a simple prop

Texas has joined the ranks of ID-friendly states. HB 2454 was introduced earlier this month and plays off the tired old Expelled theme:

“An institution of higher education may not discriminate against or penalize in any manner, especially with regard to employment or academic support, a faculty member or student based on the faculty member’s or student’s conduct of research relating to the theory of intelligent design or other alternate theories of the origination and development of organisms.”

NCSE is reporting that Kentucky HB 169 has died in committee.

To summarize so far:

• Florida SB 1854
• Missouri HB 195
• Tennessee SB 893
• Oklahoma SB 554 and HB 1551 – both dead
• New Mexico HB 302 – dead
• Kentucky HB 169 – dead

It’s like playing Whac-a-Mole. Florida Senate Bill 1854 would require “[a] thorough presentation and critical analysis of the scientific theory of evolution” in the state’s public schools. NCSE has more.

NCSE is reporting that SB 554 appears to have died in committee, joining its little buddy HB 1551 in the Bryan Memorial Home for Anti-Evolutionist Legislation. The state of play thusfar in 2011 is:

• Kentucky HB 169
• Missouri HB 195
• Oklahoma SB 554 and HB 1551 – both dead
• New Mexico HB 302 – dead
• Tennessee HB 368 and SB 893

NCSE’s headline says it all: “Antievolution bill loses in committee in Oklahoma“

Oh look! A second anti-evolution bill in Tennessee. They’re taking a belt and braces approach to this apparently. This one (SB 893 PDF) would require authorities to “assist teachers to find effective ways to present the science curriculum as it addresses scientific controversies” such as “biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.” It would permit teachers to “help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught.” Haven’t we seen this before?

Over at PT, Dave Thomas is reporting that New Mexico HB 302 was tabled on a 5-to-4 vote in the House Education committee. The tabling was despite – or maybe because of – vocal support (and a full page ad [pdf]) by a local creationist group, IDNet-NM.

The Foundation for Thought & Ethics – publishers of the creationist cdesign proponentsist textbook Of Pandas and People – recently decided not to seek state approval from the Texas Board of Education for supplemental materials which they were developing. Which is just as well. As the Texas Freedom Network reports, the materials would have been little more than standard creationist talking points:

“FTE’s product will be electronic written material satisfying the new and expanded Biology 1 TEKS [curriculum standards] for Texas schools, with components for both teachers and students. It will include irenic yet candid discussions of what an educated person in the 21st century must know in regard to neo-Darwinian theory of life’s diversity and origin of life studies. Discussions will cover fair and accurate portrayals of the major explanations, as well as analysis and critiques of each, as advanced in scientific literature. The goal will be to equip students to see beyond the uncritical acceptance of majority viewpoints when warranted by scientific data, as well as to consider possible alternatives. Such alternatives will include intelligent design perspectives but not creationism or creation science. The major components are: (1) review of evolutionary theory; (2) critique of conventional evolutionary theory; (3) examination of origin-of-life studies and enumeration of problems with chemical scenarios for life’s origin; (4) presentation of intelligent design alternative.”

NSCE has announced that Tennessee has joined the four states that are considering anti-evolution legislation. HB 368 [PDF] aims to permit teachers to “help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught.” The “controversial” theories are the usual suspects – “biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.”

New Mexico added its name to the current slate of states with anti-evolution legislation being considered. The year started with Kentucky, then Missouri, then Oklahoma and now New Mexico. Weirdly, it is spreading west and we here in Arizona are the next state over. Given the lunacy in our current legislature, I wouldn’t be surprised if a bill appeared.

The New Mexico bill (HB 302) would require teachers to be allowed to inform students “about relevant scientific information regarding either the scientific strengths or scientific weaknesses” pertaining to “controversial” scientific topics. NCSE has more.