Darwin… or Lose

According to a Gallup poll released in June of last year: “Forty-six percent of Americans believe in the creationist view that God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years. The prevalence of this creationist view of the origin of humans is essentially unchanged from 30 years ago, when Gallup first asked the question. About a third of Americans believe that humans evolved, but with God's guidance; 15% say humans evolved, but that God had no part in the process.”

Scientific evidence, on the other hand, provides pretty strong evidence that man-like creatures existed hundreds of thousands of years ago: “Neanderthals are classified either as a subspecies of Homo sapiens (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis) or as a separate species of the same genus (Homo neanderthalensis). The first humans with proto-Neanderthal traits are believed to have existed in Europe as early as 600,000–350,000 years ago. 

“When the Neanderthals died out is disputed. Fossils found in the Vindija Cave in Croatia have been dated to between 33,000 and 32,000 years old, and Neanderthal artefacts from Gorham's Cave inGibraltar are believed to be less than 30,000 years ago, but a recent study has re-dated fossils at two Spanish sites as 45,000 years old, 10,000 years older than previously thought, and may cast doubt on recent datings of other sites. Cro-Magnon (early-modern-human) skeletal remains showing certain ‘Neanderthal traits’ have been found in Lagar Velho (Portugal) and dated to 24,500 years ago, suggesting that there may have been an extensive admixture of the Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal populations in that region.” Wikipedia.

Creationists insist that all the carbon dating evidence is false, those sequentially “evolving” skeletal remains have been incorrectly dated, or that the bones are not in any way linked to contemporary human beings, which are totally and completely a separate species (pretty much ignoring the massive genetic commonality that has very clearly been vetted). The 1925 case (State of Tennessee vs Scopes) is that famous legal milestone that suggests the Darwin and not claims of creationism is the valid legal standard, and the First Amendment’s effective separation of church and state has resulted in numerous challenges to teaching creationism (or its feebly-disguised “intelligent design” counterpart) in public schools.

Still, school boards and states cannot help themselves in trying to mandate the teaching that evolution is just one theory and that creationism is equally if not more valid. They are even continuing to challenge the notion of man-induced climate change as valid science. Nowhere is this battle more significant that in Texas, which reviews textbook basics every ten years. That would be… now. And because Texas is such a massive buyer of textbooks, what Texas mandates is often included in books that are sold across the land just because it is too expensive to have alternative editions of so many books. Local Texas districts can buy their own books, but if a district wants state money to cover books, it follows the state-approved formats.

Texas is at it again. According to a September 13^th from Mother Jones: “Behind closed doors, textbook reviewers appointed by the Texas State Board of Education are pushing to inject creationism into teaching materials that will be adopted statewide in high schools this year, according to new documents obtained by watchdog groups. Records show that the textbook reviewers made ideological objections to material on evolution and climate change in science textbooks from at least seven publishers, including several of the nation’s largest publishing houses. Failing to obtain a review panel's top rating can make it harder for publishers to sell their textbooks to school districts, and can even lead the state to reject the books altogether.”

Texas panel reviewers were quoted as spouting off with their own “scientific evidence” and the “obviously flaws” in generally-accepted science, both as to evolution and climate change. However, “Few of the textbook reviewers who were critical of the teaching of evolution and climate change possessed any scientific credentials, according to [the National Center for Science Education]. Among those who did, several were active in anti-evolution organizations such as the Discovery Institute… According to the groups, the Texas Education Agency has declined to release documents showing what changes, if any, the publishers have agreed to make in response to these reviews. A public hearing on the books will take place next week in Austin, followed by a final vote to approve or reject them in November.” Mother Jones.

If creationism is mandated, must we also include as equally valid theories practices in Hindu and Buddhist teachings, groups which have vastly more adherents than the aggregate of evangelicals all over the world? Is reincarnation and past-life analysis worthy of teaching to our young? Why not? And if God created evolution itself, wouldn’t that be a wonderful thing? Where exactly do you draw the line, and exactly which religious theories must be advanced in our textbooks? I guess that’s why they talk about “deep in the heart [vs the mind] of Texas.”

I’m Peter Dekom, and the separation between church and state was the result of the harsh merger of those institutions in pre-1776 Europe… and the suffering that resulted.