There’s a petition and statement going around regarding HF 183 for Iowa academics to sign. The text reads:
We, the undersigned members of institutions of higher learning in Iowa, urge our legislators to reject passage of "The Evolution Academic Freedom Act" (HF 183) introduced by Rod Roberts (R-Carroll). The language of this bill comes primarily from the Seattle-based Discovery Institute, which has conducted lobbying efforts and political activism against the teaching of evolution since 1994.
Evolution is as established a scientific theory as any other theory in science. It is misleading to claim that there is any controversy or dissent within the vast majority of the scientific community regarding the scientific validity of evolutionary theory. Since there is no real dissent within the scientific community, then "academic freedom" for alternative theories is simply a mechanism to introduce religious or non-scientific doctrines into our science curriculum.
Similar efforts to undermine the teaching of evolution in schools repeatedly have been found to be unconstitutional, something witnessed most recently in Kitzmiller v. Dover (2005) in Pennsylvania.
We, therefore, urge our legislators to recognize HF183 as part of a long history of creationist assaults on science education, and reject passage of this bill.
- Log in to post comments
Good idea, but I hope they fix the typos (e.g., to for too etc.)
Cool. I think it should be part of any job interview/hiring process for teaching at the university level. Maybe even high school or at least high school science.
It's a little more wordy than the petition I'd propose:
We the undersigned would like to ask a single question.
"Are you nuts?"
I think they should have briefly pointed to a list of other states rejecting equivalent bills to give the committee something to use as a precedent. With clear precedents, it's much easier for a committee to "fall in line", as it were, as other people have already done the hard work for them.
1. Would the first commentator, Umkomasia, please identify which of the six "to"'s he feels should be "too".
2. The bill is too timid: should be the "Theory Academic Freedom Act". Then teachers could could teach alternatives to such obviously questionable theories as chemistry (questioned by alchemy), heliocentricity (by geocentricity), spherical earth (by flat earth), combustion (by phlogiston), conservation of energy (by perpetual motion), and the granddaddy bogus theory of them all: Pythagoras'.
I'm sorry to inform you, Prof. Lynch, but I am so hopeful that efforts such as this bill will bring more attention to the work that I have done with a new theory of evolution. I am working very hard to reach the academic community with my work which has been done largely over the internet. My webpage contains an "early" effort and since then I have written wherever I think I can benefit those who concern themselves with this science. My work is easy to find by searching a new word which I coined: girasas.
I am hopeful that the work of H.P. Blavatsky will be admitted into academic circles and understood, as I understand or beyond my ability to organize thoughts.
With a theory of 7 human races, 3 though animal combination, 1 solo human, and 3 through girasas combination, we have a new way to look at religion. Rather than view religion as an outsider to investigation, we might easily come to work with each religion as if it were a race or subrace, majority or minority, and necessary for the balanced growth of the whole of humanity.
I hope you will investigate this proposed new theory and help to place a progressive woman into her rightful place in history.
Brenda,
Any observations/data to support your ridiculous claims on your poorly written webpage? Any fossils of a race that lived 300 million years ago?
What's with the theosophists trying to horn in on evolution? Brenda isn't the first Blavatskyite I've seen comment on evolution related articles spamming their religion as if it were an alternative to the theory of evolution. Is this some kind of coordinated effort?
Noah,
Let's be fair. H.P. Blavatsky wrote her books when women did not even have the right to vote. Why should anyone even attempt to validate her work back then.
I am hopeful that scientists will be held responsible for knowing the length and breadth of the literature on their subject of evolution. Since I am trying to show you how these pieces fit (Did you bother to check any of my other writings on the internet via: girasas?) together, I hope you will be patient and pick a proper forum. This is a subject of national interest and not a personal satisfaction for me.
Seven races associated with seven religions, only now they exist in subrace form with only one race populating the globe. Humans descend through animals - take over their bodies eventually and oust them by ascending them off the planet. The evolving animals were forced to leave by this woman's writings. Now, if there is a higher kingdom: girasas descending into humans, the end result will be the same: we will be forced out and off of earth, but in the process, we learn more. Hence, we may not use it immediately perhaps as we again are asked to descend into animals before having a form. It alarms me to think that so much progress has to be waylaid until our work with "evolving" animals is completed. I hope you take a look at this book and consider that someone else put a lot of work into bringing us (you and me and all of us) a theory that explains Jesus Christ and explains past records.