Tyson says Texas evolution critics are a threat to economy

Astrophyscist and TV host Neil deGrasse Tyson talked up the need for more science funding in a lecture at the University of Arlington-Texas Tuesday night and took some time to wade into the evolution debate too.

Tyson addressed a packed auditorium for more than three hours as part of UTA's Maverick Speaker Series. When he wasn't talking about killer asteroids or why physicists always wear their seatbelts, he spoke at length about the link between science education/funding and America's dominance on the world stage over the past century.

During the Q&A, an audience member asked Tyson about conservative members of the state Board of Education who want to teach the "weaknesses" of the theory of evolution in Texas high school classrooms.

"I think they should stay in the Sunday school," Tyson said. Calling intelligent design theory a "philosophy of ignorance," he argued that a lack of appreciation for basic scienctific principles will hurt America's scientific output, which has been the largest economic engine in the country's history.

"If nonscience works its way into the science classroom, it marks...the beginning of the end of the economic strength this country has known," Tyson said.

Tyson, who spent time in Washington, D.C. after being appointed to committees by then-President George W. Bush, went on to say that he always knew a Republican judge in Pennsylvania would ultimately side with evolution backers in the high-profile Dover education case in 2005. The judge understood that respecting science is good for the US economy, Tyson said.

"What I learned from my tours of duty in Washington is no Republican wants to die poor," Tyson said.

Tyson's solution for jump starting scientific innovation again in America: double NASA's budget.

-Aman Batheja

Comments

[BigBrotherBites]

He's a typical rhetoric spewer. Evolution is nothing more than a "Theory" itself. Even Darwin said his own work was flawed. Its the only reason he supports it because hes a overpaid scientist making money off such rhetoric.

[RJ -- Texas]

OK, BigBrotherBites, I'll make a deal with you. I'll take advantage of everything that science brings us if you promise to only use those things that your God has provided you before those overpaid scientists got hold of them.

Man -- as a native Texan, I'd like to day I'm surprised by the number of dopes in this state, but sadly, I'm not.

[Robert]

If he thinks "weaknesses" of a theory should not be explored then, he's not a scientist - he is a dogmatist.

[Southlake resident and lifelong Texan]

As has been pointed out enumerable times, Darwin's Theory of Evolution is wholly incomplete, and in no way explains the creation of life. While evidence may support some form of change for the better among living beings over thousands of years, nothing in the theeory explains how the first living thing came to be, and if the oft-repeated notion of The Big Bang is proposed...what existed before the Bang to cause it to occur/ The only possible answer is that something existed, and more true evidence points to the notion of Intelligetn design of life than has ever supported the idea that completely random chance caused the inexplicable act that caused life to begin. If one doesn't limit one's analysis to the wodden type espoused by so called "natural science" experts, rational thought can lead to only one copnclusion- God exists, and he created the universe. perhaps he used the mechanism of evolution to improve his creation over time, as we have no idea if a "day" on God's clock equals a million years on ours or not, but something HAD to create the first thing, and only something which always existed can be the answer to that question.

[Gary]

Sorry, Genesis Fans, but the scientist was not talking to you: we know where you get your opinions & how much they are worth. The more important audience is leaders of government and industry, who have to wonder how America will survive in the 21st century world economy as the Okeefenokee Swamp of the world's educational systems.

[Harold]

Evolution is science and belongs in the class room. Creationism is faith, and belongs in church. Teaching faith as a science is utter nonsence and belongs in comedy clubs.

End of discussion.

[Concerned Joe]

Robert,

Darwinian evolution has no more weaknesses than gravitation or the atomic model of matter. To mandate the teaching of weaknesses where there is none is merely a ploy to introduce non-science into the science classroom.

There is a difference between teaching critical thinking and legislating nonsense.

[Mark]

The fact that this is even being seriously discussed by (allegedly) rational adults makes me concerned for my world and fellow man.

[Joe]

@Harold,
Gee thanks for ending the conversation and letting us know we aren't allowed to debate. This is the biggest flaw that has been exposed by ID. The fact that the academy suppresses and attempts to silence any dissent. I am gladd the Einstein, Gallileo and many other masters decided not to listen to the powers that be when they wer starting out. Just because your educated doesn't mean your not an idiot.

[Ragnar]

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

Evolution is a theory the same way gravity is a theory. We have observed speciation in cichlids and in drosophilia.

Now, people also need to recognize that evolution as a concept does NOT address the origin of life. The theory that life spontaneously generated from non-living chemicals is called Abiogenesis.

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