Evolution 'critical analysis' bill passes Florida House, 71-43

This bill is destined to achieve the same fate as the ill-fated Dover, PA school board's decision to mandate teaching intelligent design. While the bill will not mandate the teaching of intelligent design, the singling out of evolution as the only scientific theory for special scrutiny will cause the law to be overturned. If the bill stated that all alternatives to scientific theories are taught, then the bill might stand legal muster. But in its current form, this would be analogous to teaching the geocentric view of the solar system as opposed to the heliocentric view. In addition, this opens up the possibility for the pastafarians to demand that the Fly Spaghetti Monster view of the origin. Good luck with this Florida.

How they voted. Find your rep below:

Member
Y Adams
Y Altman
Y Ambler
Y Anderson
Y Attkisson
Y Aubuchon
N Ausley
Y Bean
N Bendross-Mindingall
Y Bogdanoff
Y Bowen
Y Boyd
N Brandenburg
N Braynon
N Brisé
Y Brown
N Bucher
N Bullard
Y Cannon
Y Carroll
Y Chestnut
Y Coley
Y Cretul
Y Culp
N Cusack
- Davis, D.
N Domino
Y Dorworth
Y Evers
N Fields
N Fitzgerald
Y Flores
Y Ford
Y Frishe
Y Galvano
- Garcia, L.
Y Garcia, R.
- Gardiner
N Gelber
N Gibbons
N Gibson, A.
Y Gibson, H.
Y Glorioso
Y Gonzalez
Y Grant
Y Grimsley
Y Harrell
Y Hasner
Y Hays
N Heller
Y Holder
N Homan
Y Hooper
Y Hudson
Y Hukill
N Jenne
Y Jordan
Y Kelly
Y Kendrick
N Kiar
Y Kravitz
Y Kreegel
N Kriseman
Y Legg
Y Llorente
N Long
Y Lopez-Cantera
N Machek
- Mayfield
Y McBurney
Y McKeel
- Meadows
Y Murzin
Y Needelman
N Nehr
Y Nelson
Y Patronis
Y Patterson
CH Pickens
N Planas
Y Poppell
N Porth
Y Precourt
Y Proctor
N Randolph
Y Reagan
N Reed
N Richardson
Y Richter
- Rivera
Y Robaina
N Roberson
Y Ross
N Rouson
Y Rubio
N Sachs
N Sands
Y Sansom
N Sasso
N Saunders
Y Schenck
N Schultz
N Schwartz
Y Scionti
N Seiler
Y Simmons
N Skidmore
Y Snyder
N Soto
N Taylor
N Thompson, G.
Y Thompson, N.
N Thurston
Y Traviesa
Y Troutman
N Vana
N Waldman
Y Weatherford
Y Williams
Y Zapata

CH=In the Chair: Pickens
Y=Yea N=Nay -=Not Voting

Well, look on the bright side. The two houses will squabble over which version is the better one with the almost inevitable result that nothing will happen.

Then they can get back to screwing up insurance and taxes. ;-)

Alan Hays (from the article)

"But unfortunately, thanks to the Supreme Court's distortion of the First Amendment, too many people are afraid to even mention the theory of intelligent design."

Idiots. The bill doesn't allow religious teachings as alternatives, it DOES say that "all the scientific alternatives" are allowed - though of course it fails to specify exactly what they are.

But let the fundies shoot themselves in the foot. They always do it, and they'll never learn. Bring on the court case!:-)

This bill is kind of funny. Upon reading the full text (http://www.flsenate.gov/data/ session/2008/Senate/bills/bill text/pdf/s2692c1.pdf), it's readily apparent that this bill is not intended to allow the teaching of Intelligent Design, but rather to block it.

"the term "scientific information" means germane current facts, data, and peer-reviewed research specific to the topic of chemical and biological evolution"

"Every public school teacher in the state's K-12 school system shall have the affirmative right and freedom to objectively present scientific information relevant to the full range of scientific views regarding biological and chemical evolution in connection with teaching any prescribed curriculum regarding chemical or biological evolution."

That would categorically dismiss Intelligent Design or Creationism as an acceptable course of study in Florida schools.

-pb

It would seem so. But the lack of clear definitions of many of the terms used in the bill will leave the matter open to interpretation. Which will lead to lawsuits. Which will lead to spending tax dollars. Which will lead to the IDers getting laughed out of court. Again.

Beyond the Pale? You don't happen to do any work for the Neverwinter Vault, do you?

Rhonda is going to get more "academic freedom" than she bargained for if this passes. I would argue that for every religiously motivated science teacher who wants to criticize evolution, you'll have a dozen real science teachers who will use the equal protection of the law to absolutely destroy ID and other creationist BS. I predict that Rhonda ain't gonna like the outcome!

The Dude wrote:

Alan Hays (from the article)
"But unfortunately, thanks to the Supreme Court's distortion of the First Amendment, too many people are afraid to even mention the theory of intelligent design."
Idiots. The bill doesn't allow religious teachings as alternatives, it DOES say that "all the scientific alternatives" are allowed - though of course it fails to specify exactly what they are.
But let the fundies shoot themselves in the foot. They always do it, and they'll never learn. Bring on the court case!:-)

Sadly, it is the students who are going to pay the largest tab for this bill...by having their brains filled with cr@p.

The only other result from this is likely to be the taxpayers paying for the state's defense in court and that all the lawyers involved will have their pockets lined.

Feklahr wrote:

Beyond the Pale? You don't happen to do any work for the Neverwinter Vault, do you?

Not that I am aware of.

-pb

pbagosy wrote:

<quoted text>
Not that I am aware of.
-pb

I don't see that "Beyond the Pale" pop up too often, in fact, the only other person I know that uses it is one of my online friends. ;)

What does "critical analysis" mean and how do we know we have done it?

The Dude wrote:

Alan Hays (from the article)
"But unfortunately, thanks to the Supreme Court's distortion of the First Amendment, too many people are afraid to even mention the theory of intelligent design."
Idiots. The bill doesn't allow religious teachings as alternatives, it DOES say that "all the scientific alternatives" are allowed - though of course it fails to specify exactly what they are.
But let the fundies shoot themselves in the foot. They always do it, and they'll never learn. Bring on the court case!:-)

If it specifically mentions "scientific alternatives" then that leaves out ID...

Darwins Stepchild wrote:

<quoted text>
Sadly, it is the students who are going to pay the largest tab for this bill...by having their brains filled with cr@p.
The only other result from this is likely to be the taxpayers paying for the state's defense in court and that all the lawyers involved will have their pockets lined.

True. It was the schoolboard in Dover who got the $1M bill when they lost, despite the fact it was the DI who told them ID was legal to teach. Maybe this time the bill could be put onto the idiots like Storms who are actually responsible for this fiasco.

John Myers wrote:

What does "critical analysis" mean and how do we know we have done it?

In science, it kinda means 'observe, test, repeat'. Which evolution has gone through 150 years of. According to the fundies, it means 'repeat the same 40 year old debunked creationist "arguments", link evolution to Liberals, Nazi's, Communists, baby-eaters, kitten-killers and those oh so evil atheists - and offer "POOF! GODDIDIT!" as a viable "scientific" alternative'.

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>Maybe this time the bill could be put onto the idiots like Storms who are actually responsible for this fiasco.

Wouldn't that be sweet. Or bill the dorks that put her in office.

I can't believe we are still dealing with this. Is ID science? no Is ID a push to try and use religion as science? yes Should it be allowed to be taught in science classes at school? no Why? because it's not science. Ta da! so simple

pbagosy wrote:

This bill is kind of funny. Upon reading the full text (http://www.flsenate.gov/data/ session/2008/Senate/bills/bill text/pdf/s2692c1.pdf), it's readily apparent that this bill is not intended to allow the teaching of Intelligent Design, but rather to block it.
"the term "scientific information" means germane current facts, data, and peer-reviewed research specific to the topic of chemical and biological evolution"
"Every public school teacher in the state's K-12 school system shall have the affirmative right and freedom to objectively present scientific information relevant to the full range of scientific views regarding biological and chemical evolution in connection with teaching any prescribed curriculum regarding chemical or biological evolution."
That would categorically dismiss Intelligent Design or Creationism as an acceptable course of study in Florida schools.
-pb

Most of the legislators wouldn't recognize 'science' if they tripped over it in the park. I fear this will open the kids up to the presentation of irrational boogie-woogie and religious nonsense based on ignorance and fear. And Galileo was right ... "still, it turns ... ". But I pity the students, hostage of a small-minded gang of cringers.

Stepchild, students' brains are already being filled with crap-it's called evolution! Evols consistenly sweep all opposing data, however scientifically compelling, under the "religious rug label" in order to dismiss having to scientifically support the bankrupt notion of evolution in support of their religion of secular humanism. This is at student expense and , apparently, evols care less about the student than their sacred. theory. As a biologist, I am well informed of both sides of the issue. There is compelling scientific evidence in opposition which should be given exposure in the classroom as an opportunity for them to gain a real learning experience in how the scientific method is supposed to develop. Evolution is terribly flawed. No wonder evols don't want it exposed.

Check out Ben Stien's new movie, Expelled. I hear that it presents itself well to both sides of the Intelligent Design issue.