In 1925, John Scopes, a Tennessee high school teacher, taught his class about Darwinism and ignited a countrywide debate, not to mention one of the most dramatic trials of the 20th century. In what became known as the "Scopes Monkey Trial," he was charged with violating a Tenneesee law that prohibited the teaching of evolution. After the intense eight-day trial that brought to light the everlasting battles between church and state and science and religion, Scopes was found guilty and sentenced to pay a $100 fine.

Fast forward to today in Texas. Christine Comer, who served as the science director of the Texas Education Agency for nine years, left her post because she came under fire for questioning creationism. And perhaps questioning is even too strong a word - all Comer did was forward an e-mail about a lecture on the subject to a colleague. But that action was enough to stir certain Texas education officials into a tailspin. And these officials, many of whom have close connections to our home-grown boy over in Washington, called for Comer's resignation.

Texas school standards expect evolution to be taught in science classes. Apparently, however, those guidelines do not coincide with the personal beliefs of many state education officials, creating the dissonance that perhaps forced Comer from her job. For example, the chair of the Texas Board of Education, Don McLeroy, is a Sunday school teacher who has given talks on the merits of intelligent design.

Rumors whisper that the Board of Education wants to tighten the state's stance on intelligent design when the school standards come up for review next year. Right now, Texas' needle of opinion on intelligent design points at neutral, but even that position upsets many.

According to UT integrative biology professor Eric Pianka, intelligent design is "creation by another name." At least one federal judge agrees with him. In the 2005 case Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Judge John E. Jones III slammed the Dover Area School Board for voting to amend Dover High School's curriculum to allow for exploration of intelligent design after several parents complained about the district's one-sided approach to the theory of life. Jones ruled this action unconstitutional and forbade intelligent design from being taught in Dover schools, proclaiming the concept "flawed and illogical."

And Jones is not the only one who believes intelligent design is academically insubstantial. In an e-mail to The Daily Texan, assistant professor of integrative biology Dan Bolnick wrote: "I know of only one piece of original peer-reviewed research that has been published supporting intelligent design, and every biologist I know considers the study design to be fundamentally flawed. In contrast, there were 1,570 original peer-reviewed research papers with the key words 'natural selection' or 'sexual selection' in their title or abstract last year alone, and these papers are only a subset of evolutionary subjects."

Darwin's theory of evolution may be just that - a theory, and as much of one as intelligent design - but scientifically, a theory is a call for questioning and synthesis, and a path toward tangible fact. Science and religion exist in different realms and cannot - should not - be reconciled, especially in textbooks.

"It's a poor thing for scientists to say 'I believe in evolution.' Believing in evolution is not scientific. The way science works is by keeping an open mind," Pianka said.

Agenda-ridden boards and agencies cry dogma back and forth, but science is science. Proof is proof. There are facts and there are suppositions, and as the TEA has proven, the former does not belong in the realm of political politesse. But the latter does not belong in our schools.

- L.F.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools