Gov. Perry: We Teach Creationism in Texas Public Schools. The Rest of Texas: No, We Don't.

perry.jpg
Perry: See, this hair doesn't just happen!
How does one explain the follicle-by-follicle perfection of Gov. Rick Perry's imperturbable man-mane? Where does his mega-watt smile and its rows of pearly whites come from? Braces? No, silly. They come from God. God spoke, and Perry was born a man of uncommon comeliness. That, Friends of Unfair Park, is Creationism.

But contrary to what Perry is saying on the campaign trail, it isn't taught in Texas public schools.

At a New Hampshire campaign stop Thursday morning, a boy ushered to the front by his mother asked Perry if he believed in evolution. "It's a theory that's out there," Perry said, according to a CNN report. "It's got some gaps in it. In Texas we teach both Creationism and evolution."

Ok, so there are "gaps." Humans and chimpanzees have more in common with each other, genetically, than either does with gorillas. Whatever that means. We can debate that.

But not this, Elected Official With Whom The Buck Stops In Our Public School System. We do not teach Creationism.

We flirted recently with Intelligent Design, the next step in a Christianist retreat that basically cedes all that hard-fought territory to science, but insists an unseen, Market Force-style hand sparked life and continues to guide its progression. But the State Board of Education stepped back off of the ledge and jettisoned the submitted Creationist texts and the inter-species insecurities evinced in the state biology panel, which cringed at the comparisons in a Holt McDougal supplement on hominid skulls.

We don't live in a state where kids learn theology in biology class. Not yet, anyway.

Texas Freedom Network Prez Kathy Miller seems to believe the gaffe was calculated.

"Gov. Perry has once again waded into the culture wars for political gain, but without considering the harmful consequences. It is irresponsible for the leader of a state, or a presidential hopeful, to suggest to public school teachers that it is OK to teach creationism as science when such attempts have repeatedly been ruled unconstitutional by the courts, and could result in litigation against a school district," she said in a statement we received this afternoon. "And it is outrageous that Gov. Perry would erode respect for and trust in public education in Texas, simply in order to promote his political aspirations. Texans and Texas schools are working to prepare our children for college and 21st-century jobs. Gov. Perry's irresponsible comments wrongly suggest otherwise."

We think she's giving him way too much credit. Anyone wanna lay odds on Perry simply has no clue what we teach?


Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
196 comments
medication errors
medication errors

The medication error can include number of types of damages that can be recovered. A patient can recover money damages for pain and sufferings, medical bills, loss of income etc which appears due to medication errors. The solocitor look forward to help you with your medication error case.

Danielle Latta
Danielle Latta

Interested to see how Governor Perry is scoring in the social media world since his big campaign announcement? MutualMind, a Dallas-based company that specializes is social media monitoring, began tracking the social buzz for Perry 's Presidential Campaign. See the results here: http://bit.ly/pXDKk6

Urbandweller
Urbandweller

(call out box) Perry: "Oh, did you just ask about my good hair, It's a relaxer, next question"

BCulbreath
BCulbreath

If that is his wife she sure looks sad or maybe tired of his Lie's.

Choderus
Choderus

I am sticking by my theory more than ever nowadays that this historic drought plaguing Texas is god's way of telling all the "good christians" that EVEN HE hates Rick Perry and wants you all to quit voting for him!

CR
CR

Don't worry about the kids learning about Creationism because they aren't learning much of anything anyhow and a large number of them will drop out before they take biology.

debasser
debasser

I think this is going to be the fastest exit in history for a potential GOP candidate. He says Bernanke commits treason, then says Texas teaches creationism (I'm from Texas and both ideals are presented). Regardless of what you believe, the GOP will make sure he's not "the guy".  I think it would be McCain's year if he tried again.

Candygirl1988
Candygirl1988

I do not understand the so-called God, do not believe. But he stillwishes it.

Waltercarpio
Waltercarpio

I wish people had the ability to ignor people like him so they can disappear from the planet ..

BostonFlyer
BostonFlyer

Ahh Texas where would we be without you guys and you crazy politicians, like it is said everything is bigger in Texas including political stupidity.

Guesty
Guesty

I hate to interrupt the ritual flogging of the demised equine, but I have a question: Has anybody seen Clay Cooley and Governor Goodhair in the same place at the same time? Just curious.

love texas
love texas

I think part of the problem is that the average human's frame of reference is really small, and their little pie slice of the world is heavily influenced by those who claim to have oracle-like abilities to see the rest of it. It explains a comment above to the effect of "it's really record breaking hot outside, must be global warming". Hot? In Summer? In Texas? Holy shit. Guess I've been wrong all along. Thanks, you've cured me of the notion by letting me know this summer was really hot.

Records have only been kept for so long, and on the global scale, even a thousand years is a blip, a rounding error. The tiniest change in the energy put out by the sun, or a volcanic eruption throws out more climate change than the entire human race could possibly hope to muster. The whole idea that we are "care takers for mother earth" is arrogant, and dismissive of the reality that humans are just another animal, trying to survive. I hardly think that humanity's survival is so assured, much less our superhuman ability to "heal the earth, stop global warming, etc".

There is no scientific consensus, if there every could be such a thing. To say there is would be to ignore the whistleblowers who exposed doctored data and falsified results. There is a growing community of scientists who claim the exact opposite. But the mass media, Democrat party and public schools preach global warming as gospel. If we had accepted a scientific consensus fifty years ago, we'd still be worried about the coming ice age.

Perry isn't worthy
Perry isn't worthy

LOL I remember Perry showing up at a Walmart here..no one seemed to care. Why do people bother voting for him if no one likes him? Makes no sense

Likeicare
Likeicare

How about.. Perry has no clue about anything, much less what is taught in Texas schools.  I'll bet he doesn't even know they don't give out schoolbooks.

Peteratefood
Peteratefood

I love that so many people think politics are about intelligence.  The game is about winning voters.  Believe it or not, most of the people that vote are Christians, like it or not.  All the intelligent people that understand science, realize the politics are a joke, and also realize that this country was bought and sold a long time ago, know that it doesn't matter what moron in a monkey suit gets stuck in office.  That's why they are not at the polls on election day.  How is anyone still surprised?  I mean, really?

Josh
Josh

Evolution describes the changes that occur in populations of living organisms; it does not address the origin of life.

Beverly Kurtin
Beverly Kurtin

As an aside, many scientists, of which I am one, do believe in God. Did he have a hand in what has occurred? I think so, but I cannot, nor should others, confuse theology with science. Even though the two are not necessarily opposed to each other, Creationism and its younger brother, Intelligent Design, is NOT science and cannot be taught as such.

Is evolution "just a theory?" Is PERRY just a theory?

Beverly Kurtin
Beverly Kurtin

This is what I wrote in a comment to Texas Freedom Network. TFN's Miller has it right.

Kreationism: How Krispy Kreme doughnuts are made.

 

Perry, as with most pols will say just about anything theythink will win them a vote. What kills me is that the guy still thinks thatevolution is “only a theory.” Like most under educated, and Perry certainly isone of them, they know only one definition for the word theory. They do notunderstand the meaning of a scientific theory which is 180 degrees from themore understood term.

 

A scientific theory is, in layman’s terms, if something issaid to be “just a theory,” it usually means that it is a mere guess, or isunproved. It might even lack credibility. But in scientific terms, a theoryimplies that something has been PROVEN and is GENERALLY ACCEPTED AS BEING TRUE.(http://wilstar.com/theories.ht... Emphasis is mine)

 

As a scientist, I’m appealed by the man in the streetthinking evolution is “just a theory,” but when the Gov of a State says that,it is incredibly stupid. But then again, Perry IS stupid when it comes toacademic subjects. He got C’s and D’s at Aggi land.

 

I feel that Perry is the best gift that Obama has everreceived. None of the Republicans with whom I’ve discussed him are for him orany other of the Wrong Wing Nuts who think that the whole nation is Christianand that all Christians are as far over to the Wrong side as they are. There isNOTHING right about them.

 

Perry has alienated many others with his call for the nationto pray to Jesus. Jesus? JESUS? So much for the other religions in our countrywho do not pray to Jesus. I certainly do not, I’m not any kind of a Christian.Which is why, if the Dominionists got their way, I, along with any other personin any other religion other than Perry and Bachmann’s version of Christianitywould be put to death. No, I am NOT kidding. Google the word and see what thosemisbegotten people believe. Some definitions exist for misbegotten, :unlawfully conceived : illegitimate 2 a : having a disreputable or improperorigin : ill-conceived b : contemptible, deformed Choose the definition of yourchoice.

 

Tad Banyon
Tad Banyon

We can hardly deny the obvious. When it comes to our politicians, we produce some real doozies. Fortunately, our ten-gallon penises provide some measure of reassurance that all is not lost in Texas.

Observist
Observist

In the grand scheme of things, we live in a thin film of atmosphere that is only a 4 miles thick on a planet 7900 miles across.  Our food sources will only grow in a temperature range of less than 100 degrees along a practically infininte spectrum of temperature.  There are now 7 billion people sharing this thin film of atmosphere, and at the same time digging up millions of years' worth of carbon sequestered in fossils and spewing it into that thin film as fast as they possibly can.  How is it arrogant to think that might possibly be having an effect?  Are there any other animals just "trying to survive" that have the ability to affect the earth the way humans do? 

The idea is not to "heal the earth" the idea it to not fuck it up.  That's not arrogant.  What's arrogant is to think we can do whatever we want, as much as we want, for as long as we want without having any effect on the planet.  You say yourself that humanity's survival is not assured - that's exactly the reason we should monitor our climate to determine if our actions are changing it, and, if so, change our actions in attempt to assure our survival.  That's the real meaning of "conservative".

scottindallas
scottindallas

I don't think he's won a majority of votes for 11 years.  Some could argue that Kinky is doing him a favor in splitting the vote.

scottindallas
scottindallas

fair enough.  I tend to think the two are asking different questions.  Science never pretends to answer "why" but rather to describe "how"  Even if God decreed it, surely there is a mechanism that makes the decree manifest. 

Meandyou2013?
Meandyou2013?

Perry is a puppet.. Just like most of our leaders.. They fill our heads with what they want us to believe.. Christianity..and Science..are used to manipulate our lives.. But that doesnt mean that Yeshua wasnt the son of God either.. Or that science doesnt explain where we came from.. Im just tired of the control that both are trying to gain..

scottindallas
scottindallas

before you cut and paste that again you might want to correct "...I’m appealed by..."  I'm sure you meant appalled.  Scientific theories aren't all the same.  Some theories can be repeated with such consistency that basically no one disputes them.  However, science is inductive reasoning, and as such many are never conclusively proven, but the body of information sways a vast majority of people, this is different than mixing sulfur and water.  We can't reproduce creation (or whatever you call it.)  I take it that you are a "social scientist," I find few social scientists really understand the scientific method.  The goal of science is to control for all variable--whether known or unknown.  When there are many unknown variables a scientific theory cannot be said to be proven.  Two billiard balls colliding can be predicted, all the variables identified.  I'm not antagonistic to science, I don't hate "social sciences" but I resent that so many "social scientist" playing fast and loose with the scientific method. This makes them FAR too certain in the foundation of what are equivocal findings, that are always subject to the vagaries of consciousness, and it's role in interpreting stimuli.   The science of the creation (forgive the term) of this universe is ill-suited to replication, as such their certainty is weaker.  All that said, I don't dispute the theory of evolution, count me as convinced, but this isn't deductive reasoning, it's inductive, and as such people will be convinced with different sums of data. 

Wes Scott
Wes Scott

But, but but ... Ricky was a cheerleader, and that is what he still is today. You don't need good grades to be a cheerleader. It's not like he was trying to be a scientist, or something. He's a damned Aggie, for christsake! And now, he's living in the Land of Bevo. It has got to be affecting what little brain he has.

Meandyou2013?
Meandyou2013?

And religion does not prove that science is wrong..

Meandyou2013?
Meandyou2013?

So show us the proof that we evolved from apes.. Science does not prove that there is no God..

Lovetexas
Lovetexas

You're right about the fact that "not fucking it up" is a wise policy. However, that has nothing to do with climate change policy, taxes, carbon credits, etc. Shutting down a mine or a ensuring coal plants meet emissions standards should be about keeping people healthy, with as much consideration as possible given to the fact that there is a demand for those resources and energy that increases the quality of our lives.

Meandyou2013?
Meandyou2013?

Ok.. since our survival is at stake..lol.. What should we do then? Kill half the population to limit what all these people say is wrong with our planet? They've done it before!.. And I wouldn't put it passed them to do it again.. OR.. Lets just make more laws.. That way we wont have ANY freedom..because our survival is at stake.. I swear.. We believe anything that we're told to believe..

scottindallas
scottindallas

Yeshua never claims to be God, there is no evidence for the Trinity, nor an argument for the Trinity in the Bible.  But, that hasn't kept millions of Christians imagining there is an argument for that inane theory.  In fact, millions were killed in the 4th and 5th century to defend the Algerian Constantine's "vision" of the Trinity. 

Observist
Observist

Science does not try to gain control or manipulate your life, whereas that is the sole purpose of religion.

scottindallas
scottindallas

He is an aggie rather than an mechanical engineer.  You shouldn't disparage the either of those scientific fields--though Rick Perry is a free-fire zone.

scottindallas
scottindallas

We do have genetic information from Mitochondrial DNA that can trace us back through our mothers.  It doesn't "prove" what you ask, but it does show a mechanism and a heritage that takes us back quite a ways into the past. 

Tad Banyon
Tad Banyon

We did not evolve from apes.We both evolved from a common ancestor.

scottindallas
scottindallas

I agree that the doomsayer strategy is off putting.  However, we should conserve for it's own sake, seek efficiency for it's own sake and protect and preserve ecosystems as much as possible.  That's not arrogant.  If we felled the rain forests, and denuded the mountains that would be dangerous and irresponsible.  I agree with some of your points, but you go over the line as well.  Moderation, and modesty will help us all

Observist
Observist

Yes, that's it.  I'm suggesting we kill half the population now, so that half the population doesn't die sometime in the future.

scottindallas
scottindallas

God can't be proven nor disproven, so, I have no idea what you are fearful of?  Science is only as powerful as it is workable.  Though some do jump to support theories where the jury is still out.  Mainly these are in the "soft sciences"  the hardest of the soft sciences is medicine, far softer are the social sciences--these are problematic due to the ability to interpret stimuli.  The best rebuke of "medical science" is the placebo effect.  I'm not a Christian Scientist, nor a Scientologist, but cautious and slow to judge.  There are thousands of cases where conventional medical science has killed or hurt people despite their best intentions. 

Observist
Observist

No scientific activity whatsoever is dedicated to proving the non-existence of god.  None. There is science dedicated to discovering facts that happen to contradict relgious beliefs, but that's not the same as trying to control or manipulate religious believers.  There are proselytizing atheists that want to convince people there is no god, and some of them might be scientists, but that doesn't mean science is some kind of social movement in opposition to religion.   A child molester might be a priest, but that doesn't mean the pupose of religion is to molest children.

Meandyou2013?
Meandyou2013?

If scientist were to say that they could "prove" that there is no God.. You dont think that that would gain the control of everyone on the planet who believe's in God? Or at least try to change their faith? Science is right there with religion my friend..

Maogani Johnsonn
Maogani Johnsonn

I saw a documentary that traced DNA, all races.  The conclusion was that everyone originated from North Africa.

Tad Banyon
Tad Banyon

Just to be a little more precise, only females can trace their lineage on their mother's side. Males can trace their DNA through the father's Y-chromosomal DNA. I have done this and found, to my astonishment, that my ancestors came from North Africa. I was expecting American Indian or your basic white guy European.

Tad Banyon
Tad Banyon

"I'm not poo-pooing the idea, I am questioning the certainty of the science."OK, fair enough.

And I am questioning your understanding of the science, which, unless you are also a climate researcher, is massively filtered , incomplete, watered down, and almost certainly biased one way or the other.

The only logical position any layman can take (who can never have access to all the actual data and couldn't understand it if he did) is to accept that those researchers who are trained in it and work with it every day know more about it than anyone else. The only legitimate critic whose ideas you should have any comfort with are other working climate researchers and their published findings in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Anything less than that, any other kind of scientists or any other publication, is necessarily less reliable and legitimate.

Of all the quotes and facts about climate change ever quoted in blogs and conversations like this one, I have never seen one that came from a working climate researcher in a peer-reviewed journal. Ever.

The idea that the entire field of climate research is completely wrong can only mean that they are completely incompetent or that an entire industry of some of the smartest people in the world is made up of frauds and hoaxsters. Both ideas are, of course, completely absurd.

scottindallas
scottindallas

There are enough questions, particularly that Greenland was green for 2000 year within the last 10,000 that suggest we have serious doubts.  Read up on Thomas Kuhn, philosopher of science--a course I've taken about paradigm shifts.  When the questions mount leading to a new hypothesis and a revolutionary change in the theory. 

"Kuhn has made several notable claims concerning the progress of scientific knowledge: that scientific fields undergo periodic "paradigm shifts" rather than solely progressing in a linear and continuous way; that these paradigm shifts open up new approaches to understanding that scientists would never have considered valid before; and that the notion of scientific truth, at any given moment, cannot be established solely by objective criteria but is defined by a consensus of a scientific community. Competing paradigms are frequently incommensurable; that is, they are competing accounts of reality which cannot be coherently reconciled. Thus, our comprehension of science can never rely on full "objectivity"; we must account for subjective perspectives as well."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...

There are many cycles with regard to the warming/cooling trends that we don't fully understand.  Scientists have yet to formulate a model that is accurate.  Another recent advance is that they underestimated the amount of heat lost to space.  Tad, we have much to learn, and still are looking through a glass darkly.  To suggest that climate science is well researched is a joke.  We haven't even been using static measuring tools, conditions nor locations.  There is little objectivity in perspective, nor in our metrics.  I'm not poo-pooing the idea, I am questioning the certainty of the science. 

Tad Banyon
Tad Banyon

As you know, evolution is not concerned with how life began, only how it behaved once it was here. And I don't know where you are getting your "science", but you're wildly overstating the controversies about evolution, global warming, and the Big Bang. Virtually nothing is "fully explained", but all 3 of those are on very solid scientific footing. While we haven't been studying global warming for very long, the amount of manpower and computing power that's been brought to bear on it makes it one of the most thoroughly studied scientific ideas of our time. Like I said earlier, "scientists" may be crawling around all over the place to question and poo-poo it, but working CLIMATE researchers-- the scientists who would know better than anyone-- are overwhelmingly in agreement. Even meteorologists aren't the best people to ask, as meteorology is not focused on the kinds of long-term patterns that climate research is. Forget the politics for a minute, forget what you think about Al Gore or Sen Inhofe, forget conspiracy theories about worldwide socialist hoaxes or silly notions of trying to keep a grant gravy train going. Assume that climate researchers are just as competent and ethical and competitive as everyone else in the world. If something like 98% of them all agree that the data they work with every day, using their highly advanced education and training, points conclusively toward man-made climate change, how can anyone possibly make a remotely reasonable argument that they're all just wrong? What other entire industry are we willing to indict as completely incompetent at best, and fraudsters at worst? Its frankly quite ridiculous.

scottindallas
scottindallas

Tad, that is but one element of how we got here.  Theories such as the big bang and others that have serious problems are also part of the equation.  There are parts of the universe that are older than the big bang, scientists have twisted and invented theories to justify these problems in the measurable data. 

None of this is to endorse ID.  That is a wholly opportunistic and mercurial interpretation that will seek refuge in the gaps, and mysteries.  Again, the big bangers are making leaps that aren't fully explained by the data.  My larger point is that this conversation is a great opportunity to describe and explain the scientific method.  Which works very well to explain chemistry, but not as well other fields (social science is particular bug-a-boo for me)  Science is very slow to explain these historical, one off phenomenon, but the best thing we have.  I'm not anti-science, I dare say the social scientists do more to defame the Sc. Meth.

Tad Banyon
Tad Banyon

Taking some science classes helps, too.Of course, if you refuse to believe mountains of settled scientific understanding just because you haven't yet done the experiments yourself and seen the evidence and worked out the calculations by your own hand, then you're just an idiot and science probably isn't for you anyway. Nor is anything else that requires using your brain, for that matter..

Tad Banyon
Tad Banyon

No, not a poor analogy at all. We don't fully understand the mechanics of evolution, but we know that things evolve. We don't think they might, we don't hypothesize that they could, we KNOW they DO. The only question is whether natural selection is the method by which evolution works. But the question about whether we have evolved is as completely and utterly settled scientifically as the question of the force that holds us to the earth. Evolution, like gravity, is a fact. How it works, just like gravity, there are questions about.

julierox
julierox

Actually, the beauty of evolutionary theory is that it specifically INCLUDES history.

At least I think that's what you were getting at; I'm not very good at translating dipshit textspeak.

scottindallas
scottindallas

You've overreached there.  Gravity is measurable, how do we measure genetic mutation?  There is a difference.  You just stepped into the difference I've been talking about.  We have mass and weight which define gravitational force.  That said, we don't fully understand the mechanics of gravity as it were.  I'm not a creationist, I am a defender of the scientific method.  You made a poor analogy Tad. 

Meandyou2013?
Meandyou2013?

You honestly have NO idea what you are talking about.. But ur scientific mind totally excludes history..lol

Montemalone
Montemalone

Evolution was not contrived by some lonely lunatic in a basement somewhere, unlike 100% of religions.

Meandyou2013?
Meandyou2013?

Like I said.. What is the difference between "faith"  and  "theory"? You believe that its been done because someone who claims to be a scientist..spends his life trying to find the answers..tells us what he believes to be the truth.. and you believe it.. That's all..

Tad Banyon
Tad Banyon

Its been done.Evolution is as much an established fact as gravity.

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...