
Is anyone REALLY that surprised?
Defying description and lacking in focus...the junk drawer of all teacher blogs.
Entitled the "Evolution Academic Freedom Act," HF 183 contains three sections. In the first, it is contended that "current law does not expressly protect the right of instructors to objectively present scientific information relevant to the full range of scientific views regarding chemical and biological evolution," that "instructors have experienced or feared discipline, discrimination, or other adverse consequences as a result of presenting the full range of scientific views regarding chemical and biological evolution," and that "existing law does not expressly protect students from discrimination due to their positions or views regarding biological or chemical evolution."This bill follows current trends in that it uses terms like "academic freedom", "protection", and "full range of scientific views" to disguise religious intent. And it fits into the same strategy that I discussed in a previous post, which is to give the impression that evolution is a weak theory and that there's a lot of scientific controversy about the validity of the theory of evolution. Both of these statements are false.
If enacted, the bill would require schools to allow teachers to inform students "about relevant scientific information regarding either the scientific strengths or scientific weaknesses pertaining to biological evolution or chemical evolution," protecting teachers who choose to do so from "reassignment, termination, discipline or other discrimation [sic] for doing so."This is another "back door" argument. Proponents of creationism have consistently re-labeled their tactics (equal time, scientific creationism, intelligent design, academic freedom, etc.) and have consistently had their tactics declared unconstitutional in the courts. So if they aren't able to legally introduce creationism, the next best thing is to make evolution look like a week theory, or a theory in jeopardy (neither of which, by the way, is accurate). The logic behind this goes something like this: 1) evolution and creationism are competing ideas used to explain the diversity of life of Earth, and 2) creationism can't be legally taught in science classes but if 3) people can be convinced that evolution is "weak" then 4) by default they will accept the creationists perspective as true.
Groundhogs, aka woodchucks, stop hibernating in early March. But the male rodents emerge from their burrows periodically during their four-month hibernation to visit potential partners.And now you know the truth.
[...]
“For males, these early excursions are an opportunity to survey their territories and to establish bonds with females,” [study author Stam. M.] Zervanos said in a statement then. “For females, it is an opportunity to bond with males and assess food availability.”
On average, the groundhogs he studied went into hibernation on Nov. 7 and woke up for good on Feb. 28. But the ladies apparently needed their beauty rest: They snoozed for an average 117 days, compared with the guys' 106 days of shut-eye.
In one case, when a male groundhog emerged from his den, he hung out for a few days at the entrance of the girls' dorm until one of the lasses came out ... then, like a typical guy, he went and visited another woman.