or ‘hunch’ as it does in everyday usage,” as the National Academy of Science explained in its publication Science and Creationism, second edition (1999). “Scientific theories are explanations of natural phenomena built up logically from testable observations and hypotheses. Biological evolution is the best scientific explanation we have for the enormous range of observations about the living world. … [S]cientists can also use [“fact”] to mean something that has been tested or observed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing or looking for examples. The occurrence of evolution in this sense is a fact.”
Well, you can’t expect creationist to know what they’re legislating about. Glenn also tells us:
Clause (ii) betrays the intention of the bills. As The New York Times editorialized of the phrase “scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses” in 2008, “This is code for teaching creationism.” Employed by proponents of “creation science” and “intelligent design” alike, the phrase appears in antievolution laws enacted in Louisiana in 2008 and Tennessee in 2012.
Indeed — the legislation was hopelessly stupid from the start. Glenn’s post ends with this:
House Bill 1804 was sponsored by Terri Leo-Wilson (R-District 23), who previously served three terms on the state board of education (as Terri Leo) where she continually sought to undermine the treatment of evolution in the state science standards and in textbooks submitted for state adoption [obviously a genius]; Senate Bill 2089 was sponsored by Brandon Creighton (R-District 4). Both bills received committee hearings, during which public comment was heard and amendments were proposed, but neither bill came to a committee vote.
That’s pretty much the whole story for state legislation this year. But there are legislatures still in session, and there’s no shortage of idiotic legislators. One never knows what might happen tomorrow, so stay tuned to this blog!
Copyright © 2023. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.