Pay No Attention to That Man Behind the Curtain

Well, after the California State Board of Education policy statement on science education came out, a curriculum guide called the Science Framework, instructions to textbook publishers how they were to proceed if they wanted to sell their products in California, was produced. It clearly emphasized that the purpose of instruction in evolution is to persuade the student of its factuality. Areas of difficulty were ignored or minimized. In places the document is not even internally coherent even though isolated portions of it make good sense:

Students should never be told that "many scientists" think this or that. Science is not decided by vote, but by evidence. Nor should students be told that "scientists believe." Science is not a matter of belief; rather it is a matter of evidence that can be subjected to the tests of observation and objective reasoning...Show students that nothing in science is decided just because someone important says it is so (authority) or because that is the way it has always been done (tradition).

As Phillip Johnson observes, however, the Framework immediately proceeds to use a dissembling definition of evolution and appeals to the authority of scientific orthodoxy.

The prior commitment to materialistic naturalism that we have seen repeatedly in the course of this series is the Achilles heel of the Darwinists. By insisting that the subject be taught in an unquestioning manner in the public schoosl they are almost asking for a wider debate that will certainly include knowledgeable critics. We have seen that critics have a hard time getting a fair hearing, but this situation cannot last forever. Inevitably, someone with sufficient credibility will succeed in exposing the humbugs.