Afarensis is a 3.5-2.8 million year old hominin from the Kada Hadar member of the Hadar formation in the Middle Awash, Ethiopia. He is approximately 41 inches tall, weighs approximately 60 pounds and has a cranial capacity of a whopping 410 cc (approximately). Afarensis is currently considered to be transitional between apes and humans and displays some traits of both. Since he spends a lot of time on the couch watching monster movies, some observers question whether he is an obligate biped (although no one has observed him climbing a tree). He also has a blog called 
In a recent post I wrote about how Ben Stein was giving a preview of Expelled to the Missouri Legislature. Most of the write ups framed the issue around House Bill 1315 - the Emily Brooker Higher Education Sunshine Act - turns out, though, that a new bill has been introduced. This is HB 2554 which states:
AN ACT To amend chapter 170, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to teacher academic freedom to teach scientific evidence regarding evolution.Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:
Section A. Chapter 170, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be
2 known as section 170.335, to read as follows:
170.335. 1. The state board of education, public elementary and secondary school
2 governing authorities, superintendents of schools, school system administrators, and public
3 elementary and secondary school principals and administrators shall endeavor to create
4 an environment within public elementary and secondary schools that encourages students
5 to explore scientific questions, learn about scientific evidence, develop critical thinking
6 skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about
7 controversial issues, including such subjects as the teaching of biological and chemical
8 evolution. Such educational authorities in this state shall also endeavor to assist teachers
9 to find more effective ways to present the science curriculum where it addresses scientific
10 controversies. Toward this end, teachers shall be permitted to help students understand,
11 analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific
12 weaknesses of theories of biological and chemical evolution.
13 2. Neither the state board of education, nor any public elementary or secondary
14 school governing authority, superintendent of schools, or school system administrator, nor
15 any public elementary or secondary school principal or administrator shall prohibit any
H.B. 2554 2
teacher in a public school system 16 of this state from helping students understand, analyze,
17 critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific
18 weaknesses of theories of biological or chemical evolution.
19 3. This section only protects the teaching of scientific information and this section
20 shall not be construed to promote any religious or nonreligious doctrine, promote
21 discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs or nonbeliefs, or promote
22 discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion.
23 4. No later then the start of the 2008-2009 school year, the department of
24 elementary and secondary education shall notify all public school superintendents of the
25 provisions of this section. Each superintendent shall then disseminate to all employees
26 within his or her school system a copy of this section.
News-Leader.Com has an interesting write up. The three main candidates for governor in Missouri were all asked about the question and here are the responses:
Republican gubernatorial candidate Kenny Hulshof, a U.S. congressman from Columbia, favors teaching intelligent design, according to campaign spokesman Scott Baker."He believes students should be presented a range of views of the origin of life," Baker said.
The campaign for state Treasurer Sarah Steelman, Hulshof's Aug. 5 Republican primary opponent, did not return phone calls seeking comment on her stance on the issue.
Attorney General Jay Nixon, the lone Democrat in the race, believes teaching intelligent design blurs the line of separation between church and state, his spokesman said.
We should write Nixon and congratulate him on his stance. Steelman may be open to persuasion on the subject, so perhaps some diplomatic, reasoned letters may do some good - be sure to include a link to Judge Jones' decision...
Steelman's contact info can be found at the link below:
http://www.treasurer.mo.gov/Contact.html
Nixon's contact info is at the link below:
http://www.jaynixon.com/contact/
Politics
Comments
They should add a PS to students:
Those who have doubts about evolution are not advised to enroll in Honors Biology. Be aware that this may restrict your further education in the life sciences and therefore your access to careers in medicine, agricultural science, veterinary science, horticulture, animal husbandry, farming, etc. We advise you to discuss this life-affecting decision with your parents and the school counselor.
Posted by: Elizabeth | April 6, 2008 3:59 PM
Too many times the line between science and --- something else, philosophy? --- is blurred. Science is involved with the ability to predict. Concepts with no ability to make measurable predictions are not scientific concepts. How fast will the ball be moving 30 seconds after it is dropped? What effect will a given drug have upon a given cellular receptor? Intelligent design, whether there is or is not a designer, provides zero enhancement of science's ability to predict. There is nothing in intelligent design that allows one to make measurable predictions differently from ones we already have available. Therefore, intelligent design is not science. It may be philosophy. I have no quarrel with intelligent design being taught in a philosophy class. I reject utterly the idea of teaching intelligent design in a science class, at least until intelligent design consists entirely of a set of falsifiable, measurable predictions. All else is not science but is unscientific. Science, and only science, belongs in science classes. Intelligent design in science classes is a harmful conflation.
Posted by: Jeff | April 6, 2008 5:15 PM
These "academic freedom" bills never seem to get around to defining what constitutes "scientific strengths and weaknesses". Just another end around by our friends at the Discovery Institute. The terminators of crank science - " That terminator is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until evolutionary theory is dead."
Posted by: scripto | April 7, 2008 9:55 AM
My first impression of the text of the amendment is that it sounds reasonable.
Second was that it is very wishy-washy and could mean almost anything.
Third impression is that the lawmakers had better define every damn word in it or the school system is going to be sued from all sides and it is going to bankrupt the education budget for years to come.
dikkon
Posted by: dikkon | April 7, 2008 8:59 PM