Reporting From the Front Lines of the Texas Evolution Debate

Wired by Juli Berwald | Apr. 1, 2009 (Opinion)

Just hours before the Texas State Board of Education held its final hearings on the science education standards that would be put in place for the next decade, I set my kitchen timer for three minutes. I practiced my testimony among open jars of peanut butter and jelly strewn about from making kids' lunches. Ding. I still had my conclusion to read. What could I cut?

For months I had been slinking around the controversy in Texas. I had gone to ... Full Story »

Posted by Kristin Gorski

See All Reviews »

View

Review

Fabrice Florin
4.0
 by Fabrice Florin - Apr. 1, 2009

Great citizen journalism from a freelance science writer in Texas. She advocates against questioning evolution theory in science textbooks, on the grounds that "it's really hard to come up with scientifically based weaknesses to evolution." The story is largely about her experience testifying before the Texas State Board of Education at a hearing pitting scientists against religious creationists. An insightful and informative article about an important topic.

I was impressed that despite her own belief in evolution theory, the author presented opposing views reasonably and fairly, without forcing her opinions on us. I wish the creationist side could follow her lead.

Science is about explaining the how of the natural world: how the universe began, how life originated, how the diversity of species occurred. Scientists feel no need for their work to answer why the universe exists, why we are here. For scientists, those are questions better left to philosophy, religion and after-work hours. Perhaps creationists find theories that only answer how to be completely unsatisfactory. Maybe for creationists, any theory that doesn’t answer why contains weaknesses.

Juli Berwald – a freelance science writer living in Austin, Texas.

See All Reviews »

Fabrice's Rating

Overall
4.0

Good
from 13 answers
Quality
3.9
Information
4.0
Insight
4.0
Style
4.0
Context
4.0
Expertise
4.0
Originality
3.0
Relevance
4.0
Responsibility
4.0
Popularity
4.5
Recommendation
5.0
Credibility
4.0
More How our ratings work »