subscribe to our mailing list:
|
SECTIONS
|
![](/img/blank.gif) |
![](/img/blank.gif) |
![](/img/blank.gif) |
On the Frontline
Be the first to read new TalkReason articles - subscribe to our mailing list!
|
Evolution and climate education update: September 21, 2012
Dear Friends of NCSE,
A preview of Bill McGuire's Waking the Giant. NESCent is taking its
show on the road again. And NCSE's Mark McCaffrey debunks the idea of
"teaching the controversy" about climate page in The Earth Scientist.
A PREVIEW OF WAKING THE GIANT
NCSE is pleased to offer a free preview of Bill McGuire's Waking the
Giant: How a Changing Climate Triggers Earthquakes, Tsunamis, and
Volcanoes (Oxford University Press, 2012). The preview consists of the
bulk of chapter 2, "Once and Future Climate," in which McGuire
observes, "some past climates can provide a useful, and somewhat
terrifying, [guide] to what our planet might look like by 2100 and in
the centuries that follow. In particular, the post-glacial period
provides us with the perfect opportunity to examine and appraise how
abrupt and rapid climate changes drive the responses of the solid
Earth."
McGuire is Professor of Geophysical and Climate Hazards at University
College London and the author of numerous books, including Global
Catastrophes: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford University Press,
2006), Surviving Armageddon: Solutions for a Threatened Planet (Oxford
University Press, 2007), and Seven Years to Save the Planet
(Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 2008). Of Waking the Giant, Library Journal's
reviewer wrote, "The author succeeds at interpreting complex earth
science into compelling reading for a popular audience. Anyone with an
interest in climate change, geology, and atmospheric science will
enjoy this work."
For the preview of Waking the Giant (PDF), visit: http://ncse.com/book-excerpt
For information about the book from its publisher, visit: http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/LifeSciences/Ecology/?view=usa&ci=9780199592265
ON THE ROAD AGAIN WITH NESCENT
The Darwin Day Roadshow is returning! The Roadshow is a project of the
National Evolutionary Synthesis Center, in which NESCent staff shares
their enthusiasm for evolutionary science with students, teachers, and
the general public on the occasion of Charles Darwin's birthday,
February 12. According to NESCent, "Our teams talk to students,
teachers and the general public about their research in evolutionary
science, describe what it takes to become an evolutionary biologist
(and what some of the rewards and challenges are), and convey why
evolutionary science is relevant to everyone."
And the results are delightful: as NESCent's Craig McClain wrote at
Pacific Standard (May 15, 2011), "for all of us the Darwin Day Road
Show was a gratifying adventure that no one will forget. From the
landscapes with their silos, combines, center pivot crop circles, high
school gymnasiums, to the indelible interactions we had along the way,
we absorbed it all." Applications from schools interested in hosting
the Roadshow, especially those who would not be likely to have access
to Darwin Day activities otherwise, are now being accepted. Act soon,
though; the application deadline is November 9, 2012.
For information about NESCent's Darwin Day Roadshow and about applying
to host it, visit: http://roadshow.nescent.org/
http://roadshow.nescent.org/apply/
For McClain's article in Pacific Standard, visit: http://www.psmag.com/science/scientists-take-charles-darwin-on-the-road-31211/
NCSE'S MCCAFFREY IN THE EARTH SCIENTIST
NCSE's Mark McCaffrey contributed "Teaching controversy" to a special
issue of The Earth Scientist focusing on climate change education. The
abstract of his article:
What could be wrong with presenting in a science class "both sides" of
controversial topics like evolution or climate change, or having
students debate the topics, using argumentation to improve their
critical thinking skills? In the case of evolution, presenting
supposed alternatives, such as intelligent design or young-earth
creationism, is not only considered bad practice, but also
unconstitutional in public schools due to the separation of church and
state. However, in the case of climate change, the practice of
teaching it as controversial and presenting "both sides" as if they
are equally valid, is a too common practice among science teachers.
This paper examines the reasons why teachers may be encouraged or
drawn to "teach the controversy" about climate change, why it is not
an effective practice and leaves students more confused, and how the
Next Generation Science Standards may help to transform how we teach
about climate and global change science and solutions.
The Earth Scientist is the journal of the National Earth Science
Teachers Association. McCaffrey's article appears in the fall 2012
issue (vol. 28, no. 3), pp. 25-29.
For McCaffrey's article (PDF), visit: http://www.nestanet.org/cms/sites/default/files/journal/current.pdf
For information about The Earth Scientist, visit: http://www.nestanet.org/cms/content/publications/tes
For information about NESTA, visit: http://www.nestanet.org/cms/
September 7, 2012
A sign of progress in South Korea. NCSE's Eugenie C. Scott receives
the Richard Dawkins award from the Atheist Alliance of America. NCSE's
Mark McCaffrey and Joshua Rosenau argue that science literacy still
matters. And reservations are now available for NCSE's next excursion
to the Grand Canyon.
PROGRESS IN SOUTH KOREA?
A panel overseeing revisions to science textbooks in South Korea
"reaffirmed that the theory of evolution is an essential part of
modern science that all students must learn in school," according to a
report in Nature (September 6, 2012). The panel was convened after it
was announced that, owing to pressure from a creationist organization,
the Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology instructed
publishers to exclude discussions of the evolution of the horse and of
Archaeopteryx -- favorite targets of creationists, including the
"intelligent design" movement -- without consulting any biologists for
their advice.
Nature reported that on September 5, 2012, the panel concluded that
Archaeopteryx should still be included but conceded that "the
textbooks' explanation of the evolution of the horse was too
simplistic and should be revised or replaced with a different example,
such as the evolution of whales." Duckhwan Lee, the leader of the
panel, told Nature that he hopes that the panel's work will improve
the public's understanding of evolution, adding, "We welcome any
petition in the future ... if it is regarding flaws in the evolution
parts of science textbooks. But we do not want to waste our time if it
has any religious implication."
For the report in Nature, visit: http://www.nature.com/news/science-wins-over-creationism-in-south-korea-1.11377
And for NCSE's previous coverage of international events, visit: http://ncse.com/news/international
NCSE'S SCOTT RECEIVES DAWKINS AWARD
NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott received the Atheist
Alliance of America's Richard Dawkins Award at the group's annual
meeting in Denver, Colorado, on September 1, 2012. Unable to attend
the ceremony in person, the namesake of the award began his video
introduction by saying, "Eugenie Scott is one of my very favorite
people, although we have our civilized disagreements, as I shall
tell," and adding, "it's impossible to meet Genie without loving her,
whether you agree with her or not." Scott began her acceptance speech
by joking, "I now possess awards in the names of both Stephen Jay
Gould and Richard Dawkins. This demonstrates that I can get along with
everyone. Regardless of my historic amiability, however, I do not
anticipate ever being presented with the Ken Ham award, if such
exists."
Scott concluded by saying, "it is with much feeling that I accept this
award with Richard's name on it. It is meaningful to me and in some
ways brings full circle a respect I have had for his influence on
science and its significance to us as human beings. Not only in
influencing my own understanding and teaching of evolutionary biology,
but in my more recent career as director of NCSE, in trying to spread
more broadly the understanding of evolution as a science, and to
encourage people to think about it, regardless of the philosophical or
religious system they embrace. ... I can't hold a candle to Richard
when it comes to increasing scientific knowledge -- but I am honored
to be considered, with him, to be a strong advocate of increasing the
public understanding of that knowledge, and I join him in that
important task."
For Dawkins's video introduction, visit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgwaR7ExVdg
For information about the Atheist Alliance of America, visit: http://atheistallianceamerica.org/
NCSE'S MCCAFFREY AND ROSENAU IN NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE
"Science literacy still matters" -- a letter by NCSE's Mark McCaffrey
and Joshua Rosenau -- was published in the journal Nature Climate
Change (2012; 2[9]:636). Responding to mischaracterizations in the
media of a recent study finding that science literacy is negatively
correlated with concern about climate change, they noted that the
study in question failed to examine people's understanding of climate
science in particular, and thus cannot be regarded as evidence that
climate literacy efforts are fruitless. Different researchers have
found a correlation between understanding of climate science in
particular and concern about climate change, they added.
McCaffrey and Rosenau observed, "in US schools, climate change is
often skipped entirely and, if taught, is presented briefly or as a
political controversy. ... Most students rely on their schools for
climate change science and -- with rare exceptions -- they are not
getting what they need." They concluded, "strategic framing, including
minimizing doom and gloom by integrating science with solutions, is
vital, especially in educational settings. But dismissing literacy as
unimportant or irrelevant is wrong. Although literacy alone can't
solve the climate problem, it provides society with the tools and
shared basis for understanding the science and solutions before us."
For McCaffrey and Rosenau's letter (subscription required), visit: http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n9/full/nclimate1644.html
And for NCSE's resources on climate education, visit: http://ncse.com/climate
NCSE AND THE GRAND CANYON 2013
Explore the Grand Canyon with NCSE! Reservations are now available for
NCSE's next excursion to the Grand Canyon -- as featured in the
documentary No Dinosaurs in Heaven. From July 15 to 23, 2013, NCSE
will again explore the wonders of creation and evolution on a Grand
Canyon river run conducted by NCSE's Genie Scott and Steve Newton.
Because this is an NCSE trip, we offer more than just the typically
grand float down the Canyon, the spectacular scenery, fascinating
natural history, brilliant night skies, exciting rapids, delicious
meals, and good company. It is, in fact, a unique "two-model" raft
trip, on which we provide both the creationist view of the Grand
Canyon (maybe not entirely seriously) and the evolutionist view -- and
let you make up your own mind. To get a glimpse of the fun, watch the
short videos filmed during the 2011 trip, posted on NCSE's YouTube
site. The cost of the excursion is $2530; a deposit of $500 will hold
your spot. Seats are limited: call, write, or e-mail now.
For further information about the excursion, visit: http://ncse.com/about/excursions/gcfaq
For information about No Dinosaurs in Heaven, visit: http://www.nodinos.com/
For NCSE's YouTube channel, visit: http://www.youtube.com/NatCen4ScienceEd
And for contact information for NCSE, visit: http://ncse.com/contact
August 31, 2012
A Bill Nye video on the creationism/evolution controversy goes viral.
Plus a new issue of Reports of the NCSE is available, The New York
Times covers climate change in zoos and aquariums, and two NCSE
staffers discuss climate change issues at the Daily Kos blog.
BILL NYE VIDEO ON CREATIONISM
A two-and-a-half-minute video with Bill Nye discussing the
creationism/evolution controversy went viral, garnering over 2.5
million views in its first week on-line. Posted on August 23, 2012, on
the YouTube channel of Big Think, under the title "Creationism is not
appropriate for children," the video reiterates the centrality of
evolution to the life sciences and laments the prevalence of evolution
denial in the United States. In it, Nye remarked, "And I say to the
grownups, if you want to deny evolution and live in your world, in
your world that's completely inconsistent with everything we observe
in the universe, that's fine, but don't make your kids do it because
we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for
the future."
Nye later told CBS This Morning (August 28, 2012), "My concern is you
don't want people growing up not believing in radioactivity, not
believing in geology and deep time. You don't want people in the
United States growing up without the expectation that we can land
spacecraft on Mars. You want people to believe in science, this
process, this great idea that humans had to discover more about the
universe and our place in it, our place in space. And I really want to
emphasize, I'm not attacking anybody's religion, but science, if you
go to a museum and you see fossil dinosaur bones, they came from
somewhere, and we have by diligent investigation have determined that
the earth is 4.54 billion years old."
NCSE's Steven Newton was interviewed on KPCC (August 29, 2012) for its
story about Nye's video. Nye's remarks were fully in step with the
views of the scientific community, Newton explained, adding, "Science
teachers around the country are pretty much in sync with scientists
around this country in understanding that evolution is the foundation
of the biological sciences, and as such, it should be part of the
curriculum and it should be taught," citing the courageous teachers in
Dover, Pennsylvania, who in 2005 refused to read the evolution
disclaimer mandated by the school board there. "Intelligent design or
overtly biblical Creationism -- all of them have the same root [in] a
denial of evolution and how science works," Newton commented.
A Supporter of NCSE, Bill Nye "The Science Guy" was the host of the
popular science education television programs Bill Nye the Science Guy
-- which won eighteen Emmys -- and The Eyes of Nye; he is currently
the executive director of the Planetary Society, the world's large
space interest organization. The video was by no means Nye's first
excursion into defending the teaching of evolution: in 2011, for
example, he told Popular Mechanics, "it's fine if you as an adult want
to run around pretending or claiming that you don't believe in
evolution, but if we educate a generation of people who don't believe
in science, that's a recipe for disaster. ... the main idea in all of
biology is evolution. To not teach it to our young people is wrong."
For Nye's "Creationism is not appropriate for children" video, visit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU
For the CBS This Morning story, visit: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505270_162-57501492/bill-nye-on-creationism-critique-im-not-attacking-religion/
For KPCC's interview with Newton, visit: http://www.scpr.org/programs/patt-morrison/2012/08/29/28156/bill-nye-the-science-guy-warns-about-not-teaching-/
For the Popular Mechanics interview with Nye, visit: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/evolution-classroom-bill-nye-science-education
RNCSE 32:4 NOW ON-LINE
NCSE is pleased to announce that the latest issue of Reports of the
National Center for Science Education is now available on-line. The
issue -- volume 32, number 4 -- features Valerie First's "My Niche in
Human Evolution," reporting the author's experiences in discussing
evolution as a docent at her local science center and at her local
zoo. For his regular People and Places column, Randy Moore discusses
the career of Carl Akeley, the pioneering taxidermist whose work is
still on display at the American Museum of Natural History.
Plus a host of reviews of books on the public understanding of
evolution: Tim Beazley reviews Frank S. Ravitch's Marketing
Intelligent Design, George Bishop reviews Michael Berkman and Eric
Plutzer's Evolution, Creationism, and the Battle to Control America's
Classrooms, Richard F. Firenze reviews David Sloan Wilson's The
Neighborhood Project, Timothy H. Goldsmith reviews the films Creation
and Darwin's Darkest Hour, Brandon Haught reviews the film No
Dinosaurs in Heaven, and Richard P. Meisel reviews Greg Graffin and
Steve Olson's Anarchy Evolution.
All of these articles, features, and reviews are freely available in
PDF form from http://reports.ncse.com. Members of NCSE will shortly be
receiving in the mail the print supplement to Reports 32:4, which, in
addition to summaries of the on-line material, contains news from the
membership, a regular column in which NCSE staffers offer personal
reports on what they've been doing to defend the teaching of
evolution, a new regular column interviewing NCSE's favorite people --
members of NCSE's board of directors, NCSE's Supporters, recipients of
NCSE's Friend of Darwin award, and so on -- and more besides. (Not a
member? Join today!)
For the table of contents for RNCSE 32:4, visit: http://reports.ncse.com/index.php/rncse/issue/current/showToc
For information about joining NCSE, visit:http://ncse.com/join
DISCUSSING CLIMATE CHANGE IN INFORMAL EDUCATION
"With many zoos and aquariums now working with conservation
organizations and financed by individuals who feel strongly about
threatened habitats and species, managers have been wrestling with how
aggressive to be in educating visitors on the perils of climate
change," reports The New York Times (August 26, 2012). "Surveys show
that American zoos and aquariums enjoy a high level of public trust
and are ideally positioned to teach," the Times explains. "Yet many
managers are fearful of alienating visitors -- and denting ticket
sales -- with tours or wall labels that dwell bleakly on damaged coral
reefs, melting ice caps or dying trees."
The solution: "a patter that would intrigue rather than daunt or
depress the average visitor." Paul Boyle, the senior vice president
for conservation and education at the Association of Zoos and
Aquariums, told the Times that most of the association's 224 member
institutions have some sort of climate message. The AZA itself is
encouraging its member institutions to engage their visitors in
understanding climate change, observing, "Overwhelming international
scientific consensus confirms that human activities are disturbing
Earth's climate ... Effects from climate change are already
threatening biodiversity and human health and are expected to
increase."
For the story in The New York Times, visit: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/27/science/earth/zoos-and-aquariumsuggle-with-ways-to-discuss-climate-change.html
For the AZA's discussion of climate and wildlife, visit: http://www.aza.org/climate-disruption/
NCSE'S MCCAFFREY AND ROSENAU AT DAILY KOS
When the popular Daily Kos blog decided to devote a week-long
blogathon, running August 17 through August 24, 2012, to climate
change, two NCSE staffers were invited to contribute.
In "Why climate literacy matters," posted on August 20, 2012, Mark
McCaffrey observed, "Ideology, cultural norms, and corporate profits
certainly contribute to climate change denial. But arguably one of the
biggest drivers of denial is ignorance. Most people, even many
meteorologists, never learned anything about climate change in
school." There are signs of hope, he explains: "In recent years, a few
projects have been funded to develop sound, scientifically accurate
climate education materials for educators, museums and science
centers, key influentials such as community leaders, and yes, even TV
weathercasters." But there is abundant room for improvement, he
concluded: "For a real sea change, a national climate and energy
literacy initiative is needed so that humans and the ecosystems that
sustain us can survive and thrive in the 21st [c]entury."
In "Attacks on climate change education are attacks on our future,"
posted on August 22, 2012, Joshua Rosenau argued, "The greatest
climate change battlefield in the US may not be Congress and the White
House, but the nation's more than 17,000 elected school boards and the
classrooms they run. Disputes over local curriculum make fewer
headlines, but those decisions shape the generations that will be most
affected by climate change -- the citizens (and voters) who will have
to respond to climate change." Reviewing a host of recent incidents of
climate change denial in the schools, he urged, "In order for future
citizens to be able to make scientifically informed decisions about
how to deal with the challenge, the science of climate change needs to
be taught -- accurately, thoroughly, and without compromise -- in the
classroom."
Among those also contributing to the Daily Kos's Climate Change SOS
blogathon were Michael E. Mann, John P. Abraham, Bill McKibben, Henry
Waxman, Brian DeMelle, Ed Markey, and Al Gore.
For McCaffrey's and Rosenau's posts, visit: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/20/1121963/-Why-Climate-Literacy-Matters
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/22/1122994/-Attacks-on-climate-change-education-are-attacks-on-our-future
For a chronological list of posts in the blogathon, visit: http://www.dailykos.com/user/Climate%20Change%20SOS/history
August 24, 2012
A pair of interviews with Eugenie C. Scott on science denial. Renewed
concern about the public funding of private schools that teach
creationism in Louisiana. And a glimpse of Global Weirdness.
TWO INTERVIEWS WITH EUGENIE C. SCOTT
NCSE's executive director was recently interviewed twice about science
denial in on-line venues.
Speaking to Liza Gross for KQED's Quest series (August 21, 2012),
Scott discussed the similarities between those who reject vaccines and
those who reject evolution and climate change. In all of these cases
of science anomalies, she explained, there is a tendency to construe
anomalies as disproving accepted scientific views, motivated by
religious or political ideologies or -- as with vaccination -- concern
for their children. Noting that only a few are diehard science
denialists, Scott commented, "I think we shouldn’t abandon the people
who are in that one segment of society who are bound and determined
not to accept vaccinations but we should really focus our attention
more on keeping people from slipping down into that category.
Certainly, that’s what we’ve done with evolution and that’s what we
are likely to be doing with climate change as well."
Speaking to Paul Fidalgo for the Committee for Scientific Inquiry
(August 22, 2012), Scott addressed the continuities and changes in the
antievolution movement. "I am not surprised we're still dealing with
attacks on evolution: It is a topic that generates a great deal of
emotion, and that can prevent people from listening to the scientific
evidence," she commented, but added, "this is not your grandfather's
creationism." Tennessee's new antiscience law, which encourages
teachers to present the "scientific strengths and scientific
weaknesses" of topics such as evolution and climate change, is a case
in point, she explained. The law presents these "as if they were
topics that were of questionable validity in science. They may be
controversial to the general public, but they certainly are not
controversial among scientists."
Recent video interviews of NCSE staff are available at the Recent
Interviews playlist on NCSE's YouTube channel.
For the KQED interview, visit:
http://science.kqed.org/quest/2012/08/22/in-defense-of-science-an-interview-with-ncse%E2%80%99s-eugenie-scott/
For the CSI interview, visit:
http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/eugenie_scott_on_the_stealth_of_science_denialism/
And for NCSE's YouTube channel, visit: http://www.youtube.com/user/NatCen4ScienceEd
"LOUISIANA'S LOCH NESS MYTHOLOGY"
The Baton Rouge Advocate (August 16, 2012) editorially excoriated
Louisiana's controversial new voucher program for its funding of
schools that "not only teach creationist nonsense, but are proud of
it." As NCSE previously reported, the voucher program uses public
school funds to pay for tuition and certain fees at private schools
for students who attend low-performing public schools and whose family
income is below 250% of the federal poverty level. But as Zack Kopplin
told the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education at its July
2012 meeting, at least 19 of the 119 schools slated to benefit from
the program apparently teach creationism instead of or along with
evolution.
As a result, as Barbara Forrest, a professor of philosophy at
Southeastern Louisiana University, a founder of the Louisiana
Coalition for Science, and a member of NCSE's board of directors, told
the Advocate, "What [students] are going to be getting financed with
public money is phony science. They're going to be getting religion
instead of science." Alluding to a textbook published by Accelerated
Christian Education, the editorial noted, "Among the dubious
assertions of creationist pseudo-science is that evolution is called
into question by sightings of the Loch Ness monster, a 'dinosaur'
living in the modern age -- according to those who believe in the Loch
Ness myth."
Quoting the state superintendent of schools, John White, as saying "If
students are failing the test, we're going to intervene, and the test
measures evolution," the editorial retorted, "The state has no
intention, apparently, of launching any serious investigation of the
Loch Ness monster in school curriculums. Instead, it will pay and pay,
for years, and -- if students do poorly on science tests at some
future date -- the state Department of Education might raise the
question of why mythology is part of a school’s curriculum," adding,
"A more-effective way would be for the department to open its eyes to
this kind of educational malpractice before children’s futures are
endangered."
The voucher program is presently under legal challenge from the
Louisiana Association of Educators and the Louisiana Federation of
Teachers along with a number of local school boards. But the issue of
the state's funding the teaching of creationism is not part of the
challenge. Rather, as the New Orleans Times-Picayune (July 10, 2012)
explained, "Two key issues are at play in the voucher suit: whether
providing private schools with money from the Minimum Foundation
Program violates the [Louisiana state] constitution by redirecting
those funds from public schools, and whether a last-minute vote
setting the new MFP formula in place received enough support in the
state House to carry the force of law."
For the editorial in the Baton Rouge Advocate, visit: http://theadvocate.com/news/opinion/3590598-123/our-views-louisianas-loch-ness
For the story in the New Orleans Times-Picayune, visit: http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/07/judge_denies_injunction_in_vou.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Louisiana, visit: http://ncse.com/news/louisiana
A GLIMPSE OF GLOBAL WEIRDNESS
NCSE is pleased to offer a free preview of Climate Central's Global
Weirdness (Pantheon, 2012). The preview consists of the introduction
to the book, which explains that it is intended "to lay out the
current state of knowledge about climate change, with explanations of
the underlying science given in clear and simple language," and
chapter 4, "Dinosaurs Didn't Drive Gas-Guzzlers or Use
Air-Conditioning," which reviews the natural influences on climate,
concluding, "However, the fact that something can happen naturally
doesn't mean it's always natural."
Global Weirdness was written by Emily Elert and Michael D. Lemonick,
but produced collectively by scientists and journalists at Climate
Central, a nonprofit, nonpartisan science and journalism organization
that conducts scientific research on climate change and informs the
public of key findings. The reviewer for Booklist wrote, in a starred
review of Global Weirdness, "Without talking down to readers, the
authors do a masterful job of clarifying all aspects of a complicating
and alarming topic, making it that much more difficult from
global-warming denialists to keep their heads in the sand."
For the preview of Global Weirdness (PDF), visit: http://ncse.com/book-excerpt
For information about the book from its publisher, visit: http://www.randomhouse.com/book/209517/global-weirdness-by-climate-central
For information on Climate Central, visit: http://www.climatecentral.org/
Evolution and climate education news: August 17, 2012
Dear Friends of NCSE,
A new survey on Canadian public opinion on climate change. Plus
potentially bad news for evolution education in both Missouri and
Kentucky.
POLLING CLIMATE CHANGE IN CANADA
A new survey addresses the views of Canadians on climate change.
Conducted by Insightrix Research, Inc. for IPAC-CO2 Research Inc.,
which describes itself as "an environmental non-government
organization (ENGO) created to provide ndependent risk and
performance assessments of CO2 storage projects," the survey asked its
respondents, "Where do you stand on the issue of climate change?" Of
the respondents, 32% agreed that climate change is occurring due to
human activity, 54% agreed that climate change is occurring partially
due to human activity and partially due to natural climate variation,
9% agreed that climate change is occurring due to natural climate
variation, and 2% agreed that climate change is not occurring at all;
4% of respondents were not sure.
According to the report, the results were consistent with the results
from a survey conducted in 2011. Regionally, residents of Alberta,
Saskatchewan, and Manitoba were least likely to agree that climate
change is occurring due to human activity, while residents of Quebec,
the Atlantic provinces, and British Columbia were most likely to
agree. The report added, "Younger respondents are most likely to
believe that climate change is occurring due to human activity and
least likely to believe that it is occurring due to natural climate
variation. Men are more likely than women to believe that climate
change is occurring due to natural climate variation. No significant
differences in beliefs by level of education are noted."
The poll was conducted between May 29 and June 11, 2012. Reporting on
the survey, the Canadian Press (August 15, 2012) explained, "Unlike
traditional telephone polling, in which respondents are randomly
selected, the Insightrix survey was conducted online among 1,550
respondents, all of whom were chosen from a larger pool of people who
agreed to participate in ongoing research. They were compensated for
participating. The survey set quotas by age, gender, region and
education to match the general population. The polling industry's
professional body, the Marketing Research and Intelligence
Association, says online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error
because they do not randomly sample the population."
By way of comparison, a survey from Angus Reid Public Opinion,
conducted in May and June 2012, asked respondents in Canada (as well
as the United States and the United Kingdom), "Which of the following
statements comes closest to your view of global warming (or climate
change)?" "Global warming is a fact and is mostly caused by emissions
from vehicles and industrial facilities" was preferred by 58% of
Canadians, "global warming is a fact and is mostly caused by natural
changes" was preferred by 20% of Canadians, "global warming is a
theory that has not yet been proven" was preferred by 14% of
Canadians, and 8% of Canadians were not sure. The Angus Reid survey
was also conducted on-line with the results weighted to ensure a
representative sample.
For the report of the Insightrix Research survey (PDF), visit: http://www.ipac-co2.com/uploads/File/Surveys/IPAC-CO2%20-%202012%20-%20National%20Survey.pdf
For the Canadian Press's story (via the CBC), visit: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/08/15/calgary-climate-change-web-poll.html
For the report of the Angus Reid Public Opinion survey (PDF), visit: http://www.angus-reid.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/2012.06.27_Climate.pdf
And for NCSE's collection of polls and surveys on climate change, visit: http://ncse.com/polls/polls-climate-change
A WORRY FROM MISSOURI
Is a new amendment to the Missouri state constitution going to
undermine the teaching of evolution in the state's public schools? On
August 7, 2012, voters overwhelmingly approved a proposal to revise a
portion of the state constitution that concerns freedom of religion.
Among the revisions was the addition of a provision "that no student
shall be compelled to perform or participate in academic assignments
or educational presentations that violate his or her religious
beliefs." And that provision, as NCSE's Joshua Rosenau told Science
Insider (August 14, 2012), is worrisome from the point of view of
science education: "Those words give students the legal right to skip
assignments related to evolution if the subject matter conflicts with
their beliefs, Rosenau says."
Evolution was not mentioned in the proposal and was not apparently
mentioned in the legislature's discussion of House Joint Resolution 2,
the instrument that placed the proposal on the ballot. Opponents of
the proposal warned, however, that the integrity of science education
was at stake. Michael McKay of the Skeptical Society of St. Louis told
the St. Louis Post-Dispatch (July 30, 2012) that if the amendment
passes, students could graduate from school without having taken an
important science class, avoid learning about evolution," and The New
York Times (August 6, 2012) editorially expressed a similar concern
that the proposal "would allow students who believe in creationism,
for example, to opt out of assignments on evolution."
Susan German, president of the Science Teachers of Missouri, told
Science Insider, "It could be an issue. There are teachers that work
in very conservative districts and they already have students on a
yearly basis that voice their concerns about having to learn some of
these concepts," and recommended that her colleagues "wait and see
what the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
advises them to do" before taking any action in light of the new
amendment. It remains to be seen whether teachers will be expected to
provide substitute assignments for students who object to assignments
on evolution and whether schools and the state will be prohibited from
testing such students from their understanding of the material covered
in such assignments.
"It's a recipe for disaster," commented NCSE's executive director
Eugenie C. Scott. "With the new amendment in place, Missouri's biology
teachers are bound to receive a flurry of requests -- or demands --
for students to be excused from learning about evolution. And that's
going to create trouble, since nothing in biology makes sense except
in the light of evolution." Citing a 2008 article she and NCSE's Glenn
Branch published in Evolution: Education and Outreach 1(2), she argued
that if teachers are forced to accommodate such requests, the result
would be disruptive for the classroom, burdensome for teachers, and
problematic for administrators, as well as harmful to the scientific
literacy of the students excused.
For the proposal that was approved (PDF), visit: http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2012ballot/fulltext_1.pdf
For the Science Insider story, visit:
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2012/08/missouri-right-to-pray-law-could.html
For the St. Louis Post-Dispatch story, visit: http://www.stltoday.com/lifestyles/faith-and-values/missouri-s-proposed-amendment-on-prayer-gets-mixed-reviews/article_8b188463-9973-532c-92d9-223235cad84a.html
For the editorial in The New York Times, visit: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/07/opinion/prayer-in-missouri.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Missouri, visit: http://ncse.com/news/missouri
KENTUCKY LEGISLATORS ASSAILING EVOLUTION
Legislators in the Kentucky state senate are concerned about the
presence of evolution in the state science standards and associated
end-of-course testing. According to the Lexington Herald-Leader
(August 14, 2012), "Several GOP lawmakers questioned new proposed
student standards and tests that delve deeply into biological
evolution during a Monday meeting of the Interim Joint Committee on
Education. In an exchange with officials from ACT, the company that
prepares Kentucky's new state testing program, those lawmakers
discussed whether evolution was a fact and whether the biblical
account of creationism also should be taught in Kentucky classrooms."
State senator David Givens (R-District 9) told the Herald-Leader, "I
would hope that creationism is presented as a theory in the classroom,
in a science classroom, alongside evolution," while state
representative Ben Waite (R-District 10) went so far as to dispute the
inclusion of evolution. "The theory of evolution is a theory, and
essentially the theory of evolution is not science -- Darwin made it
up," Waide was quoted as saying. "My objection is they should ensure
whatever scientific material is being put forth as a standard should
at least stand up to scientific method. Under the most rudimentary,
basic scientific examination, the theory of evolution has never stood
up to scientific scrutiny."
But Vincent Cassone, chair of the University of Kentucky's biology
department, told the Herald-Leader, "The theory of evolution is the
fundamental backbone of all biological research. ... There is more
evidence for evolution than there is for the theory of gravity, than
the idea that things are made up of atoms, or Einstein's theory of
relativity. It is the finest scientific theory ever devised." David
Helm, president of the Kentucky Science Teachers Association, declined
to comment, but referred the newspaper to the National Science
Teachers Association's statement on evolution, which "strongly
supports the position that evolution is a major unifying concept in
science and should be included in the K-12 science education
frameworks and curricula."
In a subsequent editorial headlined "Keep religious beliefs out of
science class if we want Ky. kids to compete," the Herald-Leader
(August 16, 2012) observed, "It is unlikely that the pleas by Sen.
David Givens, R-Greensburg, and others that creationism or other
unscientific, faith-based beliefs about the origins of the universe
and its species should be taught along with evolution will gain enough
traction to change Kentucky's standards," adding, "Parents will always
be free to teach their children as they see fit in their homes. But
religious beliefs cannot be substituted for, or equated with,
scientific understanding in public schools. At least, not if we want
our children to compete on a national level."
Previous legislative activity aimed at undermining the teaching of
evolution in Kentucky's public schools includes House Bill 169 in 2011
and House Bill 397 in 2010, both based on the so-called Louisiana
Science Education Act; both bills died in committee. Kentucky is
apparently unique in having a statute (Kentucky Revised Statutes
158.177) on the books that authorizes teachers to teach "the theory of
creation as presented in the Bible" and to "read such passages in the
Bible as are deemed necessary for instruction on the theory of
creation." Yet the Louisville Courier-Journal (January 11, 2006)
reported that in a November 2005 survey of the state's 176 school
districts, none was teaching or discussing "intelligent design."
For the Lexington Herald-Leader's article, visit: http://www.kentucky.com/2012/08/14/2298914/gop-lawmakers-question-standards.html
For the NSTA's statement on evolution, visit: http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/evolution.aspx
For the Lexington Herald-Leader's editorial, visit: http://www.kentucky.com/2012/08/16/2300725/keep-religious-beliefs-out-of.html
For the Biblical creation statute (PDF), visit: http://www.lrc.ky.gov/KRS/158-00/177.PDF
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Kentucky, visit: http://ncse.com/news/kentucky
Evolution and climate education update: August 3, 2012
Dear Friends of NCSE,
A change of mind for a scientist who doubted climate change. And sad
news of the death of former NCSE employee Skip Evans.
"A CONVERTED SKEPTIC"
A climate scientist who was formerly dismissive of climate change now
describes himself as "a converted skeptic." Richard Muller, a
professor of physics at the University of California, Berkeley, and
cofounder of the Berkeley Earth project, wrote in a column in The New
York Times (July 28, 2012), "Three years ago I identified problems in
previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very
existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive
research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global
warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming
were correct. I'm now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely
the cause."
Muller's volte-face was based on the project's analysis of "a
collection of 14.4m land temperature observations from 44,455 sites
across the world dating back to 1753," according to the Guardian (July
29, 2012); Muller wrote in the Times, "Our results show that the
average temperature of the earth's land has risen by two and a half
degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years, including an increase of
one and a half degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it
appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the
human emission of greenhouse gases." The analysis from the project is
not yet been published; it is presently undergoing peer review at the
Journal of Geophysical Research.
Michael Mann of Penn State University told the Guardian that he
welcomed the Berkeley Earth project's results as "demonstrat[ing] once
again what scientists have known with some degree of certainty for
nearly two decades." He added, "I applaud Muller and his colleagues
for acting as any good scientists would, following where their
analyses led them, without regard for the possible political
repercussions. They are certain to be attacked by the professional
climate change denial crowd for their findings." (A minor irony is
that the project is partly funded by the Charles G. Koch Charitable
Foundation, which is connected to various efforts to promote climate
change denial.)
For Muller's column in The New York Times, visit:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html
For information about the Berkeley Earth project, visit:
http://berkeleyearth.org/
And for the article in the Guardian, visit:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/jul/29/climate-change-sceptics-change-mind
SKIP EVANS DIES
Skip Evans, a former employee of NCSE, died on July 26, 2012, at the
age of 49, according to a post at The Panda's Thumb blog (July 26,
2012). Born in Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania, on June 4, 1963, Evans
earned a B.S. in computer science from the University of Central
Florida in 1987, and thereafter worked as a programmer for a variety
of companies in Orlando, Atlanta, and New York City. A man of varied
interests, he was active in motorcycle racing, community theater (as
actor, director, and playwright), improvisational comedy, and,
increasingly, activism on behalf of church/state separation, serving
as the secretary of Central Floridians Against Censorship and the
president of the Atlanta chapter of Americans United for Separation of
Church and State. He worked for NCSE as Network Project Director,
succeeding Molleen Matsumura, from August 2001 to April 2004.
Afterward, he returned to programming, operating his own company from
Kalispell and Helena, Montana, and then relocating to Madison,
Wisconsin. He remained active in opposing creationism and promoting
evolution education, blogging at The Panda’s Thumb and helping to
found Wisconsin Citizens for Science and the Madison Science Pub. At
the time of his death, he was a senior programmer for SoLoMo
Technology.
Even before coming to NCSE, Evans was already a stalwart defender of
teaching evolution in the public schools. A dogged critic of the
flamboyant young-earth creationist Kent Hovind, he requested a copy of
Hovind's "dissertation" from Patriot University, only to receive the
original document, complete with a taped-in clipping from a magazine,
to his surprise and delight. Among his publications in RNCSE were a
report of his visit to a "seminar" run by Answers in Genesis and a
review of a bizarre creationist novel. During his nearly-three-year
stay at NCSE, Evans worked closely with activists in California,
Georgia, Montana, Ohio, and Texas, who found his level of commitment
impressive and his trademark sense of humor infectious. He produced
effective critiques of the "intelligent design" movement's propaganda,
such as "Doubting Darwinism through creative license" and "The
Discovery Institute pioneers the misinfomercial." His delight in
NCSE's Project Steve, which he helped to conceive and implement, was
heightened by the fact that his given name, which he rarely used, was
Stephen. And as a self-described refugee from the dot-coms, Evans also
brought his expertise with information technology to bear,
substantially improving NCSE's ability to communicate with, and to
facilitate communication among, activists.
For the post at The Panda's Thumb blog, visit:
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2012/07/a-death-in-the.html
For Evans's publications in RNCSE, visit:
http://ncse.com/rncse/18/2/creationism-trip-to-dark-side
http://ncse.com/rncse//20/3/ride-to-glory
For Evans's critiques of "intelligent design" propaganda, visit:
http://ncse.com/creationism/general/doubting-darwinism-creative-license
http://ncse.com/news/2002/05/discovery-institute-pioneers-mis-infomercial-00298
And for Project Steve (now with 1223 Steves), visit: http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve
Evolution and climate education update: July 27, 2012
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Louisiana is about to fund the teaching of creationism to the tune of
11.6 million dollars, according to a young activist. Plus a reminder
that NCSE speakers are ready, willing, and able to discuss evolution
and climate education.
VOUCHERS FOR CREATIONISM IN LOUISIANA?
Louisiana is about to spend almost twelve million dollars to fund the
teaching of creationism, charges Zack Kopplin, famous for organizing
the effort to repeal the so-called Louisiana Science Education Act. In
Kopplin's sights now is a controversial new voucher program in the
state that uses public school funds to pay for tuition and certain
fees at private schools for students who attend low-performing public
schools and whose family income is below 250% of the federal poverty
level. When the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education considered
a set of accountability guidelines for such private schools at its
July 24, 2012, meeting, Kopplin testified that of the roughly 6600
spaces available for students under the program, 1350 will be filled,
as the Lafayette Independent Weekly (July 26, 2012) described it, "at
private Christian schools that teach creationism and peg evolution as
'false science.'”
According to the Alexandria Town Talk (July 25, 2012), "A number of
the schools on the voucher list teach creationism, a doctrine that
holds that God created all life out of nothing, and either don’t
mention the theory of evolution or teach that it is false science.
State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education policy on teaching
science requires that public schools teach what is in textbooks but
they can supplement with BESE-approved material to promote 'critical
thinking' on alternatives to evolution." Superintendent of Education
John C. White told the newspaper that BESE had approved the curriculum
for all of the schools. "Not teaching evolution could show up in the
required state testing for students receiving vouchers, he said, and
there could be repercussions 'if a school shows a fundamental
disregard' for conducting the test."
Writing earlier in the New Orleans Times-Picayune (July 18, 2012)
about Kopplin's research on the private schools expected to receive
new students through the voucher program, columnist James Gill
commented, "It is impossible to prepare fully for such a massive
reform as going voucher, and some undeserving private schools are
bound to receive an OK from harried state officials. But a religious
takeover on this scale cannot be accidental. Of the schools on Zack
Kopplin's list, one believes that scientists are 'sinful men,' and
declares its view 'on the age of the earth and other issues is that
any theory that goes against God's word is in error.' Another avers
that evolution is 'extremely damaging to children individually and to
society as a whole.' A third tells students to write an essay
explaining how 'the complexity of a cell shows it must be purposefully
designed.' And so it goes."
The creationist instructional material used by such schools include
textbooks from Bob Jones University Press and A Beka Books -- which
were described by the University of California system in the ACSI v.
Stearns case as "inappropriate for use as primary texts in college
preparatory science courses due to their characterizations of
religious doctrine as scientific evidence, scientific inaccuracies,
failure to encourage critical thinking, and overall un-scientific
approach" -- and Accelerated Christian Education. A textbook from ACE
that argued against evolution on the grounds that the Loch Ness
monster not only exists but also is a living plesiosaur (incorrectly
described as a dinosaur) understandably attracted the attention of The
Scotsman (June 25, 2012) and was widely ridiculed nationally and
internationally.
The voucher program is presently under legal challenge from the
Louisiana Association of Educators and the Louisiana Federation of
Teachers along with a number of local school boards. But the issue of
the state's funding the teaching of creationism is not part of the
challenge. Rather, as the New Orleans Times-Picayune (July 10, 2012)
explained, "Two key issues are at play in the voucher suit: whether
providing private schools with money from the Minimum Foundation
Program violates the [Louisiana state] constitution by redirecting
those funds from public schools, and whether a last-minute vote
setting the new MFP formula in place received enough support in the
state House to carry the force of law." The state will be allowed to
implement the voucher program while the challenge works its way
through the court system, the newspaper reported.
For the article in the Lafayette Independent Weekly, visit:
http://www.theind.com/news/11055-kopplin-state-paying-116m-to-schools-teaching-creationism
For the article in the Alexandria Town Talk, visit:
http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/20120725/NEWS01/120725003/Louisiana-vouchers-going-mainly-church-affiliated-schools
For James Gill's column in the New Orleans Times-Picayune, visit:
http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2012/07/vouchers_are_a_creationists_be.html
For NCSE's collection of material from ACSI v. Stearns, visit:
http://ncse.com/creationism/legal/acsi-v-stearns
For the article in The Scotsman, visit:
http://www.scotsman.com/news/odd/loch-ness-monster-cited-by-us-schools-as-evidence-that-evolution-is-myth-1-2373903
For the article on the challenge to the voucher program in the New
Orleans Times-Picayune, visit:
http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/07/judge_denies_injunction_in_vou.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Louisiana, visit:
http://ncse.com/news/louisiana
Evolution education update: March 12, 2010
Dear Friends of NCSE,
A free preview of Evidence of Evolution and the latest from Reports of the NCSE, plus a resolution to the recent furor over evolution in Israel.
A GLIMPSE OF EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION
NCSE is pleased to offer a free preview of Evidence of Evolution (Abrams, 2009), featuring the photography of Susan Middleton and the text of Mary Ellen Hannibal. The publisher writes, "Published to commemorate the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species, Evidence of Evolution uses exquisite images by distinguished photographer Susan Middleton to reveal beautiful and surprising patterns of evolutionary development in animals and plants. These photographs, of rare and remarkable specimens from the collections of the California Academy of Sciences in San Francisco, are accompanied by a clear, accessible overview of the key evolutionary concepts that explain life on Earth, by science writer Mary Ellen Hannibal. Virtually a natural history museum in a book, Evidence of Evolution expresses the power of Darwin's vision in images and words that bridge art and science."
For the preview (PDF), visit: http://ncse.com/files/pub/evolution/Evidence_combined.pdf
For the publisher's description, visit: http://www.abramsbooks.com/Books/Evidence_of_Evolution-9780810949249.html
CATCHING UP WITH RNCSE
Selected content from volume 29, number 5, of Reports of the National Center for Science Education is now available on NCSE's website. Featured are NCSE's Joshua Rosenau's discussion of how a Nobel laureate's views on evolution were misrepresented by a member of the Texas state board of education and Julie Duncan's discussion of "Credibility, Profitability, and Irrefutability: Why Creationists are Building Museums." And Charles Israel reviews Marcel Chotkowski LaFollette's Reframing Scopes, Sander Gliboff reviews Benjamin Wiker's The Darwin Myth, and NCSE's Steven Newton reviews Davis A. Young and Ralph F. Stearley's The Bible, Rocks and Time.
If you like what you see, why not subscribe to RNCSE today? The next issue (volume 30, numbers 1-2) revisits the distribution of copies of the Origin of Species disfigured by a creationist introduction, with a summary by NCSE's Steven Newton and a commentary by Brian Regal. Plus it's a book review extravaganza, with reviews of Keith Thomson's The Young Charles Darwin, Robert T. Pennock and Michael Ruse's anthology But Is It Science?, Peter J. Bowler's Monkey Trials and Gorilla Sermons, Robert J. Richards's The Tragic Sense of Life, John H. Walton's The Lost World of Genesis One, and a host of further books. Don't miss out -- subscribe now!
For the selected content from RNCSE 29:5, visit: http://ncse.com/rncse/29/5
For subscription information, visit: http://ncse.com/membership
CONTROVERSY OVER EVOLUTION OVER IN ISRAEL?
In a letter released by Israel's ministry of education on March 3, 2010, Gavriel Avital promised to follow the ministry's policy on evolution and the environment, Haaretz (March 4, 2010) reported. Avital, the recently appointed chief scientist in the ministry, sparked a furor by questioning the reliabilty of evolution and global warming, eliciting a chorus of condemnation from Israel's scientific establishment as well as a disavowal from the minister of education, Gideon Sa'ar, who told Israel's parliament, the Knesset, "Avital's statements regarding evolution and the environment are not consistent with the Education Ministry's policy and are not acceptable to me."
In his letter, Avital wrote, "Following statements that were published which related to quotes from statements that I made before I assumed [m]y position, and following my conversations with the two of you, I wish to make it clear that the ministry's policy as presented by the education minister at the Knesset is acceptable to me without reservation and I will act accordingly in the context of my position as chief scientist of the Education Ministry." Haaretz noted, however, that not all of Avital's controversial statements were made before he assumed his position in December 2009. A source in the ministry told the newspaper, "the case ended with the release of Avital's letter."
For the article in Haaretz, visit: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1153813.html
Evolution education update: November 20, 2009
NCSE was busy conducting a campaign to counteract the distribution of copies of the Origin of Species with a creationist introduction. Plus a chance to hear a panel of scientists discuss the frontiers of
evolution on-line.
DON'T DISS DARWIN!
Does Darwin's On the Origin of Species need a special introduction?
Creationist Ray Comfort thinks so. During the week of November 16,
2009, Comfort and his allies distributed free copies of the Origin on
college campuses across the United States -- including a "special
introduction" by Comfort which claims, among other things, that
evolution is scientifically false and that Darwin was a misogynist
racist whose ideas inspired Hitler.
To put Comfort's claims in perspective -- and to aid scientists,
teachers, students, and other concerned citizens in protesting
Comfort's distortions -- NCSE created a special site, Don't Diss
Darwin, chock-full of advice, analysis, background information, flyers
and signs, a Safety Bookmark (a tongue-in-cheek tool for separating
Comfort's introduction from the rest of the Origin), and even a
not-quite-serious public service announcement video.
Reporters across the country (and a few from abroad) asked NCSE to
comment on the distribution, with quotes from NCSE's Eugenie C. Scott,
Robert Luhn, and Steve Newton appearing in the Los Angeles Daily News
(November 18, 2009), the Gainesville (Florida) Sun (November 19,
2009), the Santa Barbara (California) Independent (November 18, 2009),
and even the Sheaf, the student paper of the University of
Saskatchewan (November 18, 2009).
NCSE worked with a number of individuals and organizations in
responding to the distribution, including the Center for Inquiry and
the Secular Student Alliance. Also noteworthy are the filmmaker Randy
Olson's video poking fun at the creationist campaign ("The Kirk
Cameron Action Kit"; the former child star is a partner of Ray
Comfort) and Scientific American's podcast (November 17, 2009) with
Steve Mirsky describing the situation as "Darwin in Battle of Wits
against Unarmed Man."
For Don't Diss Darwin, visit: http://www.dontdissdarwin.com
For the US News & World Report debate between Comfort and Scott, visit: http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/10/29/exclusive-ray-comfort-defends-his-creationist-edition-of-on-the-origin-of-species.html
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/10/30/how-creationist-origin-distorts-darwin.html
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/11/02/ray-comfort-responds-to-genie-scott-on-creationist-origin-of-species.html
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/11/03/scientist-genie-scotts-last-word-to-creationist-ray-comfort-there-you-go-again.html
For the cited newspaper articles, visit:
http://www.dailynews.com/search/ci_13818898
http://www.gainesville.com/article/20091119/ARTICLES/911191059/1109/
http://www.independent.com/news/2009/nov/18/darwins-descendant/
http://thesheaf.com/2009/11/creationist-intro-to-darwin-book/
For the Secular Student Alliance's response, visit: http://www.secularstudents.org/originintoschools
For the Center for Inquiry's response, visit: http://www.centerforinquiry.net/oncampus/combating_creationism
For Randy Olson's video and the Scientific American podcast, visit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z-OLG0KyR4
http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=darwin-in-battle-of-wits-against-un-09-11-17
WEBCAST: FRONTIERS OF EVOLUTION
Hear E. O. Wilson and Everett Mendelsohn discuss "Frontiers of
Evolution" on-line! Starting at 1:00 p.m. (Eastern) on November 24,
2009, a panel of scientists led by Wilson and Mendelsohn will discuss
Darwin's legacy and the frontiers of evolutionary biology, as part of
the 150th anniversary Origin of Species lecture series, hosted by The
Reading Odyssey and the Darwin 150 project -- and the whole event will
be webcast live.
Sponsors of the lecture series include the National Center for Science
Education, National Geographic, Citrix Online and its HiDef
Conferencing Division, Campaign Monitor, the Harvard University Museum
of Comparative Zoology, SquareSpace, the movie Creation, and the New
York Academy of Sciences. Previous speakers in the series included
Mendelsohn, Jonathan Weiner, and NCSE Supporter Sean B. Carroll.
For information on the webcast, visit: http://darwinlecture4.eventbrite.com/
For information about the hosts, visit:
http://www.readingodyssey.com/
http://www.darwin150.com/
Evolution education update: November 13, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
A host of interesting reading and watching, as the sesquicentennial of
the Origin approaches, the third episode of Becoming Human is aired,
EvoS Journal makes its debut, five videos expounding "Evolution in Two
Minutes or Less" are posted at Discover magazine's website, and a
symposium on "Evolution in Extreme Environments" is webcast.
THE ORIGIN SESQUICENTENNIAL APPROACHES
As November 24, 2009, the sesquicentennial anniversary of the
publication of Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species, approaches,
celebrations are continuing around the country and around the world,
as well as in the literature and on the internet. As NCSE previously
reported, Science is allocating a special section of its website to "a
variety of news features, scientific reviews and other special
content." Similarly, Nature is providing "continuously updated news,
research and analysis on Darwin's life, his science and his legacy."
Herewith a sampling of further celebrations in the literature -- and
let NCSE know of any worthwhile contributions to add!
To celebrate the anniversary, the journal BioScience is making James
T. Costa's article "The Darwinian Revelation: Tracing the Origin and
Evolution of an Idea," from its November 2009 issue (59 [10]),
available on-line free of charge. "The idea of evolution by natural
selection formulated by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace is a
cornerstone of modern biology, yet few biology students or
professionals are familiar with the processes of discovery behind the
idea," Costa writes. "I suggest that in teaching evolution today,
educators could profitably draw on both Darwin's personal intellectual
journey in coming to his ideas, and the compelling argument structure
he devised in presenting his theory."
"Darwinian Revolutions" -- written, directed, and narrated by Allen
MacNeill of Cornell University -- is a new series of six on-line
videos that together provide a brief introduction to Darwin's theory
of evolution by natural selection and its implications. On his blog,
MacNeill observes, "the theory of evolution is more dynamic, more
exciting, more widely accepted, and more widely applied than at any
time in the past century and a half. With the accelerating pace of
discoveries in evolutionary biology and their applications in biology,
medicine, psychology, economics, and even literature and art, the 21st
century shows all indications of being what the founders of the
'modern synthesis' called it back in 1959: the 'century of Darwin' and
his theory of evolution by natural selection."
A special issue of the journal Naturwissenschaften (2009; 96 [11])
commemorates the anniversary with papers by Ulrich Kutschera on
"Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species, directional selection, and the
evolutionary sciences today"; Hartmut Follmann and Carol Brownson on
"Darwin's warm little pond revisited: From molecules to the origin of
life"; Rolf G. Beutel, Frank Friedrich and Richard A. B. Leschen on
"Charles Darwin, beetles and phylogenetics"; Simon Conway Morris on
"The predictability of evolution: Glimpses into a post-Darwinian
world"; and Ulrich Kutschera and Karl J. Niklas on "Evolutionary plant
physiology: Charles Darwin’s forgotten synthesis." All articles in the
special issue will be freely available on-line until December 30,
2009.
For the special on-line features from Science and Nature, visit:
http://www.sciencemag.org/darwin/
For Costa's article in BioScience, visit: http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/full/10.1525/bio.2009.59.10.10
For "Darwinian Revolutions" and MacNeill's blog post about it, visit:
http://cybertower.cornell.edu/lodetails.cfm?id=421
http://evolutionlist.blogspot.com/2009/11/darwinian-revolutions-video-series.html
For the special issue of Naturwissenschaften, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/ph5w541k7876/?p=00811e89e36d4b6aa8d52fd0aa783d79&pi=1
BECOMING HUMAN, PART 3
The third episode of Becoming Human -- a three-part NOVA documentary
on what the latest scientific research reveals about our hominid
relatives -- will air on November 17, 2009, on public broadcasting
stations around the country. According to NOVA:
How did modern humans take over the world? New evidence suggests that
they left Africa and colonized the rest of the globe far earlier, and
for different reasons, than previously thought. As for Homo sapiens,
we have planet Earth to ourselves today, but that's a very recent and
unusual situation. For millions of years, many kinds of hominids
co-existed. At one time Homo sapiens shared the planet with
Neanderthals, Homo erectus, and the mysterious "Hobbits" --
three-foot-high humans who thrived on the Indonesian island of Flores
until as recently as 12,000 years ago.
"Last Human Standing" examines why "we" survived while those other
ancestral cousins died out. And it explores the provocative question:
In what ways are we still evolving today?
Further information about the film, including a preview, interviews,
and interactive features, is available at NOVA's website. Information
on finding local public broadcasting stations is available via PBS's
website.
For further information, visit: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/beta/evolution/becoming-human-part-3.html
For information on local stations, visit: http://www.pbs.org/stationfinder/index.html
EVOS JOURNAL DEBUTS
The first issue of EvoS Journal: The Journal of the Evolutionary
Studies Consortium -- a new open-access on-line peer-reviewed journal
designed to promote the education of evolutionary theory in colleges
and universities -- is now available. The journal is published by the
Evolutionary Studies Consortium, of which NCSE is a member
institution. The consortium seeks to "facilitate the development and
implementation of Evolutionary Studies Programs at colleges and
universities across the United States"; the original model for such
programs is David Sloan Wilson's Evolutionary Studies Program at
Binghamton University.
Correspondingly, EvoS Journal seeks to "publish peer-reviewed articles
related to evolutionary theory in higher education" as well as to
"publish undergraduate peer-reviewed publications that have arisen
from courses offered through Evolutionary Studies Programs." In their
editorial introduction to the first issue, Rosemarie Sokol Chang,
Glenn Geher, Jennifer Waldo, and David Sloan Wilson write, "The
contents of EvoS Journal will be doubly exhilarating. First, there is
the exhilaration of expanding evolutionary theory throughout and
beyond the biological sciences, including all aspects of humanity.
Second, there is the exhilaration of incorporating this expansion into
higher education and public life. We look forward to your
participation, as readers and contributors."
For EvoS Journal, visit: http://evostudies.org/journal.html
For information about the Evolutionary Studies Consortium, visit: http://evostudies.org/
For information about the Evolutionary Studies Program at Binghamton
University, visit: http://evolution.binghamton.edu/evos/
For the editorial introduction to the first issue (PDF), visit: http://evostudies.org/pdf/EvoS1-1Editorial.pdf
EVOLUTION IN TWO MINUTES OR LESS
NCSE congratulates Scott Hatfield on winning Discover magazine's
"Evolution in Two Minutes or Less" video contest, for "Evolution: The
Song." The contest's judge, biologist and blogger P. Z. Myers,
explained, "He turned evolution into a rock anthem. And it's a very
catchy one, too. ... Scott jumps out in your face and grabs your
attention with a musical version of the big concepts. It's great
stuff." Also winning honors were Stephen Anderson's "Evolution in 120
Seconds" (the viewer's choice winner); Maggie Tse, Tony Cheng, and
Stella Chung's "Where Do We Come From? Where Are We Going?" (the
runner-up); Benjamin's "It's ... EVOLUTION"; and Whitney Gray's "Why
Elephants Do Not Have Wings." A member of NCSE, Hatfield is a high
school biology teacher in Fresno, California.
For all five of the videos and further information, visit: http://discovermagazine.com/contests/evolution-in-two-minutes-or-less/
WEBCAST: EVOLUTION IN EXTREME ENVIRONMENTS
A live webcast of "Evolution in Extreme Environments" -- a symposium
cosponsored by the American Institute of Biological Sciences and the
National Evolutionary Synthesis Center and held at the National
Association of Biology Teachers conference -- will be available
on-line from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. (Mountain Time) on November 13,
2009.
Cynthia M. Beall will speak on "Human Evolution and Adaptation to
High-altitude"; Steven Haddock will speak on "Life in the Deep Sea:
Only the Fragile Survive"; William R. Jeffrey will speak on "Cavefish:
Evolution in the Dark"; Jody W. Deming will speak on "Arctic Winter
Sea Ice: A Biological Museum or Evolutionary Playground?"; and Kirsten
Fisher, Kristen Jenkins, and Anna Thanukos will lead a teacher
workshop on "Plant Desiccation Tolerance."
Classrooms all over the world will even be able to submit their
questions on-line and have the speakers respond in real time! For
those who aren't able to view the webcast live, all of the talks will
be recorded and placed on NESCent's website for free access after the
conference. The website also will contain supplemental resources,
videos, and links so students and teachers can learn more about
evolution in extreme environments.
For information about the webcast, visit:
http://www.aibs.org/events/special-symposia/evolution_in_extreme_environments.html
http://www.nescent.org/NABT09Webcast.php
Evolution education update: October 30, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
The first part of a documentary on hominid evolution is about to
debut. Norman Levitt, a fierce critic of pseudoscience, is dead.
NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott joined Scientific
American's board of advisers. And a chance to hear Sean B. Carroll
on-line.
BECOMING HUMAN, PART 1
The first episode of Becoming Human -- a three-part NOVA documentary
on what the latest scientific research reveals about our hominid
relatives -- will air on November 3, 2009, on public broadcasting
stations around the country. According to NOVA:
Part 1, "First Steps," examines the factors that caused us to split
from the other great apes. The program explores the fossil of "Selam,"
also known as "Lucy's Child." Paleoanthropologist Zeray Alemseged
spent five years carefully excavating the sandstone-embedded fossil.
NOVA's cameras are there to capture the unveiling of the face, spine,
and shoulder blades of this 3.3 million-year-old fossil child. And
NOVA takes viewers "inside the skull" to show how our ancestors'
brains had begun to change from those of the apes. Why did leaps in
human evolution take place? "First Steps" explores a provocative "big
idea" that sharp swings of climate were a key factor.
Further information about the film, including a preview, interviews,
and interactive features, is available at NOVA's website. Information
on finding local public broadcasting stations is available via PBS's
website.
For further information, visit: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/beta/evolution/becoming-human-part-1.html
For information on local stations, visit: http://www.pbs.org/stationfinder/index.html
NORMAN LEVITT DIES
Norman Levitt, Professor Emeritus of Mathematics at Rutgers University
and a fierce critic of pseudoscience, died on October 23, 2009, in New
York City, according to the obituary in eSkeptic (October 26, 2009).
Born on August 27, 1943, in New York City, Levitt received his B.A.
from Harvard University in 1963 and his Ph.D. from Princeton
University in 1967. After a brief stint at New York University, he
spent the rest of his career at Rutgers University, with visiting
professorships at Arhus University, Stanford University, and the
University of British Columbia; he retired from Rutgers in 2007. A
specialist in topology, he authored Grassmannians and Gauss Maps in
Piecewise-Linear Topology (Springer-Verlag, 1987), but he was better
known to the general public for his critiques of pseudoscience and
obscurantism, including Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its
Quarrels with Science (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994),
coauthored with Paul R. Gross, and Prometheus Bedeviled: Science and
the Contradictions of Contemporary Culture (Rutgers University Press,
1999).
While creationism was hardly Levitt's only target, he was certainly
concerned about it, especially in its recent manifestation of
"intelligent design," which he described -- in a press release
announcing SciPolicy's amicus curiae brief for the plaintiffs in
Kitzmiller v. Dover -- as "not new science, fringe science, nor even
junk science. It is merely window-dressing for a movement that is
social, political, and, above all, theological down to its core, and
which never had the least intention of doing disinterested science."
In the wake of the Kitzmiller verdict, he castigated the sociologist
Steve Fuller's testimony on behalf of "intelligent design" in a review
of Fuller's Science vs. Religion? Intelligent Design and the Problem
of Evolution (Polity Press, 2007) for Skeptic and reviewed Michael
Shermer's Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design
(Times Books, 2006) for Reports of the NCSE. His widow Renee Greene
Levitt asks for memorial contributions to be sent to NCSE in lieu of
flowers.
For the eSkeptic obituary, visit: http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/09-10-26
For the SciPolicy press release and brief (both PDF), visit:
http://ncseweb.org/webfm_send/379/1
http://ncseweb.org/webfm_send/383
For the two reviews mentioned, visit:
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/07-12-19#feature
http://ncseweb.org/rncse/26/6/review-why-darwin-matters
GENIE GRANTS SCIAM'S WISHES
NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott is on the revamped and
expanded Board of Advisers of Scientific American, announced in the
magazine's November 2009 issue. Acting editor-in-chief Mariette
DiChristina explained that the advisers "have agreed, as friends of
the magazine, to assist in our mission of being for you, our readers,
the best source for information about science and technology advances
and how they will affect our lives. The advisers give us feedback on
story proposals and manuscripts from time to time."
Other members of the board include Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg of
the University of Texas, Austin; Lawrence Lessig of Harvard Law School
and the Center for Internet and Society; Lawrence M. Krauss of Arizona
State University; John P. Moore of Cornell University; Jeffrey Sachs
of the Earth Institute; Arthur Caplan of the University of
Pennsylvania; Nobel laureate David Gross of the University of
California, Santa Barbara; Leslie C. Aiello of the Wenner-Gren
Foundation for Anthropological Research; and Martin Rees of Cambridge
University.
Scott's previous involvement with Scientific American includes
reviewing Robert T. Pennock's Tower of Babel: The Evidence against the
New Creationism for its August 1999 issue and contributing "The Latest
Face of Creationism," coauthored with NCSE's Glenn Branch, to its
January 2009 issue on "The Evolution of Evolution." She was also
honored as one of the Scientific American 10 for 2009 for her
"outstanding commitment to assuring that the benefits of new
technologies and knowledge will accrue to humanity."
For Scientific American's announcement, visit: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=from-the-sources
For NCSE's previous coverage of Scott and Scientific American, visit:
http://ncseweb.org/news/2008/12/evolution-scientific-american-003309
http://ncseweb.org/news/2009/05/eugenie-c-scott-among-scientific-american-10-004783
WEBCAST: THE MAKING OF THE FITTEST
Hear NCSE Supporter Sean B. Carroll discuss "The Making of the
Fittest: Natural Selection and the DNA Record of Evolution" on-line!
From 8:30 to 9:30 p.m. (Eastern) on November 4, 2009, Carroll will
deliver the third lecture of the 150th anniversary Origin of Species
lecture series, hosted by The Reading Odyssey and the Darwin 150
project -- and the whole lecture will be webcast live.
Sponsors of the lecture series include the National Center for Science
Education, National Geographic, Citrix Online and its HiDef
Conferencing Division, Campaign Monitor, the Harvard University Museum
of Comparative Zoology, SquareSpace, the movie Creation, and the New
York Academy of Sciences. Future speakers in the series include E. O.
Wilson.
For information on the webcast, visit: http://darwinlecture3.eventbrite.com/
For information about the hosts, visit:
http://www.readingodyssey.com/
http://www.darwin150.com/
Evolution education update: October 23, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Kevin Padian discusses "Ten Myths about Charles Darwin" and
Understanding Evolution is recruiting college instructors of
introductory biology to serve on a teacher advisory board.
TEN MYTHS ABOUT CHARLES DARWIN
Kevin Padian discusses -- and debunks -- "Ten Myths about Charles
Darwin" in the October 2009 issue of BioScience. "Charles Darwin is
one of the most revered (and at times reviled) figures in Western
history. A great many 'facts' about him and his ideas are the stuff of
textbook myths, others are inaccuracies spread by antievolutionists,
and still others are conventional historical mistakes long corrected
but still repeated," he writes. "I present 10 such misconceptions, and
some quick and necessarily incomplete rebuttals. New scholarship is
rapidly clearing away some of these myths." Addressed are:
* As a boy Darwin was good only for "shooting, dogs, and rat-catching"
* Darwin was a "mere companion" to Captain Robert FitzRoy on the HMS Beagle
* Darwin's epiphany about natural selection came while visiting the
Gal?pagos Islands
* Darwin stole the credit for natural selection from Alfred Russel Wallace
* Population thinking
* Dual criteria for classification: Genealogy and similarity
* Gradual change is slow and steady
* Human evolution was shaped mainly by natural selection
* Sexual selection is all about how many offspring you leave
* Darwin was a confirmed atheist who had a deathbed conversion to
Christianity
Padian concludes, "Myths will always arise and abound ... It is hoped
that this myth-busting scholarship will soon filter down to revisions
of textbooks that discuss Darwin and to public discourse about his
life and work." President of NCSE's board of directors, Padian is
Professor of Integrative Biology at the University of California at
Berkeley and also Curator of Paleontology at the University of
California Museum of Paleontology. (Thanks to BioScience for
graciously making Padian's article freely available on-line.)
For "Ten Myths about Charles Darwin" in BioScience, visit: http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/full/10.1525/bio.2009.59.9.10
COLLEGE INSTRUCTORS WANTED TO HELP UNDERSTANDING EVOLUTION
The University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), in
partnership with the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS)
and the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center (NESCent), has received
NSF funding to expand the highly successful Understanding Evolution
website (UE) with the aim of improving evolution education at the
college level -- and college instructors of introductory biology are
needed to serve on a teacher advisory board for the project.
UE's Undergraduate Library would target college instructors of
introductory biology to help them clarify evolutionary concepts in
pedagogically sound ways, integrate evolution throughout their
teaching, and relate evolution to current research and issues that
matter in students' everyday lives. Functionalities built into the
site would also encourage community building within this population of
instructors. The Library will also include the Evo Lab, an area
targeting undergraduate students directly which would aim to provide
student-centered, media-enhanced experiences that portray evolutionary
biology as useful and a cornerstone of modern biological research. The
Undergraduate Library will serve as a one-stop-shop for evolution
educators and students at the college level -- an approach that has
proven successful for UE's K-12 site.
In order to best serve its audience, UCMP is forming a UE Teacher
Advisory Board for this three-year project. It is seeking college
instructors of introductory biology from a range of institutions
(community colleges, four-year colleges, large universities, private
and public schools) to serve on this board. Board members will attend
two two-day meetings in Berkeley, California, and will receive a
stipend for their service, as well as travel reimbursement. If you are
interested in serving, visit UE for details and an application form.
For the application form, visit: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/tab_application.php
For Understanding Evolution, visit: http://evolution.berkeley.edu
Evolution education update: September 18, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
The leading exponent of Islamic creationism is unflatteringly profiled in New Humanist, while the new film about Darwin, Creation, is favorably reviewed by NCSE's executive director.
HARUN YAHYA EXPOSED IN NEW HUMANIST
A long, and occasionally lurid, story about Harun Yahya and the resurgence of Islamic creationism appears in the September/October 2009 issue of New Humanist. "Inspired by the high profile of its Christian American counterpart, Muslim creationism is becoming increasingly visible and confident," writes Halil Arda. "The patron saint of this new movement, the ubiquitous 'expert' cited and referenced by those eager to demonstrate the superiority of 'Koranic
science' over 'the evolution lie', is the larger-than-life figure of Harun Yahya," the pseudonymous leader of the Science Research Foundation, headquartered in Istanbul, Turkey.
Although Islamic creationism is often regarded as a curiosity in the West, it is "treated far more seriously across the Muslim world," Arda warns. "From daily newspapers in Egypt and Bosnia to influential satellite TV stations like al-Jazeera and (the Iran-funded) Press TV, to small Muslim broadcasters in the West like Radio Ummah and Radio Ramadan, Harun Yahya's argument, with its appearance of scientific credibility, its crowd-pleasing critique of Western materialism and its promise of the imminent collapse of the 'Darwinist Dictatorship', is enthusiastically welcomed by a new audience hungry for compensatory narratives of Islamic superiority."
But how did a young interior design student named Adnan Oktar transform himself into the undisputed leader of the Islamic creationist movement? According to Arda, "Combining his undoubted charisma (something even his most ardent opponents concede) with a gift for manipulation, Oktar set out to build a cult around himself ... targeting disaffected but affluent and educated young people, insisting they turn their worldly goods over to the cult, and vigorously enforcing rigid hierarchies and punitive rules." As the group coalesced, "discipline was maintained through humiliation, the threat of expulsion and physical violence."
With a cadre of dedicated followers and their resources at his disposal, Oktar was able to gain political and economic influence with Turkey's Islamist Welfare Party in the mid-1990s. After the party was disbanded in 1997, however, Oktar turned to antievolutionism. In 1998, Arda writes, the Science Research Foundation, founded by Oktar in 1990, "launched its campaign against Darwinism, distributing tens of thousands of free copies of his book The Evolution Deceit in Turkey, paving the way for the Atlas of Creation and Oktar's new role as the spokesman for Muslim creationism."
The form of creationism adopted by Harun Yahya's group is not constant. The Science Research Foundation originally adopted its antievolution arguments from young-earth creationist organizations in the United States, but discarded claims about a young earth and a global flood flood not vouched for by the Qur'an or Islamic tradition. Subsequently, it evinced a degree of sympathy for "intelligent design" creationism instead, employing catchphrases like "irreducible complexity" and using the phrase "intelligent design" as equivalent with "creation." Later, however, Harun Yahya denounced "intelligent design" as insufficiently Islamic.
Arda comments, "Oktar's ideological and political promiscuity seem to support the claim that he has no genuine beliefs at all, and merely opportunistically jumps on issues which will further his notoriety, following the lead of smarter followers. As one former follower told me, 'We had something to please everybody: Ataturk, namaz (prayer), creationism and, if need be, cocaine.'" But his influence may be waning: in 2008, Oktar was sentenced to three years in prison for "creating an illegal organization for personal gain," and Arda reports that he is expected to lose his final appeal to Turkey's Supreme Court, with a decision expected in October 2009.
Contemplating the rise of Harun Yahya, Arda concludes, "Thanks to the 'War on Terror', Oktar could paint himself as a credible alternative to radical Islam; thanks to our timidity and incompetence around issues of faith he can gain credibility as a representative of Muslim sentiment and a champion of 'inter-faith dialogue'. And, most of all, for many disoriented Muslims, he provides a compelling vision of a superior Islamic science. He is a deluded megalomaniac who has artfully exploited the global resurgence of religious sentiment to cheat us all. A ludicrous man for ludicrous times."
For the article in New Humanist, visit: http://newhumanist.org.uk/2131
For NCSE's previous coverage of Islamic creationism, visit:
http://ncseweb.org/rncse/19/6/cloning-creationism-turkey
http://ncseweb.org/rncse/19/6/islamic-scientific-creationism
http://ncseweb.org/rncse/26/5/turkish-creationist-movement-tours-american-college-campuses
EUGENIE C. SCOTT REVIEWS CREATION
In a guest post at The Panda's Thumb blog, NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott reviewed the new film about Darwin, Creation, describing it as "a thoughtful, well-made film that will change many views of Darwin held by the public -- for the good." She described the science as accurate if limited and the history as satisfactory if not wholly accurate, explaining, "This isn't a documentary about Darwin, it's a movie about Darwin. And there's a difference. With the latter, you don't expect absolute fealty to the historical record -- though you don't have to -- and shouldn't -- accept wholesale violations."
Most important, Scott insisted, is the film's sympathetic and detailed portrayal of Darwin (played by Paul Bettany) as flesh and blood, as "a passionate, loving human being" as well as a dedicated investigator of the natural world. "By telling an interesting story, and making Darwin human," she wrote, "Creation will I think encourage some viewers to find out more about the historical Darwin and his ideas. From my standpoint as director of NCSE, that's useful, indeed. The more people know about evolution and its most famous proponent, the less they will fear it."
It is not yet clear whether Creation will find a distributor in the United States. The producer, Jeremy Thomas, told the Telegraph (September 11, 2009), "It has got a deal everywhere else in the world but in the US, and it's because of what the film is about. ... It is unbelievable to us that this is still a really hot potato in America." A few days thereafter, however, NBC Bay Area (September 15, 2009) reported that a distribution deal was imminent, quoting a spokesperson for the film as saying, "There is now a bidding war for the film in the US. A US deal will be in place by the end of the week."
For Scott's review, visit: http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2009/09/eugenie-scott-r.html
For information about Creation, visit: http://creationthemovie.com/
For the article in the Telegraph, visit: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6173399/Charles-Darwin-film-too-controversial-for-religious-America.html
For the article from NBC Bay Area, visit: http://www.nbcbayarea.com/entertainment/movies/Creation-May-Cause-Big-Bang-in-US-59246832.html
Evolution education update: August 28, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
A partial settlement in a legal case involving a teacher accused of
inappropriate religious activity in the classroom, including teaching
creationism. The HHMI Bulletin discusses ways for teachers to
introduce evolution in a non-threatening way. And there are now over
1100 signatories to NCSE's Project Steve.
PARTIAL SETTLEMENT IN FRESHWATER CASE
A partial settlement was reportedly reached in Doe v. Mount Vernon
Board of Education et al., the case in which a Mount Vernon, Ohio,
teacher, was accused of inappropriate religious activity in the
classroom -- including displaying posters with the Ten Commandments
and Bible verses, branding crosses into the arms of his students with
a high-voltage electrical device, and teaching creationism. The Mount
Vernon News (August 27, 2009) reported that "the board’s insurance
company has agreed to pay $115,500 toward the plaintiffs’ legal fees,
$5,500 to one of the plaintiffs as compensation and the sum of $1 each
to two other individuals." The board, superintendent, and principal of
the middle school admit no liability in the agreement, which will have
to be approved by a court.
Not covered by the settlement agreement is the teacher himself, John
Freshwater. Shortly after the filing of the case, the board voted to
initiate proceedings to terminate Freshwater's employment in the
district. Freshwater appealed the decision, and administrative
hearings have been proceeding intermittently since October 2008.
Detailed reports on the hearings by Richard B. Hoppe are available on
The Panda’s Thumb blog (search for "Freshwater"). Complicating the
legal situation, Freshwater filed a counterclaim in Doe v. Mount
Vernon in 2008 and his own lawsuit, Freshwater v. Mount Vernon City
School District Board of Education et al., against the board and a
number of district administrators in 2009, alleging religious
discrimination, defamation, conspiracy, and breach of contract.
According to the Mount Vernon News, the school board also agreed to
"[p]rohibit staff from discussing the John Freshwater case with or in
the presence of students during the school day and at school
activities; [p]rovide training to board members and administrators
concerning religion and the school, and provide training to teachers
on the same topic ... [and] [m]ake a public statement at the
conclusion of the Freshwater administrative hearing." A statement
released by the board explained, "The resolution of the lawsuit
against the board, superintendent and middle school principal has no
impact or bearing on the pending administrative hearing with respect
to the middle school teacher’s employment. Due to pending litigation,
the board will not be commenting further."
For the story in the Mount Vernon News, visit: http://www.mountvernonnews.com/local/09/08/27/school-board-resolves-federal-lawsuit
For NCSE's collection of documents from Doe v. Mount Vernon, visit: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/doe-v-freshwater-mv
For Richard B. Hoppe's reports on the hearings, visit: http://pandasthumb.org
For NCSE's collection of documents from Freshwater v. Mount Vernon, visit: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/freshwater-v-mount-vernon
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Ohio, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/ohio
THE E WORD IN THE HHMI BULLETIN
How can teachers introduce evolution in a non-threatening way? Nancy
Volker's article "The E World," published in the August 2009 issue of
the HHMI Bulletin, discusses a number of strategies for introducing
evolution gradually and without fanfare. "It's like adding shredded
zucchini to a homemade chocolate cake," she explains. "No one knows
it's there, and once it's pointed out, people realize it's not at all
what they thought."
Among the resources on teaching evolution suggested in the article are
NCSE's website, the University of California Museum of Paleontology's
Understanding Evolution website, and the National Academy of Sciences
and the Institute of Medicine's booklet Science, Evolution, and
Creationism. The web version of the article also includes audio
interviews with Kelly Smith and Margaret Ptacek, both of Clemson
University.
For the article in the HHMI Bulletin, visit: http://www.hhmi.org/bulletin/aug2009/upfront/word.html
For the cited resources, visit:
http://ncseweb.org
http://evolution.berkeley.edu
http://www.nap.edu/sec
PROJECT STEVE: N > 1100
With the addition of Stephen D. Kinrade on August 25, 2009, NCSE's
Project Steve attained its 1100th signatory. A tongue-in-cheek parody
of the long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of
"scientists who doubt evolution" or "scientists who dissent from
Darwinism," Project Steve mocks such lists by restricting its
signatories to scientists whose first name is Steve. (Cognates are
also accepted, such as Stephanie, Esteban, Istvan, Stefano, or even
Tapani -- the Finnish equivalent.) About 1% of the United States
population possesses such a first name, so each signatory represents
about 100 potential signatories. ("Steve" was selected in honor of the
late Stephen Jay Gould, a Supporter of NCSE and a dauntless defender
of evolution education.)
Although the idea of Project Steve is frivolous, the statement is
serious. It reads, "Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying
principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is
overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a
common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the
patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific
doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major
mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and
pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including
but not limited to 'intelligent design,' to be introduced into the
science curricula of our nation's public schools."
Among the 1101 current signatories to Project Steve are 100% of
eligible Nobel laureates (Steven Weinberg and Steven Chu), 100% of
eligible members of President Obama's Cabinet (Steven Chu, the
Secretary of Energy), at least ten members of the National Academy of
Sciences, the authors of widely used textbooks such as Molecular
Biology of the Gene, Psychology: An Evolutionary Approach, and
Introduction to Organic Geochemistry, and the authors of popular
science books such as A Brief History of Time, Why We Age, and
Darwin's Ghost. When last surveyed in February 2006, 54% of the
signatories work in the biological sciences proper; 61% work in
related fields in the life sciences.
For information about Project Steve, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2009/08/taking-action/project-steve
Evolution education update: August 14, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Chris Comer is appealing the dismissal of her case against the Texas
Education Agency. A new study conducted by NCSE's Louise S. Mead and
Anton Mates reveals progress in the treatment of evolution in state
science standards -- but there's still plenty of room for improvement.
And NCSE's Glenn Branch reviews the updated edition of But Is It
Science? for Skeptic.
CHRIS COMER APPEALS
Chris Comer, whose lawsuit challenging the Texas Education Agency's
policy of requiring neutrality about evolution and creationism was
dismissed on March 31, 2009, is now appealing the decision. Formerly
the director of science at the TEA, Comer was forced to resign in
November 2007 after she forwarded a note announcing a talk by Barbara
Forrest in Austin; according to a memorandum recommending her
dismissal, "the TEA requires, as agency policy, neutrality when
talking about evolution and creationism."
In June 2008, Comer filed suit in federal court in the Western
District of Texas, arguing that the policy violates the Establishment
Clause of the First Amendment: "By professing 'neutrality,' the Agency
credits creationism as a valid scientific theory." The judge ruled
otherwise, however, writing, "As a matter of law, the Agency's
neutrality policy, if it advances religion at all, only does so
incidentally. Further, a reasonable observer of the neutrality policy
would not believe the Agency endorses religion through the policy."
In her appellate brief, submitted to the United States Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Comer asked the court to "review the
record de novo and reverse and vacate the district court's decision.
Specifically, it should grant Comer's motion for summary judgment, and
vacate the grant of summary judgment for defendants, as well as the
dismissal of plaintiff's complaint. At a minimum, this Court should
vacate the grant of summary judgment to defendants, plus the order
dismissing the complaint, and remand for further proceedings."
For Comer's appellate brief (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/webfm_send/1170
For NCSE's collection of information about the case, visit: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/chris-comer-docs
For NCSE's video about the case, visit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpCdQ2Tbf6s
EVOLVING STANDARDS
How is evolution faring in state science education standards? NCSE's
Louise S. Mead and Anton Mates pored over the latest standards in all
fifty states. In a new study forthcoming in the journal Evolution:
Education and Outreach, they report, "The treatment of biological
evolution in state science standards has improved dramatically over
the last ten years." Forty states received satisfactory grades for the
treatment of evolution in their state science standards in Mead and
Mates's study, as opposed to only thirty-one in Lawrence S. Lerner's
2000 study Good Science, Bad Science, conducted for the Fordham
Foundation.
But the news is not all rosy. Five states -- Alabama, Louisiana,
Oklahoma, Texas, and West Virginia -- received the grade of F, and a
further six states -- Alaska, Connecticut, Kentucky, Tennessee,
Wisconsin, and Wyoming -- receive the grade of D. Moreover, the
"treatment of human evolution is abysmal," Mead and Mates lament, with
only seven states (and the District of Columbia) providing a
comprehensive treatment. Many states "do not reference the Big Bang as
the current scientific theory for the origin of the universe," they
add, and only 17 states provide a comprehensive treatment of the
connections among biological, geological, and cosmological systems.
Mead and Mates also consider a few states that furnish "excellent
examples of the successes and failures of the standards-setting
process." The grades for Florida and Kansas have vaulted from F to A,
although not without controversy: "the Kansas standards have seesawed
between abysmal and excellent no fewer than four times in the last
decade." In Louisiana, however, the passage of the so-called Louisiana
Science Education Act undermined the treatment of evolution in the
standards, which now receive the grade of F. And in Texas, the state
board of education's revisions in March 2009 served to undermine the
treatment of evolution in the standards to the point where they, too,
receive a failing grade.
In a companion article introducing the study, NCSE's executive
director Eugenie C. Scott commented, "On the basis of Mead and Mates's
results, there is reason to be pleased by the progress over the last
ten years in the inclusion of evolution in state science education
standards. That the treatment of evolution is inadequate in almost one
in five states still suggests that there is considerable room for
improvement, but we should be optimistic that teachers, scientists,
and others who care about science education will continue -- as
science standards continue to be periodically revised -- to work for
the appropriate inclusion of evolution in state science education
standards."
For Mead and Mates's article, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/9u0610162rn51432/fulltext.html
For Lerner's study, visit: http://www.fordhamfoundation.org/detail/news.cfm?news_id=42
For Scott's article, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/e41527271423814p/fulltext.html
PHILOSOPHERS, CREATIONISTS, AND SERIOUS BRAINIACS
NCSE's deputy director Glenn Branch's review of the updated edition of
But Is It Science? The Philosophical Question in the
Creation/Evolution Controversy (Prometheus Books, 2009) appeared in
eSkeptic for August 12, 2009. The review concluded:
But Is It Science? is evidently intended as a sourcebook for
university classes in philosophy, the history of science, science and
religion, and so forth, and as such it succeeds admirably. But it is,
or ought to be, appealing to the general public at large. The
creationism/evolution controversy is a perennial feature of life in
the United States, with attempts to remove, balance, or compromise the
teaching of evolution recurring from the Scopes era to the present
day. Even if public interest in intelligent design dwindles after
Kitzmiller, as public interest in creation science dwindled after
McLean and Edwards, the profound yet misguided discomfort with
evolution that actuates such assaults on evolution is bound to remain.
Also bound to remain are philosophical controversies over creationism,
which -- as the Kitzmiller case illustrated so vividly -- have the
potential to affect the quality of science education across the
country and indeed around the world. Pennock and Ruse conclude their
preface by writing, "We hope that you enjoy this collection and learn
from it." I think that you will. And they add, "We hope sincerely that
in twenty years it will not be necessary to bring out a third
edition." I do, too. But if so, it will be due, despite Mencken's jab,
in large part to the philosophers -- Pennock, Ruse, and Forrest, to be
sure, but also Philip Kitcher, Sahotra Sarkar, Elliott Sober, and a
host of their colleagues -- who have worked tirelessly to expose the
philosophical flaws of creationism.
The editors of the book, philosophers Michael Ruse and Robert T.
Pennock, testified in McLean and Kitzmiller, respectively, and Ruse is
additionally a Supporter of NCSE. Branch's review will be published in
a forthcoming issue of Skeptic.
For Branch's review, visit: http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/09-08-12#feature
To buy the book from Amazon.com (and benefit NCSE in the process), visit: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/1591025826/nationalcenter02/
For information about Skeptic, visit: http://www.skeptic.com/
Evolution education update: August 7, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
The way is clear for the government to seize a creationist theme park
in Florida. And the complete run of Creation/Evolution is now
available on-line.
DINOSAUR ADVENTURE LAND TO BE SEIZED?
Dinosaur Adventure Land, Kent Hovind's creationist theme park in
Pensacola, Florida, is to be seized by the federal government, the
Pensacola News Journal (July 31, 2009) reported. In November 2006, a
federal jury found Hovind guilty of fifty-eight charges, including
failing to pay payroll taxes for his employees, structuring financial
transactions to avoid reporting requirements, and "corruptly
endeavor[ing] to obstruct and impede the due administration of the
internal revenue laws." Hovind was subsequently sentenced to ten years
in prison and to pay over $600,000 in restitution.
After the judge presiding over the case ordered that two bank accounts
and ten real properties located in Pensacola be forfeited to satisfy
the financial judgment against Hovind, two claimants filed separate
objections. Eric Hovind -- who is running Creation Science Evangelism
while his father is incarcerated -- claimed ownership of a single
property, in which he lives, while Glen Stoll -- who was hired by
Hovind to restructure his ministry so its assets would be managed
through supposedly tax-exempt trusts -- claimed ownership of the
remaining nine as well as one of the bank accounts.
Eric Hovind's claim was upheld by the court in its July 29, 2009,
order, which noted that the conveyance of the title to his home was
not part of Stoll's scheme for restructuring the ministry. But Stoll's
claim was not: the court held that "Stoll has not shown he played
anything more than a titular role in the trusts he created, and the
court finds he was a nominee title holder for Kent and Jo Hovind. ...
As such, Stoll has no legal interest in any forfeited substitute
property and lacks standing to challenge the court's June 28, 2007,
and October 8, 2008, forfeiture orders."
Among the properties forfeited appears to be Dinosaur Adventure Land,
which describes itself as "a theme park and science museum that gives
God the glory for His creation." Reporting on his visit there in the
November 2004 Skeptical Inquirer, Greg Martinez concluded, "Dinosaur
Adventure Land is just a playground tricked out with dinosaur dressage
to attract an audience that can then be enticed, seduced, and
eventually duped into accepting superstitions, pseudoscience, and
plain nonsense passed off with a patina of both scientific and
religious authority."
For the story in the Pensacola News-Journal, visit: http://www.pnj.com/article/20090731/NEWS01/90731016/1006
For the court's order (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/webfm_send/1130
For Greg Martinez's account of his visit to Dinosaur Adventure Land, visit: http://www.csicop.org/si/2004-11/hovind.html
CREATION/EVOLUTION NOW AVAILABLE ON-LINE
NCSE is pleased to announce that the complete run of
Creation/Evolution is now available in PDF form on the NCSE website.
Published from 1980 to 1996, Creation/Evolution was the leading source
of information about and criticism of the creationist movement through
that momentous period, which saw the rise and fall of attempts to
require the teaching of "creation science" in the public schools as
well as the beginnings of the "intelligent design" movement.
Creation/Evolution was originally published by the American Humanist
Association, under the editorship of Frederick Edwords; in 1991, it
was acquired by NCSE, and John R. Cole became its editor. In 1997,
Creation/Evolution was merged with NCSE Reports to produce NCSE's
current journal, Reports of the NCSE, edited by Andrew J. Petto.
Highlights of Creation/Evolution include Frank Awbrey's "Yes,
Virginia, There is a Creation Model" (issue 1), Laurie R. Godfrey's
analysis of the creationist movie Footprints in Stone (issue 6),
Robert A. Moore's "The Impossible Voyage of Noah's Ark" (issue 11),
Conrad Hyers's "Genesis Knows Nothing of Scientific Creationism"
(issue 12), a special issue on the Paluxy footprints (issue 15),
Thomas McIver's report on his field study in the Grand Canyon with a
group of creationists (issue 20), John A. Moore's "Is 'Creation
Science' Scientific?" (issue 28), Bernard Ortiz de Montellano's
"Afrocentric Creationism" (issue 29), Eugenie C. Scott's review of
Phillip Johnson's Darwin on Trial (issue 33), Taner Edis's "Islamic
Creationism in Turkey" (issue 34), and Robert T. Pennock's
"Naturalism, Creationism, and the Meaning of Life" (issue 39).
For the complete run of Creation/Evolution, visit: http://ncseweb.org/media/cej
For information about subscribing to Reports of the NCSE, visit: http://ncseweb.org/membership
Evolution education update: July 10, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
A new report on attitudes toward evolution among scientists and the
public. Plus new selected content from the Expelled Exposed issue of
RNCSE.
VIEWS ON EVOLUTION AMONG THE PUBLIC AND SCIENTISTS
"Nearly all scientists (97%) say humans and other living things have
evolved over time," while only 61% of the public agrees, according to
a new report (p. 37) from the Pew Research Center for the People & the
Press. Asked which comes closer to their view, "Humans and other
living things have evolved over time" or "Humans and other living
things have existed in their present form since the beginning of
time," 97% of scientists responding chose the former option, as
opposed to only 2% choosing the latter option; 61% of the public
responding chose the former option, as opposed to 31% choosing the
latter option.
Those who chose the former option were also asked whether they
preferred "Humans and other living things have evolved due to natural
processes such as natural selection" or "A supreme being guided the
evolution of living things for the purpose of creating humans and
other life in the form it exists today." Among scientists, 87%
preferred the former option and 8% preferred the latter option; among
the public, 32% preferred the former option and 22% preferred the
latter option. Members of the public were also asked whether
scientists generally agree that humans evolved over time; 60% said
yes, 28% said no.
"Views on evolution vary substantially within the general public," the
report observed (p. 38), "particularly by religion and attendance at
religious services." For example, among white evangelical Protestants
responding, a majority, 57%, agreed that humans existed in their
present form since the beginning of time, and among those respondents
attending religious services weekly or more often, a near-majority,
49%, agreed. In contrast, among the religiously unaffiliated
responding, 60% agreed that humans evolved due to natural processes.
Also correlated with acceptance of evolution were youth and education.
The questions about evolution were part of a larger project, conducted
by the Pew Research Center and the American Association for the
Advancement of Science, investigating the public's attitude toward
science and comparing it to the attitude of scientists. The report
relied on three surveys, two conducted by telephone among members of
the general public in the United States in April, May, and June 2009,
and one conducted on-line among members of the AAAS in May and June
2009. The broader significance of the project's results are summarized
in the Pew Research Center's overview report, issued on July 9, 2009.
For the full report (PDF), visit: http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/528.pdf
For the overview report, visit: http://people-press.org/report/528/
CATCHING UP WITH RNCSE
Selected content from volume 28, numbers 5-6, of Reports of the
National Center for Science Education is now available on NCSE's
website. RNCSE 28:5-6 was a special Expelled Exposed issue, with a
comprehensive debunking of the recent creationist propaganda movie
Expelled. Featured are Eugenie C. Scott's recounting of her rude
introduction to Expelled, Gary S. Hurd's discussion of the movie's
misrepresentations of scientific research on the origin of life, and
reports on the reaction from critics and from organizations with
stakes in the creationism/evolution controversy, the controversies
over alleged misuses of copyrighted material, and, of course, the box
office.
If you like what you see, why not subscribe to RNCSE today? The next
issue (volume 29, number 3) features dispatches from Texas by Steven
Schafersman of Texas Citizens for Science, NCSE's Joshua Rosenau, and
Jeremy Mohn, who revealed Don McLeroy's penchant for quote-mining.
There's also a story about the crowning of the kilosteve -- Steve
#1000 in NCSE's Project Steve -- and a host of reviews, including
Peter Dodson on Donald R. Prothero's Evolution: What the Fossils Say
and Why it Matters, Andrea Bottaro on Kenneth R. Miller's Only a
Theory, and Donald R. Prothero on Jerry Coyne's Why Evolution is True.
Don't miss out -- subscribe now!
For the selected content from RNCSE 28:5-6, visit: http://ncseweb.org/rncse/28/5-6
For NCSE's compendium of information about Expelled, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com
For subscription information, visit: http://ncseweb.org/membership
Evolution education update: July 3, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
A survey of opinions on evolution from ten countries was released. And
paleontologists took a trip to the Creation "Museum" and were dismayed
by what they saw.
OPINIONS ON EVOLUTION FROM TEN COUNTRIES
A recent international survey conducted by the British Council
investigated awareness of Darwin, acceptance of evolution, and
attitudes toward evolution and faith. In a June 30, 2009, press
release, Fern Elsdon-Baker, the head of the British Council's Darwin
Now program, commented, "The international Darwin survey has thrown up
some very interesting results, especially as it includes data from
countries not previously covered before. The most encouraging aspect
of the survey shows that whilst there are diverse views on Darwin’s
theory of evolution, there appears to a broad acceptance that science
and faith do not have to be in conflict. Whilst the results show that
there is some way to go in communicating the evidence of evolutionary
theory to wider audiences, it is evident that there is clear space for
dialogue on this sometimes complex area of debate."
The survey was conducted in April and May 2009 in ten countries:
Argentina, China, Egypt, Great Britain, India, Mexico, Russia, South
Africa, Spain, and the United States. For the question "Have you heard
of Charles Darwin?" Russia led the list with 93% of respondents saying
yes, with Great Britain and Mexico tied for second at 90%, and China a
close third at 90%; the United States was fifth at 84%. For the
question "To what extent do you agree or disagree that it is possible
to believe in a God and still hold the view that life on earth,
including human life, evolved over time as a result of natural
selection?" India led the list with 85% of respondents agreeing, with
Mexico second at 65% and Argentina third at 62%; the United States was
fifth at 53%, just behind Great Britain, Russia, and South Africa,
which tied for fourth at 54%.
For the question "To what extent do you agree or disagree that enough
scientific evidence exists to support Charles Darwin’s Theory of
Evolution [sic]?" -- posed to respondents who had heard of Charles
Darwin and knew something about the theory of evolution -- India led
the list with 77% of respondents agreeing, with China second at 72%
and Mexico second at 65%. The United States was ninth at 41%, just
behind South Africa at 42% and well ahead of Egypt at 25%. In keeping
with reports on previous international surveys on public attitudes
toward evolution, such as Miller, Scott, and Okamoto's article in
Science in 2006, the United States was also conspicuous for the level
of disagreement with the theory of evolution: 30%, second only to
Egypt's 63%. Only 29% of respondents in the United States indicated
that they neither agreed nor disagreed or didn't know.
Respondents were also asked which of the following was closest to
their own view: "life on earth, including human life, evolved over
time as a result of natural selection, in which no God played a part";
"life on earth, including human life, evolved over time in a process
guided by a God"; and "life on earth, including human life, was
created by a God and has always existed in its current form."
(Respondents were also offered the response, "I have another view on
the origins of species and development of life on earth, which is not
included in this list.") The first view was preferred in China by 67%
of the respondents, in Mexico, Great Britain, and Spain by 38%, in
Argentina by 37%, and in Russia by 32%; the third was preferred in
Egypt by 50% of the respondents, and in India, South Africa, and the
United States by 43%. In no country was the second view held by a
plurality of respondents.
For the press release (PDF), visit: http://www.britishcouncil.org/darwinnow-survey-global.pdf
For information about Darwin Now, visit: http://www.britishcouncil.org/darwin-homepage.htm
For NCSE's report on the 2006 Science article, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2006/08/public-acceptance-evolution-science-00991
PALEONTOLOGISTS DISMAYED BY CREATION "MUSEUM"
Paleontologists took a trip to Answers in Genesis's Creation "Museum"
-- and were dismayed, unsurprisingly, by what they saw. The Ninth
North American Paleontological Convention was held June 21-26, 2009,
at the University of Cincinnati, attracting several hundred
paleontologists from around the world to present their latest
research, as well as to attend a plenary session on evolution and
society featuring NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott. The
organizers of the convention also offered a side trip to the nearby
Creation "Museum," explaining that "it is essential for professional
paleontologists to become better aware of how their work and their
roles in society are portrayed by creationists, themes that are
conveyed vividly at the museum."
Reporters accompanied the bemused paleontologists on their excursion,
with stories subsequently appearing in the Cincinnati Enquirer (June
24, 2009), The New York Times (June 30, 2009), and Agence
France-Presse (June 30, 2009). A few representative reactions from
those stories: "I'm not offended, just annoyed" (Julia Sankey of
California State University, Stanislaus); "I think they should rename
the museum -- not the Creation Museum, but the Confusion Museum" (Lisa
Park of the University of Akron); "This bothers me as a scientist and
as a Christian, because it's just as much a distortion and
misrepresentation of Christianity as it is of science" (Daryl Domning
of Howard University).
Scientific criticism of the Creation "Museum" is nothing new. When it
opened in 2007, over 800 scientists in the three states surrounding it
-- Kentucky, Indiana, and Ohio -- signed a statement sponsored by NCSE
expressing concern about the effect of the scientific inaccuracies of
its exhibits on local students. Shortly thereafter, the Society for
Vertebrate Paleontology issued a press release contending that "the
museum presents visitors with a view of earth history that has been
scientifically disproven for over a century" and accusing it of
"undermining the basic principles of science, eroding the public's
confidence in science, and causing a general weakening of science
education in the country."
For the announcement of the trip, visit: http://www.napc2009.org/creationmuseum
For the stories, visit:
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090624/NEWS01/306240055/Scientists+tour+Creation+Museum
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/science/30muse.html
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jiVuN2BMp6tmuGBGOedALIY4_FaA
For the NCSE-sponsored statement, visit: http://ncseweb.org/taking-action/aig-creation-museum
For the SVP press release, visit: http://vertpaleo.org/news/index.cfm?mode=viewEntry&id=09647CC3-A12B-5FD2-C6DA5855160D5FFC
Evolution education update: June 12, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
A new resource on NCSE's website provides the details on seventeen key legal cases in the creationism/evolution controversy. A new issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach is available. And the text of Science's recent interview of Eugenie C. Scott is now posted in NCSE's website.
"CREATIONISM AND THE LAW"
Looking for the legal skinny on the court cases that shaped the landscape of the creationism/evolution controversy? NCSE's new Creationism and the Law resource provides the details on seventeen key cases, from Scopes to Selman, that made a difference. Simply click on the name of a case to get a thorough summary; a list of source documents (typically PDFs, arranged in chronological order); and to relevant NCSE news stories, timelines, and presentations; and a selection of links to third-party sources. This new NCSE resource is free and aimed at journalists, lawyers, school administrators, school boards, and anyone interested in the legal history of evolution, creationism, and public school science education.
For "Creationism and the Law," visit: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/creationism-law
THE LATEST ISSUE OF EVOLUTION: EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
The latest issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach -- the new journal aspiring to promote accurate understanding and comprehensive teaching of evolutionary theory for a wide audience -- is now available on-line. Taking transitional forms as its theme, the issue positively teems with exciting paleontology. Among the authors are Jennifer A. Clack writing on "The Fish-Tetrapod Transition: New Fossils and Interpretations," Luis M. Chiappe writing on "Downsized Dinosaurs: The Evolutionary Transition to Modern Birds," Kenneth D. Angielczyk writing on "Dimetrodon Is Not a Dinosaur: Using Tree Thinking to Understand the Ancient Relatives of Mammals and their Evolution," J. G. M. Thewissen, Lisa Noelle Cooper, John C. George, and Sunil Bajpai writing on "From Land to Water: the Origin of Whales, Dolphins, and Porpoises," and Donald R. Prothero writing on "Evolutionary Transitions in the Fossil Record of Terrestrial Hoofed Mammals."
Also included is the latest installment of NCSE's regular column for Evolution: Education and Outreach, Overcoming Obstacles to Evolution Education. In "Transforming Our Thinking about Transitional Forms," NCSE's Education Project Director Louise S. Mead explains, "A common misconception of evolutionary biology is that it involves a search for 'missing links' in the history of life. Relying on this misconception, antievolutionists present the supposed absence of transitional forms from the fossil record as evidence against evolution. Students of biology need to understand that evolution is a branching process, paleontologists do not expect to find 'missing links,' and evolutionary research uses independent lines of evidence to test hypotheses and make conclusions about the history of life. Teachers can facilitate such learning by incorporating cladistics and tree-thinking into the curriculum and using evograms to focus on important evolutionary transitions."
For the latest issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/120878/
For Mead's article, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/501371w1h0h58385/fulltext.html
EUGENIE C. SCOTT INTERVIEWED IN SCIENCE (NOW WITH FULL TEXT)
Last week's Evolution Education Update summarized Science's interview with NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott. Now, with the kind permission of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the complete text of the interview is available on NCSE's website.
For the interview, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2009/06/eugenie-c-scott-interviewed-science-004823
Thanks for reading! And don't forget to visit NCSE's website -- http://ncseweb.org -- where you can always find the latest news on evolution education and threats to it.
Evolution education update: April 3, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Plenty of news in Texas again: the Texas state board of education voted to
adopt a flawed set of state science standards, and Chris Comer's suit
against the Texas Education Agency was dismissed. In Florida, the Florida
Academy of Sciences denounced the antievolution bill still in the state
senate. A few seats remain aboard NCSE's next excursion to the Grand
Canyon.
A SETBACK FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION IN TEXAS
At its March 25-27, 2009, meeting, the Texas state board of education voted
to adopt a flawed set of state science standards, which will dictate what
is taught in science classes in elementary and secondary schools, as well
as provide the material for state tests and textbooks, for the next
decade. Although creationists on the board were unsuccessful in inserting
the controversial "strengths and weaknesses" language from the old set of
standards, they proposed a flurry of synonyms -- such as "sufficiency or
insufficiency" and "supportive and not supportive" -- and eventually
prevailed with a requirement that students examine "all sides of scientific
evidence." Additionally, the board voted to add or amend various standards
in a way that encourages the presentation of creationist claims about the
complexity of the cell, the completeness of the fossil record, and the age
of the universe.
The proceedings were confusing and contentious, and it is understandable
that journalists differed in their initial assessments of the significance
of the vote: for example, the Dallas Morning News (March 28, 2009)
headlined its article as "Conservatives lose another battle over
evolution," while the Wall Street Journal (March 27, 2009) headlined its
article as "Texas Opens Classroom Door for Evolution Doubts," and the
Austin-American-Statesman (March 28, 2009) played it safe with "State
education board approves science standards." As the dust settled, though,
NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott -- who was invited to testify
before the board at its meeting -- commented, in a March 30, 2009, press
release, "The final vote was a triumph of ideology and politics over
science."
"The board majority chose to satisfy creationist constituents and ignore
the expertise of highly qualified Texas scientists and scientists across
the country," Scott added. Among the organizations calling upon the board
to adopt the standards as originally drafted by a panel of Texas scientists
and educators were the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
the National Association of Geoscience Teachers, the Paleontological
Society, the National Association of Biology Teachers, and the Texas
Association of Biology Teachers, as well as fifty-four scientific and
education societies that endorsed a statement circulated by NCSE. The
board's chair, avowed creationist Don McLeroy, responded by crying (video
is available on NCSE's YouTube channel), during the meeting, "Somebody's
got to stand up to experts!"
Writing in Salon (March 29, 2009), Gordy Slack -- the author of The Battle
Over the Meaning of Everything: Evolution, Intelligent Design, and a
School Board in Dover, PA (Jossey-Bass 2007) -- explained that after
Kitzmiller v. Dover, "advocates of teaching neo-creationism have been
forced to seek other ways into public science classrooms. Enter the
'strengths and weaknesses' strategy." After the creationist faction on the
board failed to reinsert the "strengths and weaknesses" language, NCSE's
executive director Eugenie C. Scott commented, "they had a fallback
position, which was to continue amending the standards to achieve through
the back door what they couldn't achieve upfront." Slack added, "Each of
the amendments singles out an old creationist argument, strips it of its
overtly ideological language, and requires teachers and textbook publishers
to adopt it."
Rachel Courtland, a blogger for New Scientist (March 31, 2009), examined a
case in point: the deletion of a reference in the standards to the age of
the universe ("about 14 billion years ago"). As revised, the standards
require students to learn "current theories of the evolution of the
universe including estimates for the age of the universe," with the actual
age absent. "Is the new standard an invitation for young-Earth proponents
to teach students that the Earth and the universe beyond it is just a few
thousand years old?" asked Courtland, adding, "Some teachers could
conceivably see it as an opening. According to a 2008 study ["Evolution
and Creationism in America's Classrooms: A National Portrait" from PLoS
Biology 2008; 6 (5)], 16% of US science teachers believe humans were
created by God in the last 10,000 years."
Texas groups defending the integrity of science education were dismayed at
the result. Kathy Miller, the president of the Texas Freedom Network,
Kathy Miller, said in a March 27, 2009, statement, "The word 'weaknesses'
no longer appears in the science standards. But the document still has
plenty of potential footholds for creationist attacks on evolution to make
their way into Texas classrooms. Through a series of contradictory and
convoluted amendments, the board crafted a road map that creationists will
use to pressure publishers into putting phony arguments attacking
established science into textbooks." There is a historical precedent in
the textbook adoption process from 2003, when creationists selectively
applied the "strengths and weaknesses" language to try to dilute the
treatment of evolution in the textbooks under consideration.
On his blog for the Houston Chronicle (March 27, 2009), Steven Schafersman
of Texas Citizens for Science optimistically commented, "I think we can
work around the few flawed standards," but lamented, "But the point is that
there shouldn't be ANY flawed standards. The science standards as submitted
by the science writing teams were excellent and flaw-free. All the flaws
were added by politically unscrupulous SBOE members with an extreme
right-wing religious agenda to support Creationism." Having attended (and
blogged from) all three days of the meeting and observed the confusion and
contention among the members of the board, he ruefully added, "this is not
the way to develop educational policy in one of the most wealthy and
powerful states in the most wealthy and powerful country in the world in
the 21st century."
Even The New York Times (March 30, 2009) took notice of the plight of
science education in Texas, editorially commenting, "This was not a
straightforward battle over whether to include creationism or its close
cousin, intelligent design, in the science curriculum. Rather, this was a
struggle to insert into the state science standards various phrases and
code words that may seem innocuous or meaningless at first glance but could
open the door to doubts about evolution. ... At the end of a tense,
confusing three-day meeting, Darwin's critics claimed that this and other
compromise language amounted to a huge victory that would still allow their
critiques into textbooks and classrooms. One can only hope that teachers
in Texas will use common sense and teach evolution as scientists understand
it."
The Austin American-Statesman (April 1, 2009) editorially complained,
"Chairman Don McLeroy, Dunbar and others have turned the education board
into a national joke. But when it comes to teaching Texas children, what
they have done is not funny. Last week's discussion about shaping the
teaching of science to allow doubts about evolution was surreal. Biology
texts now must include 'all sides' of scientific theories ... The
underlying point is that a board majority wants creationism to be part of
the scientific discussion. And they got enough of a foot in the door with
their language about teaching 'all sides' of scientific theories that
publishers will have to include criticism of evolution if they want to sell
science textbooks to Texas schools."
Detailed, candid, and often uninhibited running commentary on the
proceedings is available on a number of blogs: Texas Citizens for
Science's Steven Schafersman was blogging and posting photographs on the
Houston Chronicle's Evo.Sphere blog, the Texas Freedom Network was blogging
on its TFN Insider blog, and NCSE's Joshua Rosenau was blogging on his
personal blog, Thoughts from Kansas (hosted by ScienceBlogs). For those
wanting to get their information from the horse's mouth, minutes and audio
recordings of the board meeting will be available on the Texas Education
Agency's website as well as on Tony Whitson's Curricublog. NCSE's previous
reports on events in Texas are available on-line, and of course NCSE will
continue to monitor the situation as well as to assist those defending the
teaching of evolution in the Lone Star State.
For the story in the Dallas Morning News, visit: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-evolution_28tex.ART.State.Edition1.4a87415.html
For the story in the Wall Street Journal, visit: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123819751472561761.html
For the story in the Austin American-Statesman, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/03/28/0328sboe.html
For NCSE's press release, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2009/03/science-setback-texas-schools-004708
For NCSE's story about the societies supporting the standards, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2009/03/texas-needs-to-get-it-right-004695
For NCSE's YouTube channel, visit: http://www.youtube.com/user/NatCen4ScienceEd
For Gordy Slack's column in Salon, visit: http://www.salon.com/env/feature/2009/03/28/texas_evolution_case/
For the New Scientist blog post, visit: http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2009/03/universes-age-erased-from-texa.html
For "Evolution and Creationism in America's Classrooms: A National
Portrait," visit: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060124
For TFN's statement, visit: http://www.tfn.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5745
For Steven Schafersman's comments, visit: http://www.chron.com/commons/readerblogs/evosphere.html
For the editorial in The New York Times, visit: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/31/opinion/31tue3.html
For the editorial in the Austin American-Statesman, visit: http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/04/01/0401sboe_edit.html
For the blog coverage of the hearings, visit:
http://www.chron.com/commons/readerblogs/evosphere.html
http://tfnblog.wordpress.com/
http://www.scienceblogs.com/tfk/
For the minutes and records from the TEA, visit:
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/minutes_archived.html
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/audio_archived.html
http://curricublog.wordpress.com/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas
COMER CASE DISMISSED
In a March 31, 2009, decision, Chris Comer's lawsuit against the Texas
Education Agency, challenging the agency's policy of requiring neutrality
about evolution and creationism, was dismissed. The Austin
American-Statesman (April 1, 2009) reported, "The state's attorneys argued
in court filings that the agency is allowed to bar its employees from
giving the appearance that the agency is taking positions on issues that
the State Board of Education must decide, such as the content of the
science curriculum." The newspaper quoted Texas Education Commissioner
Robert Scott as saying, "We are sorry that this situation resulted in a
lawsuit but we were confident we would prevail," and John Oberdorfer, one
of Comer's lawyers, as saying of the dismissal, "We'll look at it and
decide what we'll do next."
Comer, the former director of science at the Texas Education Agency, was
forced to resign in November 2007 after she forwarded a note announcing a
talk by Barbara Forrest in Austin. As NCSE's Glenn Branch -- who sent the
offending e-mail -- explained in a post at the Beacon Broadside blog
(December 19, 2007), "Less than two hours after sending the e-mail, she was
called on the carpet and instructed to send a disclaimer. And then she was
forced to resign. Although a memorandum recommending her dismissal
referred to various instances of alleged 'misconduct and insubordination'
on her part, it was clear what her real offense was: 'the TEA requires, as
agency policy, neutrality when talking about evolution and
creationism.'" The TEA was widely criticized in editorials and by
scientific and educational societies.
In June 2008, Comer filed suit in federal court in the Western District of
Texas, arguing, "the Agency's firing of its Director of Science for not
remaining 'neutral' on the subject violates the Establishment Clause,
because it employs the symbolic and financial support of the State of Texas
to achieve a religious purpose, and so has the purpose or effect of
endorsing religion. By professing 'neutrality,' the Agency credits
creationism as a valid scientific theory. Finally, the Agency fired
Director Comer without according her due process as required by the 14th
Amendment -- a protection especially important here because Director Comer
was fired for contravening an unconstitutional policy." The judge ruled,
however, that the TEA's neutrality policy is not a violation of the
Establishment Clause. (Additional legal documentation for this case is
archived on NCSE's website.)
Although Comer's lawsuit was dismissed, her plight (discussed in a brief
video commissioned by NCSE) is still a disquieting indication of the
condition of science education in Texas. Shortly after her forced
resignation was in the headlines, the Houston Chronicle (December 4, 2007)
editorially commented, "With a State Board of Education review of the
science portion of the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills scheduled early
next year, Comer's ouster could portend a renewed effort to establish
creationism and intelligent design as science class fare." In light of the
recent adoption of a set of state science standards that encourages the
presentation of creationist arguments, the TEA's "neutrality when talking
about evolution and creationism" is likely to be under scrutiny again.
For the story in the Austin American-Statesman, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/04/01/0401comer.html
For Glenn Branch's post on Beacon Broadside, visit: http://www.beaconbroadside.com/broadside/2007/12/muzzling-dissen.html
For a sampling of the criticism leveled at the TEA, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2007/12/latest-comer-controversy-001154
For Comer's lawsuit (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/webfm_send/750
For the dismissal of the case (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/webfm_send/798
For NCSE's archives of documents in Comer v. Scott, visit: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/chris-comer-docs
For the video about Comer's plight, visit: http://ncseweb.org/multimedia/chris-comer-expelled-real
For the Houston Chronicle's editorial, visit: http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2007_4472569
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas
CRITICISM FOR FLORIDA'S ANTIEVOLUTION BILL
Florida's Senate Bill 2396, which would, if enacted, amend a section of
Florida law to require "[a] thorough presentation and critical analysis of
the scientific theory of evolution," was in the headlines after the Florida
Academy of Sciences denounced it. In its March 20, 2009, statement, the
academy described SB 2396 as "a deliberate attempt to undermine the adopted
science standards," adding, "SB 2396, in effect, leaves the door open for
the introduction in the public school curriculum of nonscientific and
covertly religious doctrines. The proposed bill would be damaging to the
quality of science education of Florida's children and the scientific
literacy of our citizens. It would further undermine the reputation of our
state and adversely affect our economic future as we try to attract new
high-tech and biomedical jobs to Florida."
David Karlen, a Tampa biologist and a member of the Florida Academy of
Sciences, told the Tampa Tribune (March 28, 2009), "'Critical analysis' is
the latest buzzword in the creationist movement to sneak intelligent design
or creationism into the curriculum," and noted that it is typically only
evolution for which "critical analysis" is applied. Observing that the
bill has yet to receive a hearing in committee -- the bill was referred to
the Education Pre-K-12 and the Education Pre-K-12 Appropriations committees
in the Senate -- or a counterpart in the Florida House of Representatives,
the Tribune reported that the bill "apparently is going nowhere this year,"
especially because the legislature is presently busy with budgetary
issues. May 1, 2009, is the last day of the current legislative session.
For the academy's statement (PDF), visit: http://www.flascience.org/fas_statement.pdf
For the story in the Tampa Tribune, visit: http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/mar/28/na-anti-evolution-bill-still-a-fruitless-exercise/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Florida, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/florida
VISIT THE GRAND CANYON WITH SCOTT AND GISH!
A few seats remain aboard NCSE's next excursion to the Grand Canyon -- as
featured in The New York Times (October 6, 2005). From July 3 to 10, 2009,
NCSE will again explore the wonders of creation and evolution on a Grand
Canyon river run conducted by NCSE's Genie Scott and Alan ("Gish")
Gishlick. Call or write now: seats are limited. Because this is an NCSE
trip, we offer more than just the typically grand float down the Canyon,
the spectacular scenery, fascinating natural history, brilliant night
skies, exciting rapids, delicious meals, and good company. It is, in fact,
a unique "two-model" raft trip, on which we provide both the creationist
view of the Grand Canyon and the evolutionist view -- and let you make up
your own mind. The cost is $2480; a deposit of $500 will hold your spot.
For information on the excursion, visit: http://ncseweb.org/about/excursions/gcfaq
For NCSE's story about the article in The New York Times, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2005/10/seeing-creation-evolution-grand-canyon-00771
Evolution education update: March 27, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Plenty of news in Texas, as the state board of education prepares to conduct its final vote on the state science standards. New Mexico's antievolution bill is dead. And NCSE Supporter Stephen G. Brush is to receive the 2009 Abraham Pais Prize for the History of Physics.
"STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES" NIXED IN TEXAS AGAIN
The Texas state board of education again narrowly voted against a proposal to restore the controversial "strengths and weaknesses" language to the set of state science standards now under review. As the Dallas Morning News (March 26, 2009) reported, "Board members deadlocked 7-7 on a motion to restore a long-time curriculum rule that 'strengths and weaknesses' of all scientific theories -- notably Charles Darwin's theory of evolution -- be taught in science classes and covered in textbooks for those subjects. Voting for the requirement were the seven Republican board members aligned with social conservative groups. Against the proposal were three other Republicans and four Democrats." A final vote is expected on March 27, 2009, but the outcome is not likely to change . It remains to be seen whether the board will vote to rescind the flawed amendments undermining the teaching of evolution proposed at the board's January 2009 meeting.
The debate is attracting national attention, with the Wall Street Journal (March 23, 2009) quoting NCSE's Steven Newton as saying, "This is the most specific assault I've seen against evolution and modern science," and the Washington Post (March 24, 2009) editorially urging, "The Texas State Board of Education must hold firm to its decision to strip the 'strengths and weaknesses' language from the state's science standard. Texans, like everyone else, are free to believe what they want, but in science class, they should teach science." Closer to home, the Dallas Morning News (March 25, 2009) editorially commented, "Doubting evolution shouldn't be Texas' legacy. More importantly, our students should not be subject to an erroneous line of teaching," and reminded its readers that because Texas is such a huge market for textbooks, "what happens in Texas doesn't stay here."
Writing in the Guardian (March 26, 2009), Jerry Coyne echoed the sentiment: "What happens in Texas doesn't stay in Texas. That state is a sizeable consumer of public school textbooks, and it's likely that if it waters down its science standards, textbook publishers all over the country will follow suit. This makes every American school hostage to the caprices of a few benighted Texas legislators." (House Bill 4224, introduced in the Texas House of Representatives on March 13, 2009, would, if enacted, require the Texas state board of education to restore the "strengths and weaknesses" language in the Texas state science standards.) A professor of the Department of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago, Coyne is the author of Why Evolution is True (Viking, 2009), which NCSE's Eugenie C. Scott recently praised in Nature as "a good choice to give to the neighbour or teacher who wants to know more about evolutionary biology."
NCSE's Joshua Rosenau and Eugenie C. Scott are in Austin for the meeting; both testified on March 25, 2009. Detailed, candid, and often uninhibited running commentary on the proceedings is available on a number of blogs: Texas Citizens for Science's Steven Schafersman is blogging and posting photographs on the Houston Chronicle's Evo.Sphere blog, the Texas Freedom Network is blogging on its TFN Insider blog, and NCSE's Joshua Rosenau is blogging on his personal blog, Thoughts from Kansas (hosted by ScienceBlogs). For those wanting to get their information from the horse's mouth, minutes and audio recordings of the board meeting will be available on the Texas Education Agency's website. NCSE's previous reports on events in Texas are available on-line, and of course NCSE will continue to monitor the situation as well as to assist those defending the teaching of evolution in the Lone Star State.
For the story in the Dallas Morning News, visit: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/032609dntexevolution.72be216f.html
For the story in the Wall Street Journal, visit: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123777413372910705.html
For the editorial in the Washington Post, visit: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/24/AR2009032403356.html
For the editorial in the Dallas Morning News, visit: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-science_0326edi.State.Edition1.212982b.html
For Jerry Coyne's op-ed in the Guardian, visit: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/mar/26/evolution-science-texas-school-board
To purchase Why Evolution is True from Amazon.com (and benefit NCSE in the process), visit: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/0670020532/nationalcenter02/
For Eugenie C. Scott's review in Nature (subscription required), visit: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v458/n7234/full/458034a.html
For the blog coverage of the hearings, visit:
http://www.chron.com/commons/readerblogs/evosphere.html
http://tfnblog.wordpress.com/
http://www.scienceblogs.com/tfk/
For the minutes and records from the TEA, visit:
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/minutes_archived.html
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/audio_archived.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas
TEXAS NEEDS TO GET IT RIGHT
As the Texas state board of education prepares for its final vote on a new set of state science standards, no fewer than fifty-four scientific and educational societies are calling for the approval of the standards as originally submitted -- without misleading language about "strengths and weaknesses" and without the flawed amendments undermining the teaching of evolution proposed at the board's January 2009 meeting. In their statement, organized by the National Center for Science Education, the societies write, "Evolution is the foundation of modern biology, and is also crucial in fields as diverse as agriculture, computer science, engineering, geology, and medicine. We oppose any efforts to undermine the teaching of biological evolution and related topics in the earth and space sciences, whether by misrepresenting those subjects, or by inaccurately and misleadingly describing them as controversial and in need of special scrutiny." (The full statement is reproduced below.)
Independently, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Association of Geoscience Teachers, the Paleontological Society, the National Association of Biology Teachers, and the Texas Association of Biology Teachers have issued their own statements, collected by Texas Citizens for Science, with advice for the Texas state board of education as it considers its final vote on the standards. And the AAAS's president Peter Agre (a Nobel laureate) and chief executive officer Alan I. Leshner contributed a commentary to the San Antonio Express-News (March 23, 2009), concluding, "Leveraging science and technology to create new jobs will require properly educating all potential innovators. It's time for the Texas State Board of Education to reject misleading amendments to science education standards, once and for all. As Texas science education standards go, so goes the nation. Texas needs to get it right."
***
A Message to the Texas State Board of Education
The undersigned scientific and educational societies call on the Texas State Board of Education to support accurate science education for all students by adopting the science standards (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills or TEKS) as recommended to you by the scientists and educators on your writing committees.
Evolution is the foundation of modern biology, and is also crucial in fields as diverse as agriculture, computer science, engineering, geology, and medicine. We oppose any efforts to undermine the teaching of biological evolution and related topics in the earth and space sciences, whether by misrepresenting those subjects, or by inaccurately and misleadingly describing them as controversial and in need of special scrutiny.
At its January 2009 meeting, the Texas Board of Education rightly rejected attempts to add language to the TEKS about "strengths and weaknesses" -- used in past efforts to undermine the teaching of evolution in Texas. We urge the Board to stand firm in rejecting any such attempts to compromise the teaching of evolution.
At its January 2009 meeting, the Board also adopted a series of amendments to the TEKS that misrepresent biological evolution and related topics in the earth and space sciences. We urge the Board to heed the advice of the scientific community and the experienced scientists and educators who drafted the TEKS: reject these and any other amendments which single out evolution for scrutiny beyond that applied to other scientific theories.
By adopting the TEKS crafted by your expert writing committees, the Board will serve the best educational interests of students in Texas's public schools.
American Anthropological Association
American Association of Physical Anthropologists
American Association of Physicists in Medicine
American Association of Physics Teachers
American Astronomical Society
American Geological Institute
American Institute for Biological Sciences
American Institute of Physics
American Physiological Society
American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
American Society for Cell Biology
American Society for Investigative Pathology
American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
American Society of Human Genetics
American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists
American Society of Naturalists
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Society of Plant Taxonomists
Association for Women Geoscientists
Association of American Geographers
Association of Anatomy, Cell Biology, and Neurobiology Chairs
Association of College & University Biology Educators
Association of Earth Science Editors
Association of Environmental & Engineering Geologists
Biological Sciences Curriculum Study
Biotechnology Institute
Botanical Society of America
Clay Minerals Society
Council on Undergraduate Research
Ecological Society of America
Federation for American Societies for Experimental Biology
Federation of American Scientists
Human Biology Association
Institute of Human Origins
National Association of Biology Teachers
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
National Earth Science Teachers Association
National Science Teachers Association
Natural Science Collection Alliance
Paleontological Society
Scientists and Engineers for America
Society for American Archaeology
Society for Developmental Biology
Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology
Society for Sedimentary Geology
Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles
Society for the Study of Evolution
Society of Economic Geologists
Society of Systematic Biologists
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
Southwestern Association of Naturalists
The Biophysical Society
The Helminthological Society of Washington
The Herpetologists' League
For the statement (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/webfm_send/797
For Texas Citizens for Science's collection of statements, visit: http://www.texscience.org/
For Agre and Leshner's op-ed in the San Antonio Express-News, visit: http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/Texas_case_threatens_education_and_competitiveness_nationally.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas
ANTIEVOLUTION BILL DEAD IN NEW MEXICO
New Mexico's Senate Bill 433 died in committee when the legislature adjourned sine die on March 21, 2009. The bill, if enacted, would have required 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 discrimination." SB 433 joins Iowa's House File 183 and Oklahoma's Senate Bill 320 as proposed "academic freedom" antievolution bills that failed in 2009; Alabama's House Bill 300 and Missouri's House Bill 656 are still active.
The bill mentioned only "biological evolution or chemical evolution," but its sponsor, Kent Cravens (R-District 27), described it as having wider applicability, telling the Santa Fe New Mexican (March 3, 2009), that it "just asks that if there's a controversial scientific theory being presented, that a teacher can't be reprimanded or fired or downgraded or any way harmed if the teacher happens to mention that there are other theories of controversial scientific nature, to include biological evolution, human cloning, global warming, you name a dozen different things." In a post at The Panda's Thumb blog (March 21, 2009), Dave Thomas suggested that Cravens may have intended to revise his bill accordingly.
Analyses of the bill performed by various state agencies were not enthusiastic. According to the Legislative Education Study Committee's summary analysis, the Public Education Department was worried that the bill would allow the teaching of creationism, thereby inviting litigation; the Higher Education Department observed that the New Mexico state science standards already require students to understand the evidential basis for evolution; and the Office of Education Accountability questioned the bill's premises "that the theory of evolution lacks scientific validity ... and that teachers and students need protection when addressing 'relevant scientific strengths or scientific weakness pertaining to biological evolution or chemical evolution.'"
For New Mexico's SB 433 as introduced, visit: http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/09%20Regular/bills/senate/SB0433.html
For the article in the Santa Fe New Mexican, visit: http://www.santafenewmexican.com/Bill-protects--controversial-science--teaching
For Dave Thomas's post at The Panda's Thumb, visit: http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2009/03/another-discove.html
For the LESC's analysis (PDF), visit: http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/09%20Regular/LESCAnalysis/SB0433.pdf
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in New Mexico, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/new-mexico
BRUSH AWARDED THE 2009 PAIS PRIZE
NCSE Supporter Stephen G. Brush was selected by the American Physical Society and the American Institute of Physics to receive the 2009 Abraham Pais Prize for the History of Physics "for his pioneering, in-depth studies in the history of nineteenth and twentieth-century physics," according to a story in the spring 2009 History of Physics Newsletter. Beginning his career as a physicist, Brush turned to the history of physics, publishing a number of historical monographs, including The Kind of Motion We Call Heat: A History of the Kinetic Theory of Gases in the 19th Century (North-Holland, 1976), which won the History of Science Society's Pfizer Award. He also coauthored the popular textbook Physics, the Human Adventure: From Copernicus to Einstein and Beyond (Rutgers University Press, 2001) with Gerald Holton. On retiring from the University of Maryland in 2006, he was named Distinguished University Professor Emeritus of the History of Science. Among his writings relevant to the creationism/evolution controversy are "Creationism versus physical science" and two refutations of creationist misuse of the history of science -- "Kelvin was not a creationist" and "Popper and evolution" -- for NCSE's journals. He is also Steve #71 in NCSE's Project Steve (now with over 1075 Steves).
For the story in the History of Physics Newsletter, visit: http://www.aps.org/units/fhp/newsletters/spring2009/pais.cfm
For the cited articles by Brush, visit:
http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200011/back-page.cfm
http://ncseweb.org/cej/3/2/kelvin-was-not-creationist
http://ncseweb.org/ncser/13/4/popper-evolution
>
> For information about Project Steve, visit:
> http://ncseweb.org/taking-action/project-steve
Evolution education update: March 13, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Texas is in the headlines again, with a new bill that appears to be
intended to exempt the Institute for Creation Research's graduate school
from state regulation as well as a profile of Don McLeroy, the avowed
creationist who chairs the state board of education, in the Austin
American-Statesman. Meanwhile, a legislator in Oklahoma, outraged by the
prospect of Richard Dawkins visiting the University of Oklahoma, introduced
two antievolution resolutions -- and Dawkins responded.
LEGISLATIVE SALVATION FOR THE ICR?
House Bill 2800, introduced in the Texas House of Representatives on March
9, 2009, would, if enacted, in effect exempt institutions such as the
Institute for Creation Research's graduate school from Texas's regulations
governing degree-granting institutions. The bill's sole sponsor is Leo
Berman (R-District 6), a member of the House Higher Education Committee. A
member of NCSE called Berman's office to ask whether the bill would apply
to the ICR's graduate school; a staffer answered that he thought that it
would, adding that he believed that the bill's objective was to aid
institutions that want to teach creation science or intelligent
design. Berman himself seems not to have offered any public statement
about HB 2800 so far.
As NCSE's Glenn Branch recounted in Reports of the NCSE, "When the
Institute for Creation Research moved its headquarters from Santee,
California, to Dallas, Texas, in June 2007, it expected to be able to
continue offering a master's degree in science education from its graduate
school. ... But the state's scientific and educational leaders voiced their
opposition, and at its April 24, 2008, meeting, the Texas Higher Education
Coordination Board unanimously voted to deny the ICR's request for a state
certificate of authority to offer the degree." Following the Texas Higher
Education Coordination Board's decision, the ICR appealed the decision,
while also taking its case to the court of public opinion with a series of
press releases and advertisements in Texas newspapers.
Now, however, it seems that HB 2800 would take the matter out of the
board's hands altogether. Subchapter G of Chapter 61 of Texas's Education
Code serves to regulate "the use of academic terminology in naming or
otherwise designating educational institutions, the advertising,
solicitation or representation by educational institutions or their agents,
and the maintenance and preservation of essential academic records"; it
provides, inter alia, "A person may not grant or award a degree or offer to
grant or award a degree on behalf of a private postsecondary educational
institution unless the institution has been issued a certificate of
authority to grant the degree by the board [that is, the Texas Higher
Education Coordination Board] in accordance with the provisions of this
subchapter."
HB 2800 would amend subchapter G by providing, "The provisions of this
subchapter do not apply to a private educational institution, including a
separate degree-granting program, unit, or school operated by the
institution, that: (1) does not accept state funding of any kind to support
its educational programs; (2) does not accept state-administered federal
funding to support its educational programs; (3) was formed as or is
affiliated with or controlled by a nonprofit corporation or nonprofit
unincorporated organization; and (4) offers bona fide degree programs that
require students to complete substantive course work in order to receive a
degree from the institution." Presumably the ICR would argue that its
graduate school satisfies all four requirements.
For Texas's HB 2800 as introduced (PDF), visit: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/pdf/HB02800I.pdf
For the story in Reports of the NCSE, visit: http://ncseweb.org/rncse/28/2/setback-icr-texas
For chapter 61 of Texas's Education Code, visit: http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/ED/content/htm/ed.003.00.000061.00.htm
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas
CREATIONIST BOARD CHAIR PROFILED
As the final vote on the proposed revision of the Texas state science
standards approaches, the Austin American-Statesman (March 8, 2009) offers
a profile of the chair of the Texas state board of education, avowed
creationist Don McLeroy. Describing his conversion to fundamentalism as a
dental student, the profile explained, "He is now a young earth
creationist, meaning that he believes God created Earth between 6,000 and
10,000 years ago," quoting him as saying, "When I became a Christian, it
was whole-hearted ... I was totally convinced the biblical principles were
right, and I was totally convinced that it could be accurate
scientifically." Particularly important to McLeroy is the biblical tenet
that humans were created in the image of God -- although Sid Hall, a
Methodist pastor in Austin, told the newspaper, "I would never want to
discount those works, but to take [the passage that humans were made in the
image of God] to mean something about how the universe is created is a
stretch to me ... That's code to me for 'I'm going to take my particular
myth of creationism and make it part of the science curriculum.' That's
scary to me."
At the board's January 21-23, 2009, meeting, McLeroy successfully proposed
a revision to section 7 of the draft of the high school biology standards
to require that students "analyze and evaluate the sufficiency or
insufficiency of common ancestry to explain the sudden appearance, stasis
and sequential nature of groups in the fossil record." As NCSE explains in
its call to Texas scientists, the requirement is not only unworkable and
confusing, but also evidently intended to promote the idea that living
things were specially created in their current forms. Moreover, a detailed
analysis by the Stand Up for Real Science blog strongly suggests that the
documentation that McLeroy provided in support of his revision at the
January meeting was in fact taken wholesale from creationist
sources. Undaunted, McLeroy told the American-Statesman that at the
board's March 25-27, 2009, meeting, he plans to "pitch another idea that he
says should be taught in public schools: the insufficiency of natural
selection to explain the complexity of cells" -- apparently a reference to
the "intelligent design" notion of "irreducible complexity" due to Michael
Behe.
David Hillis of the University of Texas, Austin, told the newspaper,
"McLeroy's amendments are not even intelligible. I wonder if perhaps he
wants the standards to be confusing so that he can open the door to
attacking mainstream biology textbooks and arguing for the addition of
creationist and other religious literature into the science classroom." He
added, "If Chairman McLeroy is successful in adding his amendments, it will
be a huge embarrassment to Texas, a setback for science education and a
terrible precedent for the state boards overriding academic experts in
order to further their personal religious or political agendas. The
victims will be the schoolchildren of Texas, who represent the future of
our state." Hillis is also a member of the Advisory Committee of the 21st
Century Science Coalition, which has recruited over 1400 Texas scientists
to endorse its call for the Texas state board of education to adopt state
science standards that "acknowledge that instruction on evolution is vital
to understanding all the biological sciences" and omit "all references to
'strengths and weaknesses,' which politicians have used to introduce
supernatural explanations into science courses."
Preparing for the March 25-27 board meeting at which the final vote on the
standards is expected, McLeroy is arming himself with "a large binder that
is adorned on the front with a picture of Albert Einstein" and contains
"numerous passages from books -- such as [Kenneth R.] Miller's and others
on evolutionary theory -- and articles that he plans to use as ammunition
in the fight this month over what should be in the state's science
standards." One page from his binder, the American-Statesman reports,
shows a diagram of the fossil record from a book by Miller, with McLeroy's
gloss, "What do we see?" 'Sudden appearance' of species." Miller -- a
professor of biology at Brown University and a Supporter of NCSE, who
recently received the Award for Public Understanding of Science and
Technology by the American Association for the Advancement of Science in
recognition of "his sustained efforts and excellence in communicating
evolutionary science" -- told the newspaper, "That diagram shows
evolution. If he thinks it says evolution does not occur, he is dead
wrong. It's really quite the opposite."
For the profile of McLeroy, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/03/08/0308mcleroy.html
For NCSE's call to Texas scientists, visit: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/analysis/analysis-proposed-texas-educational-knowledge-skills-teks-am
For the Stand Up for Real Science blog's analysis, visit: http://www.anevolvingcreation.net/collapse/index.htm
For the 21st Century Science Coalition, visit: http://www.texasscientists.org/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas
ANTIEVOLUTION RESOLUTIONS INTRODUCED IN OKLAHOMA
Two bills in the Oklahoma House of Representatives -- House Resolution 1014
and House Resolution 1015, introduced on March 3, 2009 - attack Richard
Dawkins's visit to the University of Oklahoma. The sole sponsor of both
bills is Todd Thomsen (R-District 25), a member of the House Education
Committee and the chair of the House Higher Education and Career Tech
Committee. Both measures, if adopted, would express the strong opposition
of the Oklahoma House of Representatives to "the invitation to speak on the
campus of the University of Oklahoma to Richard Dawkins of Oxford
University, whose published statements on the theory of evolution and
opinion about those who do not believe in the theory are contrary and
offensive to the views and opinions of most citizens of Oklahoma." Dawkins
spoke at the University of Oklahoma on March 6, 2009, as part of the
university's celebrations of the Darwin anniversaries.
While HR 1015 ends with a plea for civility -- "the Oklahoma House of
Representatives encourages the University of Oklahoma to engage in an open,
dignified, and fair discussion of the Darwinian theory of evolution and all
other scientific theories which is the approach that a public institution
should be engaged in and which represents the desire and interest of the
citizens of Oklahoma" -- HR 1014 attacks the University of Oklahoma's
Department of Zoology for "framing the Darwinian theory of evolution as
doctrinal dogmatism rather than a hypothetical construction within the
disciplines of the sciences" and engaging in "one-sided indoctrination of
an unproven and unpopular theory" while branding "all thinking in dissent
of this theory as anti-intellectual and backward rather than nurturing such
free thinking and allowing a free discussion of all ideas which is the
primary purpose of a university."
At the beginning of his talk, which was repeatedly interrupted by cheers
and applause, Dawkins opened by saying, "I don't want to blow my own
trumpet, but it isn't everybody who's the subject of legislation
..." Quoting HR 1014's complaint of his alleged "intolerance for cultural
diversity and diversity of thinking," he presented the stork theory of
human reproduction -- illustrated with a parody of the creationist
propaganda film Expelled -- as a view comparable to creationism. "They've
lost in the courts of law; they've long ago lost in the halls of science;
and they continue to lose with every new piece of evidence in support of
evolution. Taking offense is all they've got left. And the one thing you
can be sure of is that they don't actually know anything about what it is
that they reject," he added. He also announced that the Richard Dawkins
Foundation for Reason and Science would be donating $5000 to Oklahomans
for Excellence in Science Education, which fights against attempts to
undermine evolution education in Oklahoma.
For the text of Oklahoma's HR 1014 and 1015 as introduced (documents),
visit:
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2009-10HB/HR1014_int.rtf
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2009-10HB/HR1015_int.rtf
For information about the University of Oklahoma's celebrations, visit: http://www.ou.edu/darwin/Site/Home.html
For videos of the beginning of Dawkins's talk, visit: http://richarddawkins.net/article,3646,Richard-Dawkins-at-the-University-of-Oklahoma---Introduction,Richard-Dawkins
For information about the Dawkins Foundation, visit: http://richarddawkinsfoundation.org/
For Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education, visit: http://www.oklascience.org/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Oklahoma, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/oklahoma
Evolution education update: February 27, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
The thousandth signatory to NCSE's Project Steve arrived -- just in time for the Darwin anniversary celebrations! Plus NCSE is making a sample chapter from the second edition of Eugenie C. Scott's acclaimed Evolution vs. Creationism available. And a journal is calling for papers for a special issue on the teaching of evolution in a university setting.
PROJECT STEVE: N > 1000
With the addition of Steve #1000 on September 5, 2008, NCSE's Project Steve attained the kilosteve mark. A tongue-in-cheek parody of the long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of "scientists who doubt evolution" or "scientists who dissent from Darwinism," Project Steve mocks such lists by restricting its signatories to scientists whose first name is Steve. (Cognates are also accepted, such as Stephanie, Esteban, Istvan, Stefano, or even Tapani -- the Finnish equivalent.) About 1% of the United States population possesses such a first name, so each signatory represents about 100 potential signatories. ("Steve" was selected in honor of the late Stephen Jay Gould, a Supporter of NCSE and a dauntless defender of evolution education.)
Steve #1000 was announced at the Improbable Research press conference and crowned at the Improbable Research show, both held on February 13, 2008, as part of the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott and Steve Mirsky, long-time writer, columnist, and podcaster for Scientific American presented a commemorative plaque to -- of all people -- Steven P. Darwin, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology and director of the herbarium at Tulane University. In a February 14, 2009, press release, Darwin
commented, "This is the first time that being a Darwin - or a Steve - has paid off!" Videos of the press conference and the award ceremony, and a Scientific American podcast, are available on-line.
The fact that Steve #1000 hails from Louisiana is particularly ironic,
since the state recently enacted a law that threatens to open the door for creationism and scientifically unwarranted critiques of evolution to be taught in public school science classes. When a policy implementing the law was drafted, a provision that prohibited the use of materials that teach creationism in the public schools was deleted. Recently, the Society of Integrative and Comparative Biology announced that, due to the antievolution law, it would not hold its 2011 conference in New Orleans; a spokesperson for the New Orleans Metropolitan Convention and Visitors Bureau told the weekly New Orleans City Business (February 23, 2009) that the city would lose about $2.7 million as a result of SICB's decision.
Although the idea of Project Steve is frivolous, the statement is
serious. It reads, "Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying
principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is
overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically
irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to
'intelligent design,' to be introduced into the science curricula of our
nation's public schools."
Highlights from the history of Project Steve include the original press release, Glenn Branch and Skip Evans's description of the project for Geotimes, the announcement that Steven W. Hawking was Steve #300, the announcement (on St. Stephen's Day!) of Steve #400, and the announcements of Steves #600, #700, #800, and #900. And, of course, Project Steve proved to be scientifically fruitful in its own right. "The Morphology of Steve," by Eugenie C. Scott, Glenn Branch, Nick Matzke, and several hundred Steves, appeared in the prestigious Annals of Improbable Research; the paper provided "the first scientific analysis of the sex, geographic location, and body size of scientists named Steve."
Currently, there are 1046 signatories to Project Steve, including 100% of eligible Nobel laureates (Steven Weinberg and Steven Chu), 100% of eligible members of President Obama's Cabinet (Steven Chu, the Secretary of Energy), at least ten members of the National Academy of Sciences, the authors of widely used textbooks such as Molecular Biology of the Gene, Psychology: An Evolutionary Approach, and Introduction to Organic Geochemistry, and the authors of popular science books such as A Brief History of Time, Why We Age, and Darwin's Ghost. When last surveyed in February 2006, 54% of the signatories work in the biological sciences proper; 61% work in related fields in the life sciences.
Additionally, Project Steve appeared in Steven Pinker's recent book, The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature (Viking, 2007). Pinker, himself a single-digit Steve, described it as "the most formidable weapon in the fight against neo-creationism today," adding, "Part satire, part memorial to Stephen Jay Gould, the project maintains a Steve-O-Meter (now pointing past 800) and has spun off a T-shirt, a song, a mascot (Professor Steve Steve, a panda puppet), and a paper in the respected scientific journal Annals of Improbable Research called 'The Morphology of Steve' (based on the T-shirt sizes ordered by the signatories)."
For the 2009 press release, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2009/02/steve-darwin-is-steve-1000-004308
For the videos and podcast, visit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXEGfi9t7yU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgZTrdZL2Go
http://www.sciam.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=count-on-steves-to-defend-darwin-09-02-20
For NCSE's previous coverage of events in Louisiana, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/louisiana
For the story in New Orleans City Business, visit: http://www.neworleanscitybusiness.com/viewStory.cfm?recID=32768
For the 2003 press release, visit: http://ncseweb.org/taking-action/project-steve-press-release
For Branch and Evans's report in Geotimes, visit: http://www.geotimes.org/may03/column.html
And for "The Morphology of Steve" (PDF), visit: http://improbable.com/pages/airchives/paperair/volume10/v10i4/morph-steve-10-4.pdf
NEW BOOK, FREE CHAPTER
NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott's book Evolution vs. Creationism is now available in a second edition, updated to include the seminal case Kitzmiller v. Dover -- in which a federal court found that it was unconstitutional to teach "intelligent design" creationism in the public
schools -- as well as a new chapter on public opinion and media coverage and a new foreword by Judge John E. Jones III, who presided over the Kitzmiller trial.
The first edition of the book was praised by reviewers in The New York Times Book Review, Science Education, Choice (which named it a 2005 Outstanding Academic Title), the Journal of the History of Biology, Science Books & Films, Perspectives in Science and Christian Faith, Theology and Science, the Toronto Globe & Mail, and even the Institute for Creation Research's Back to Genesis.
Want to see for yourself? Now's your chance. For a limited time, we've posted a sample chapter -- chapter 1, on "Science: Truth without
Certainty" from the book. It's yours to download, read, print out, and share with others. See for yourself why the reviewer for NSTA Recommends concluded, "Evolution vs. Creationism would be an excellent resource for any science teacher, especially those who teach biology or the nature of science."
For the sample chapter (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/files/pub/creationism/Evo%20vs.%20Creationism--2nd%20edition--Chapter%201.pdf
For further information about Evolution vs. Creationism, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/evc
CALL FOR PAPERS: TEACHING EVOLUTION IN THE CLASSROOM
The Journal of Effective Teaching, a peer-reviewed electronic journal devoted to the discussion of teaching excellence in colleges and
universities, is calling for papers for a special issue on the teaching of evolution in a university setting. Topics may include Darwinism in the
history and philosophy of science, politics, and religion; evolution and the nature of science; barriers in the understanding of evolution;
strategies for teaching controversial issues related to evolution and/or Darwinism; educational research in the teaching of evolution; challenging
preconceptions in the classroom, and engaging students who have strong religious views in scientific investigations as part of a liberal arts
degree. Articles will be accepted until May 1, 2009.
For the call for papers (PDF), visit: http://www.uncw.edu/cte/ET/documents%5CCallForPapersSpecial.pdf
For information about the Journal of Effective Teaching, visit: http://www.uncw.edu/cte/ET/
Evolution education update: January 2, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
The journal Nature provides a new resource summarizing fifteen lines of
evidence for evolution by natural selection. Meanwhile, Expelled makes a
brief and inglorious appearance in newspapers again, and the Geological
Society of Australia reaffirms its stance against creationism.
EVOLUTIONARY GEMS FROM NATURE
"15 Evolutionary Gems" is a new resource summarizing fifteen lines of
evidence for evolution by natural selection, provided by the journal
Nature. The editors explain, "About a year ago, an Editorial in these
pages urged scientists and their institutions to 'spread the word' and
highlight reasons why scientists can treat evolution by natural selection
as, in effect, an established fact ... This week we are following our own
prescription. In a year in which Darwin is being celebrated amid
uncertainty and hostility about his ideas among citizens, being aware of
the cumulatively incontrovertible evidence for those ideas is all the more
important. We trust that this document will help."
The fifteen evolutionary gems, as Nature describes them, are in three
categories: gems from the fossil record (land-living ancestors of whales,
from water to land, the origin of feathers, the evolutionary history of
teeth, and the origin of the vertebrate skeleton), gems from habitats
(natural selection in speciation, natural selection in lizards, a case of
co-evolution, differential dispersal in wild birds, selective survival in
wild guppies, and evolutionary history matters), and gems from molecular
processes (Darwin's Galapagos finches, microevolution meets macroevolution,
toxin resistance in snakes and clams, and variation versus
stability). References and links to relevant resources are provided.
For "15 Evolutionary Gems" (PDF), visit: http://www.nature.com/nature/newspdf/evolutiongems.pdf
For the editorial introduction, visit: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v457/n7225/full/457008b.html
GOOD NEWS AND BAD NEWS FOR EXPELLED
As 2008 drew to a close, the good news for the producers of Expelled: No
Intelligence Allowed was that their creationist propaganda movie was
getting a bit of press again. The bad news is that it was in the lists of
the worst movies of 2008. The Onion's A.V. Club (December 16, 2008), was
quickest out of the gate, commenting, "There are terrible movies, and then
there are terrible movies that cause harm to society by feeding into its
ignorance. Nathan Frankowski's odious anti-evolution documentary belongs
in the latter category. ... Few moments in cinema in 2008 were as shameless
and disgusting as the Expelled sequence where Stein solemnly visits a Nazi
death camp and unsubtly links 'survival of the fittest' theory to the
Holocaust."
John Serba of the Grand Rapids Press (December 26, 2008) wrote, "Ben Stein
hosts this pro-Intelligent Design documentary that forgets to include a
compelling argument for this viewpoint, and instead chooses to equate
Darwinism and its legions of rational scientist followers with Nazis and
the Holocaust. Facts rooted in reality are at a premium in this insidious,
crassly manipulative dreck." Roger Moore of the Orlando Sentinel (December
26, 2008) commented, "Ben Stein's documentary was a cynical attempt to
sucker Christian conservatives into thinking they're losing the
'intelligent design' debate because of academic 'prejudice.'" Stephen
Whitty of the Newark Star-Ledger (December 27, 2008) described Expelled as
lifting "its nonsensical knowledge of early man from an Alley Oop comic and
its sense of honest inquiry from a snake-handling preacher." In the LA
City Beat (December 30, 2008), Andy Klein wrote, "Stein's 'intelligent
design' documentary has all the red flags -- inadequate or misleading
identification of interviewees, aggressively manipulative editing,
extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence, and extreme leaps of
logic ... particularly suggesting guilt by association, even to the point
of laying blame for the Holocaust on Darwin." And Ken Hanke of the
Ashville, North Carolina, Mountain Xpress (December 31, 2008) said that
Expelled was "as corrupt a piece of work as you'll ever encounter."
Expelled fared no better north of the border. Jay Stone of the Canwest
News Service (December 26, 2008) described Expelled as "a masterwork of
intellectual dishonesty." And Richard Crouse of Canada AM (December 30,
2008) commented, "Wrapping his thesis in good old American jingoistic
rhetoric -- remember this guy used to write speeches for Nixon -- Stein
repeatedly compares Darwinist scientists to communists by the suggestion
that the only way they can get funding for research is to be good Darwinist
'comrades' and even makes the outrageous connection between Darwin's theory
and Nazism." Crouse added, "Perhaps it isn't just a coincidence that the
host's initials are B.S."
For the various lists and articles, visit:
http://www.avclub.com/content/feature/there_appears_to_be_an_event/2
http://www.mlive.com/entertainment/grpress/index.ssf?/base/entertainment-1/1230300922187990.xml&coll=6
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/orl-toptenmovies08dec26,0,5012155.story
http://www.nj.com/entertainment/tv/index.ssf/2008/12/worst_films_0f_2008_ten_films.html
http://www.lacitybeat.com/cms/story/detail/the_bottom_08/7903/
http://www.mountainx.com/movies/articles/123108cranky_hanke_and_justin_southers_best_and_worst_picks_for_2008
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081230/crouse_2008_list_081230
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/story.html?id=608915a7-383c-4afa-b97b-1036f1db2afb
For NCSE's Expelled Exposed website, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com/
AUSTRALIAN GEOLOGISTS STILL OPPOSE CREATIONISM
The Geological Society of Australia recently updated its policy statement
on science education and creationism. A previous version of the statement
(reprinted in the third edition of NCSE's Voices for Evolution) from 1995
read, in part, "The Geological Society of Australia considers that notions
such as Fundamental Creationism, including so called 'Flood Geology', which
disregard scientific evidence such as that based on repeatable observations
in the natural world and the geological record, are not science and cannot
be taught as science ... The Society states unequivocally that the dogmatic
teaching of notions such as Creationism within a science curriculum stifles
the development of critical thinking patterns in the developing mind and
seriously compromises the best interests of objective public education. ...
the Society dissociates itself from Creationist statements made by any
member." The 2008 update differs from the 1995 version only in specifying
that the statement applies to "intelligent design" and in bearing the
endorsements of all of the presidents of the society from 1994
onward. Established in 1952, the Geological Society of Australia is a
non-profit organization that seeks to promote, advance and support the
earth sciences in Australia.
For the GSA's statement (PDF), visit: http://gsa.org.au/pdfdocuments/management/POL_intel%20design_2008.pdf
For information about Voices for Evolution, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/media/voices
Evolution education update: December 12,
2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Judge Jones, who presided over Kitzmiller v. Dover, is interviewed in PLoS
Genetics. The fourth issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach is now
available. And Roger Ebert offers his opinion about Expelled.
JUDGE JONES IN PLOS GENETICS
Judge John E. Jones III, who presided over the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial,
was interviewed by Jane Gitschier for PLoS Genetics. After recounting his
legal career and sketching the legal history of the creationism/evolution
controversy, Jones talked about the trial itself. Describing the expert
testimony he heard, Jones commented, "I will always remember Ken Miller's
testimony in the sense that he did A-Z evolution. And then got into
intelligent design. And having laid the foundation with the description of
evolution, got into why intelligent design doesn't work as science, to the
point where it is predominantly a religious concept." He added, "But Ken
Miller went into the immune system, the blood clotting cascade, and the
bacterial flagellum -- all three are held out by intelligent design
proponents as irreducibly complex, and in effect, having no precursors. He
[Miller] knocked that down, I thought, quite effectively -- so
comprehensively and so well. By the time Miller was done testifying, over
the span of a couple of days, the defendants were really already in the
hole."
The expert witnesses for the defense were less impressive to
Jones: "Another remarkable moment on the science side was Michael Behe,
who was the lead witness for the defendants, and a very amiable fellow, as
was Ken Miller, but unlike Miller, in my view, Professor Behe did not
distinguish himself. He did not hold up well on cross-examination." And
the school board witnesses for the defense, whom Jones lambasted in his
decision, he described as "dreadful witnesses ... hence the description
'breathtaking inanity' and 'mendacity.' In my view, they clearly lied
under oath. They made a very poor account of themselves. They could not
explain why they did what they did. They really didn't even know what
intelligent design was. It was quite clear to me that they viewed
intelligent design as a method to get creationism into the public school
classroom. They were unfortunate and troublesome witnesses. Simply
remarkable, in that sense."
Noting that the plaintiffs and defendants both asked for a ruling on the
question of whether "intelligent design" constitutes science, Jones said,
"if you're going to measure the effect of a particular policy, in this case
juxtaposing intelligent design with evolution, on the intended recipients,
you have to delve into what the policy is about. What was it about? It
was about intelligent design. And to try to determine the effect on the
recipients you have to determine what does that concept or phrase stand
for? Hence, we got into a search and examination of what exactly does ID
say, what is its basis, what are its scientific bona fides or lack
thereof. That opens the door for a determination of whether ID is in fact
science. And that is what that part of the opinion was. ... I wrote about
whether ID, as presented to me, in that courtroom from September to
November of 2005, was science, and I said it was not. That it was the
progeny, the successor to creationism and creation science. That it was
dressed-up creationism."
Looking forward, Jones expressed uncertainty about the long-term effect of
the Kitzmiller decision, commenting, "This is speculation on my part -- I
don't think that the concept of ID itself has a lot of vitality going
forward. The Dover trial discredited that thing that is ID. To the extent
that I follow it -- I'm curious about it, but it doesn't go any further
than that -- the likely tack going forward is something like teach the
controversy, talk about the alleged flaws and gaps in the theory of
evolution and go to that place first." He noted that creationists in both
Texas and Louisiana seem to be taking such a tack. And, he noted, there is
no prospect of the creationism/evolution controversy subsiding any time
soon: "They gave me the last word in 'Judgment Day' [a NOVA program on the
trial] and I said this is not something that will be settled in my time or
even in my grandchildren's lifetimes. It's an enduring, quintessentially
American, dispute."
For the interview, visit: http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1000297
For information about Kitzmiller v. Dover, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/intelligent-design-trial-kitzmiller-v-dover
For the decisionin the case (PDF), visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/webfm_send/73
For NCSE's coverage of events in Texas and Louisiana, visit:
http://www.ncseweb.org/news/texas
http://www.ncseweb.org/news/louisiana
For information about Judgment Day, visit: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/
THE FOURTH ISSUE OF EVOLUTION: EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
The fourth issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach -- the new journal
aspiring to promote accurate understanding and comprehensive teaching of
evolutionary theory for a wide audience -- is now available on-line. The
theme of the issue is the evolution of the eye. Featured, accordingly, are
original scientific articles "A Genetic Perspective on Eye Evolution: Gene
Sharing, Convergence and Parallelism," "Charting Evolutions
Trajectory: Using Molluscan Eye Diversity to Understand Parallel and
Convergent Evolution," "Early Evolution of the Vertebrate Eye -- Fossil
Evidence," "Evolution of Insect Eyes: Tales of Ancient Heritage,
Deconstruction, Reconstruction, Remodeling, and Recycling," "Exceptional
Variation on a Common Theme: The Evolution of Crustacean Compound Eyes,"
"Opening the 'Black Box': The Genetic and Biochemical Basis of Eye
Evolution," "Suboptimal Optics: Vision Problems as Scars of Evolutionary
History," "The Causes and Consequences of Color Vision," "The Evolution of
Complex Organs," "The Evolution of Extraordinary Eyes: The Cases of
Flatfishes and Stalk-eyed Flies," and "The Origin of the Vertebrate
Eye." And there are resources for teachers and reviews of books, too,
including -- consistently with the issue's theme -- a discussion of
teaching about evolution with the example of blind cave fish and a review
of Jay Hosler's comic Optical Allusions.
Also included is the fourth installment of NCSE's regular column for
Evolution: Education and Outreach, Overcoming Obstacles to Evolution
Education. In their article "Misconceptions About the Evolution of
Complexity," Andrew J. Petto (a member of NCSE's board of directors) and
NCSE's Louise S. Mead take the vertebrate eye as their example, since "the
complexity of vertebrate eyes is a common antievolution argument." In the
abstract, they summarize, "Despite data and theory from comparative
anatomy, embryology, molecular biology, genomics, and evolutionary
developmental biology, antievolutionists continue to present the eye as an
example of a structure too complex to have evolved. They stress what we
have yet to explain about the development and evolution of eyes and present
incomplete information as evidence that evolution is a 'theory in
crisis.' An examination of the evidence, however, particularly evidence
that has accumulated in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, refutes
antievolutionists' claims. The distribution of eyes in extant organisms,
combined with what we now know about the control of eye development across
diverse groups of organisms, provides significant evidence for the
evolution of all major components of the eye, from molecular to
morphological, and provides an excellent test of predictions based on
common ancestry."
For the contents of the issue, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/120878/
For Petto and Mead's article, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/a7v3307m37236637/fulltext.html
ROGER EBERT ON EXPELLED
The popular film critic Roger Ebert reviewed the creationist propaganda
movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed in a December 3, 2008, post
entitled "Win Ben Stein's mind" on his blog on the Chicago Sun-Times
website -- and he pulled no punches. "The more you know about evolution,
or simple logic, the more you are likely to be appalled by the film. No
one with an ability for critical thinking could watch more than three
minutes without becoming aware of its tactics," he wrote.
"This film is cheerfully ignorant, manipulative, slanted, cherry-picks
quotations, draws unwarranted conclusions, makes outrageous juxtapositions
(Soviet marching troops representing opponents of ID), pussy-foots around
religion (not a single identified believer among the ID people), segues
between quotes that are not about the same thing, tells bald-faced lies,
and makes a completely baseless association between freedom of speech and
freedom to teach religion in a university class that is not about
religion," he added.
"And there is worse, much worse," Ebert continued, taking especial offense
at Expelled's claim that the acceptance of evolution resulted in the
Holocaust -- "It fills me with contempt." Previously, the Anti-Defamation
League said that the movie's claim "is outrageous and trivializes the
complex factors that led to the mass extermination of European
Jewry." Expelled's lead, Ben Stein, responded, "It's none of their f---ing
business," according to Peter McKnight, writing in the Vancouver Sun (June
21, 2008).
For a thorough critique of Expelled, including a collection of links to
reviews of the movie, visit NCSE's Expelled Exposed website. Additionally,
the next issue of Reports of the NCSE (volume 28, numbers 5-6) is a special
issue devoted to debunking Expelled, containing reports on its reception, a
summary of the ways in which organizations with a stake in the
creationism/evolution controversy reacted, a summary of the various
controversies over its use of copyrighted material, and a detailed
explanation of its unsuitability for the classroom.
For Ebert's blog post, visit: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/12/win_ben_steins_mind.html
For the ADL's statement, visit: http://www.adl.org/PresRele/HolNa_52/5277_52.htm
For Peter McKnight's column, visit: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=f022096b-6832-4ec1-929
d-92e8bc337364
For Expelled Exposed, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com
For subscription information for Reports of the NCSE, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/membership
ERRATUM
Although Kevin Padian discussed evolution and religion with Alan Jones, the
dean of Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, on November 22, 2008, the link
provided in the December 5, 2008, evolution education update was to a video
of a previous discussion between the two, filmed on November 4, 2007. The
later discussion was not filmed.
For the video of Padian's talk with Jones, visit: http://fora.tv/2007/11/04/Kevin_Padian_Investigating_Evolution
Evolution education update: December 5, 2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
The Cincinnati Zoo distances itself from a widely criticized promotion
involving Answers in Genesis's Creation Museum. Plus Kevin Padian, who
serves as president of NCSE's board of directors, is continuing to speak
and write in enthusiastic defense of the teaching of evolution. And a new
batch of selected content from NCSE's journal is now available on-line.
CREATION "MUSEUM" REBUFFED BY CINCINNATI ZOO
"A promotional deal between the Cincinnati Zoo and the Creation Museum was
scuttled Monday after the zoo received dozens of angry calls and emails
about the partnership," reported the Cincinnati Enquirer (December 1,
2008). The promotion involved a package deal for tickets to the zoo's
annual Festival of Lights and to a Christmas-themed event at Answers in
Genesis's Creation Museum. The museum, which opened its doors in northern
Kentucky during Memorial Day weekend 2007, aims to illuminate "the effects
of biblical history on our present and future world" -- that is, to
evangelize for Answers in Genesis's particular brand of young-earth
creationism.
On November 30, 2008, biologist and blogger P. Z. Myers complained about
the promotion at his blog Pharyngula, writing, "the Cincinnati Zoo has
betrayed its mission and its trust in a disgraceful way, by aligning
themselves with a creationist institution that is a laughing stock to the
rest of the world, and a mark of shame to the United States," and urging
his readers to write to the zoo to "point out the conflict between what
they are doing and what their goal as an educational and research
institution ought to be." Other bloggers echoed his call, and the zoo was
evidently flooded with calls and e-mails, prompting it to cancel the
promotion because of the uproar. No refunds will be necessary, since no
packages of tickets had been sold.
NCSE's previous coverage of the Creation "Museum" includes Daniel Phelps's
review and overview and Timothy H. Heaton's account of his visit. NCSE
also sponsored a statement, signed by almost one thousand scientists in the
three states surrounding the museum -- Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana --
expressing their concern about the effect of the scientifically inaccurate
materials displayed there: "Students who accept this material as
scientifically valid are unlikely to succeed in science courses at the
college level. These students will need remedial instruction in the nature
of science, as well as in the specific areas of science misrepresented by
Answers in Genesis."
For the story in the Cincinnati Enquirer, visit: http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081201/NEWS01/312010040
For P. Z. Myers's blog post, visit: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/shame_on_the_cincinnati_zoo.php
For Phelps's and Heaton's articles, visit:
http://www.ncseweb.org/creationism/general/anti-museum-overview-review-answers-genesis-creation-museum
http://www.ncseweb.org/rncse/27/1-2/visit-to-new-creation-museum
For the NCSE-sponsored statement of concern, visit: http://sciohost.org/states/?p=3
THE LATEST FROM KEVIN PADIAN
Kevin Padian, who serves as president of NCSE's board of directors, is
continuing to speak and write in enthusiastic defense of the teaching of
evolution. To inaugurate Evolution '09, San Francisco's celebration of the
bicentennial of Darwin's birth and the sesquicentennial of the publication
of the Origin of Species, Padian spent about sixty minutes in a spirited
and lively discussion of evolution and religion with Alan Jones, the dean
of Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, on November 22, 2008. Now video of
the event is available on-line from Fora.tv. Discussing the challenge of
educating the public about evolution, Padian suggested that scientists need
to talk about the major transitions in evolution -- his specialty as a
vertebrate paleontologist -- "faster, harder, and more often." For
specifics, see his commentary in the February 2008 issue of Geotimes and
his article in Integrative and Comparative Biology 2008; 48 (2): 175-188.
Additionally, Padian discusses "The evolution of creationists in the United
States: Where are they now, and where are they going?" in a forthcoming
paper in Comptes Rendus Biologies, the proceedings of the French Academy of
Sciences for life sciences. There he writes, "As evolutionary biology in
all its forms continues to bring forth amazing new insights from the origin
of whales to the evolution of microbial resistance, one would think that
the anti-evolutionists would have less to cling to each year, and that they
would give up their arguments as disproven misapprehensions. They will
not, despite recent victories against ID as science and the lunacy of
'creation science'. Creationists reject the notion of a rational universe
because they believe that evolution depends upon the dominance of 'random
processes' that allow no divine direction or teleological goal. This is
the core of the resistance to evolution in America, and it will not go away
anytime soon."
In addition to serving as president of NCSE's board of directors, Padian is
Professor of Integrative Biology at the University of California at
Berkeley and also Curator of Paleontology at the University of California's
Museum of Paleontology. He recently received the 2008 Western Evolutionary
Biologist of the Year award from the Network for Experimental Research on
Evolution. He testified for the plaintiffs in Kitzmiller v. Dover, the
2005 case establishing the unconstitutionality of teaching "intelligent
design" in the public schools. In his decision, Judge John E. Jones III
wrote, "Padian's demonstrative slides, prepared on the basis of
peer-review[ed] scientific literature, illustrate how Pandas systematically
distorts and misrepresents established, important evolutionary
principles." He also noted that "Padian bluntly and effectively stated
that in confusing students about science generally and evolution in
particular, the disclaimer makes students 'stupid.'"
For the video of Padian's talk with Jones, visit: http://fora.tv/2007/11/04/Kevin_Padian_Investigating_Evolution
For Padian's commentary in Geotimes, visit: http://www.geotimes.org/feb08/article.html?id=comment.html
For Padian's article in Integrative and Comparative Biology (subscription
required), visit: http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/48/2/175
For Padian's paper in Comptes Rendus Biologies (subscription required),
visit: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2008.07.004
For information about Padian's Webby award, visit: http://nere.bio.uci.edu/
For Padian's testimony in Kitzmiller, with the slides he used, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/padians-expert-testimony
For the Kitzmiller decision (PDF), visit: http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf
CATCHING UP WITH RNCSE
Selected content from volume 28, number 2, of Reports of the National
Center for Science Education is now available on NCSE's website. Featured
are NCSE's Josh Rosenau's account of how the e-word -- evolution -- was
finally included in Florida's state science standards and NCSE's Glenn
Branch's report on the Texas Higher Education Coordination Board's decision
to deny the Institute for Creation Research authority to offer a graduate
degree in science education. And there are reviews, too: NCSE Supporter
G. Brent Dalrymple discusses Pascal Richet's A Natural History of Time, Ken
Feder reviews David Standish's Hollow Earth, and Kevin C. Armitage assesses
Michael Lienesch's In the Beginning: Fundamentalism, The Scopes Trial, and
the Making of the Antievolution Movement.
If you like what you see, why not subscribe to RNCSE today? The next issue
(volume 28, numbers 5-6) is a special issue devoted to debunking the recent
creationist propaganda film, Expelled, containing not only the material
already to be found at Expelled Exposed, but also reports on the reception
of Expelled at the box office, among critics, and in Canada; a summary of
the ways in which organizations with a stake in the creationism/evolution
controversy reacted to the film; a summary of the various controversies
over Expelled's use of copyrighted material; and a detailed explanation of
Expelled's unsuitability for the classroom. Don't miss out -- subscribe
now!
For selected content from RNCSE 28:2, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/rncse/28/2
For Expelled Exposed, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com/
For subscription information for RNCSE, visit: http://www.sncseweb.org/membership
Evolution education update: November 28, 2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Video and audio of Barbara Forrest's recent talk in Texas is now
available. Plus NCSE Supporter Philip Kitcher wins a Lannan Literary Award
for his Living with Darwin. And a new batch of selected content from
NCSE's journal is now available on-line.
BARBARA FORREST IN TEXAS
Barbara Forrest explained "Why Texans Shouldn't Let Creationists Mess with
Science Education" on November 11, 2008, at Southern Methodist University
in Dallas. Now video and audio of her talk is available on-line. The talk
was sponsored by the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund, and the Annette
Caldwell Simmons School of Education and Human Development, the Center for
Teaching Excellence, the Department of Anthropology, the Department of
Biological Sciences, and the Department of Philosophy in the Dedman College
of Humanities and Sciences at Southern Methodist University.
Forrest is a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University;
she is also a member of NCSE's board of directors. She coauthored (with
Paul R. Gross) Creationism's Trojan Horse (rev. ed., Oxford U.P.
2007). She also testified for the plaintiffs in Kitzmiller v. Dover, and
Judge Jones wrote in his ruling, "Barbara Forrest ... has thoroughly and
exhaustively chronicled the history of ID in her book and other writings
for her testimony in this case. Her testimony, and the exhibits ...
admitted with it, provide a wealth of statements by ID leaders that reveal
ID's religious, philosophical, and cultural content."
For video and audio of Forrest's talk, visit:
http://smu.edu/flashvideo/?id=248
http://smu.edu/newsinfo/audio/barbara-forrest-11nov2008.mp3
For information about Creationism's Trojan Horse, visit: http://www.creationismstrojanhorse.com/
CONGRATULATIONS TO PHILIP KITCHER
Philip Kitcher's Living with Darwin: Evolution, Design, and the Future of
Faith (Oxford U.P., 2006) was the recipient of a Lannan Literary Award for
Notable Book for 2008 from the Lannan Foundation, which "hopes to stimulate
the creation of literature written originally in the English language and
to develop a wider audience for contemporary prose and poetry." The award
includes a $75,000 prize. A Supporter of NCSE, Kitcher is the John Dewey
Professor of Philosophy at Columbia University.
Discussing Living with Darwin in BioScience, NCSE deputy director Glenn
Branch wrote that Kitcher's aim was "not only to debunk intelligent design
and expound the case for evolution but also 'to respond to the concerns of
the thoughtful people who are beguiled by the advertisements for
intelligent design, to expose just what it is that is threatening about
Darwinism, and to point to the deeper issues that underlie this recurrent
conflict' ... He succeeds brilliantly."
For information about Living with Darwin, visit: http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Philosophy/?view=usa&ci=9780195314441
For information about the award, visit: http://www.lannan.org/lf/lit/awards-list/by-last-name/P80/12583
For Glenn Branch's comments in BioScience (PDF), visit: http://www.bioone.org/archive/0006-3568/57/3/pdf/i0006-3568-57-3-278.pdf
CATCHING UP WITH RNCSE
Selected content from volume 28, number 1, of Reports of the National
Center for Science Education is now available on NCSE's website. Featured
are Barbara Forrest's commentary on the forced resignation of Chris Comer
from the Texas Education Agency, NCSE's Louise S. Mead's report at a
symposium aimed at training teachers how to use the latest creationist
textbook, Explore Evolution, in the classroom, and Ulrich Kutschera's
latest report on creationism in Germany. And there are reviews,
too: David Morrison discusses the late Robert Schadewald's Worlds of Their
Own and Rebecca J. Flietstra assesses Deborah B. Haarsma and Loren D.
Haarsma's Origins: A Reformed Look at Creation, Design, & Evolution.
If you like what you see, why not subscribe to RNCSE today? The next issue
(volume 28, numbers 5-6) is a special issue devoted to debunking the recent
creationist propaganda film, Expelled, containing not only the material
already to be found at Expelled Exposed, but also reports on the reception
of Expelled at the box office, among critics, and in Canada; a summary of
the ways in which organizations with a stake in the creationism/evolution
controversy reacted to the film; a summary of the various controversies
over Expelled's use of copyrighted material; and a detailed explanation of
Expelled's unsuitability for the classroom. Don't miss out -- subscribe
now!
For selected content from RNCSE 28:1, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/rncse/28/1
For Expelled Exposed, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com/
For subscription information for RNCSE, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/membership
Evolution education update: November 7, 2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
In Florida, the new state science standards may have to be reconsidered,
while the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, will be hosting a
multidisciplinary student conference on "Darwin's Legacy: Evolution's
Impact on Science and Culture."
BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD IN FLORIDA?
After a long and contentious wrangle, the Florida state board of education
voted 4-3 at its February 19, 2008, meeting to adopt a new set of state
science standards in which evolution is presented as a "fundamental concept
underlying all of biology." But now there are concerns that, due to a
recent state law, the standards will have to be approved again. The St.
Petersburg Times (November 6, 2008) explains, "The new law requires the
state Board of Education to adopt new academic standards by the end of
2011. That may include a new set of science standards, because the Board
of Education adopted the latest standards a few months before the bill
passed and was signed into law by Gov. Charlie Crist."
It is not yet clear whether the standards will indeed have to be approved
again, but Brian Moore, a staff attorney, with the state legislature's
Joint Administrative Procedures Committee (which reviews the rules proposed
by state agencies to ensure that they are in compliance with state law),
told the department of education that he thought so. According to
Education Week's curriculum blog (November 5, 2008), "It's possible, Moore
explained, that Florida's commissioner of education could seek to have
various experts certify that the recently approved science standards comply
with the Next Generation law. But it appears likely that new standards
would have to be re-approved in some form by the state board of education."
If so, the prospect of a renewed fight over the treatment of evolution in
the standards looms. "Hallelujah" was the response of Terry Kemple, who
opposed the treatment of evolution in the new standards. "This is an
opportunity for both sides to step back and let this be a fairer endeavor,"
he said. Brandon Haught of the grassroots organization Florida Citizens
for Science told the Times, "Maybe the legislators simply overlooked this
and there's a simple solution," adding that the group would "hope for the
best but plan for the worst." For now, the situation remains uncertain. A
spokesperson for the department of education told the Times, "We are
currently researching the matter so there are no specifics to offer at this
point."
For the story in the St. Petersburg Times, visit: Evolution education update: March 27, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Plenty of news in Texas, as the state board of education prepares to conduct its final vote on the state science standards. New Mexico's antievolution bill is dead. And NCSE Supporter Stephen G. Brush is to receive the 2009 Abraham Pais Prize for the History of Physics.
"STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES" NIXED IN TEXAS AGAIN
The Texas state board of education again narrowly voted against a proposal to restore the controversial "strengths and weaknesses" language to the set of state science standards now under review. As the Dallas Morning News (March 26, 2009) reported, "Board members deadlocked 7-7 on a motion to restore a long-time curriculum rule that 'strengths and weaknesses' of all scientific theories -- notably Charles Darwin's theory of evolution -- be taught in science classes and covered in textbooks for those subjects. Voting for the requirement were the seven Republican board members aligned with social conservative groups. Against the proposal were three other Republicans and four Democrats." A final vote is expected on March 27, 2009, but the outcome is not likely to change . It remains to be seen whether the board will vote to rescind the flawed amendments undermining the teaching of evolution proposed at the board's January 2009 meeting.
The debate is attracting national attention, with the Wall Street Journal (March 23, 2009) quoting NCSE's Steven Newton as saying, "This is the most specific assault I've seen against evolution and modern science," and the Washington Post (March 24, 2009) editorially urging, "The Texas State Board of Education must hold firm to its decision to strip the 'strengths and weaknesses' language from the state's science standard. Texans, like everyone else, are free to believe what they want, but in science class, they should teach science." Closer to home, the Dallas Morning News (March 25, 2009) editorially commented, "Doubting evolution shouldn't be Texas' legacy. More importantly, our students should not be subject to an erroneous line of teaching," and reminded its readers that because Texas is such a huge market for textbooks, "what happens in Texas doesn't stay here."
Writing in the Guardian (March 26, 2009), Jerry Coyne echoed the sentiment: "What happens in Texas doesn't stay in Texas. That state is a sizeable consumer of public school textbooks, and it's likely that if it waters down its science standards, textbook publishers all over the country will follow suit. This makes every American school hostage to the caprices of a few benighted Texas legislators." (House Bill 4224, introduced in the Texas House of Representatives on March 13, 2009, would, if enacted, require the Texas state board of education to restore the "strengths and weaknesses" language in the Texas state science standards.) A professor of the Department of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago, Coyne is the author of Why Evolution is True (Viking, 2009), which NCSE's Eugenie C. Scott recently praised in Nature as "a good choice to give to the neighbour or teacher who wants to know more about evolutionary biology."
NCSE's Joshua Rosenau and Eugenie C. Scott are in Austin for the meeting; both testified on March 25, 2009. Detailed, candid, and often uninhibited running commentary on the proceedings is available on a number of blogs: Texas Citizens for Science's Steven Schafersman is blogging and posting photographs on the Houston Chronicle's Evo.Sphere blog, the Texas Freedom Network is blogging on its TFN Insider blog, and NCSE's Joshua Rosenau is blogging on his personal blog, Thoughts from Kansas (hosted by ScienceBlogs). For those wanting to get their information from the horse's mouth, minutes and audio recordings of the board meeting will be available on the Texas Education Agency's website. NCSE's previous reports on events in Texas are available on-line, and of course NCSE will continue to monitor the situation as well as to assist those defending the teaching of evolution in the Lone Star State.
For the story in the Dallas Morning News, visit: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/032609dntexevolution.72be216f.html
For the story in the Wall Street Journal, visit: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123777413372910705.html
For the editorial in the Washington Post, visit: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/24/AR2009032403356.html
For the editorial in the Dallas Morning News, visit: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-science_0326edi.State.Edition1.212982b.html
For Jerry Coyne's op-ed in the Guardian, visit: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/mar/26/evolution-science-texas-school-board
To purchase Why Evolution is True from Amazon.com (and benefit NCSE in the process), visit: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/0670020532/nationalcenter02/
For Eugenie C. Scott's review in Nature (subscription required), visit: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v458/n7234/full/458034a.html
For the blog coverage of the hearings, visit:
http://www.chron.com/commons/readerblogs/evosphere.html
http://tfnblog.wordpress.com/
http://www.scienceblogs.com/tfk/
For the minutes and records from the TEA, visit:
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/minutes_archived.html
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/audio_archived.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas
TEXAS NEEDS TO GET IT RIGHT
As the Texas state board of education prepares for its final vote on a new set of state science standards, no fewer than fifty-four scientific and educational societies are calling for the approval of the standards as originally submitted -- without misleading language about "strengths and weaknesses" and without the flawed amendments undermining the teaching of evolution proposed at the board's January 2009 meeting. In their statement, organized by the National Center for Science Education, the societies write, "Evolution is the foundation of modern biology, and is also crucial in fields as diverse as agriculture, computer science, engineering, geology, and medicine. We oppose any efforts to undermine the teaching of biological evolution and related topics in the earth and space sciences, whether by misrepresenting those subjects, or by inaccurately and misleadingly describing them as controversial and in need of special scrutiny." (The full statement is reproduced below.)
Independently, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Association of Geoscience Teachers, the Paleontological Society, the National Association of Biology Teachers, and the Texas Association of Biology Teachers have issued their own statements, collected by Texas Citizens for Science, with advice for the Texas state board of education as it considers its final vote on the standards. And the AAAS's president Peter Agre (a Nobel laureate) and chief executive officer Alan I. Leshner contributed a commentary to the San Antonio Express-News (March 23, 2009), concluding, "Leveraging science and technology to create new jobs will require properly educating all potential innovators. It's time for the Texas State Board of Education to reject misleading amendments to science education standards, once and for all. As Texas science education standards go, so goes the nation. Texas needs to get it right."
***
A Message to the Texas State Board of Education
The undersigned scientific and educational societies call on the Texas State Board of Education to support accurate science education for all students by adopting the science standards (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills or TEKS) as recommended to you by the scientists and educators on your writing committees.
Evolution is the foundation of modern biology, and is also crucial in fields as diverse as agriculture, computer science, engineering, geology, and medicine. We oppose any efforts to undermine the teaching of biological evolution and related topics in the earth and space sciences, whether by misrepresenting those subjects, or by inaccurately and misleadingly describing them as controversial and in need of special scrutiny.
At its January 2009 meeting, the Texas Board of Education rightly rejected attempts to add language to the TEKS about "strengths and weaknesses" -- used in past efforts to undermine the teaching of evolution in Texas. We urge the Board to stand firm in rejecting any such attempts to compromise the teaching of evolution.
At its January 2009 meeting, the Board also adopted a series of amendments to the TEKS that misrepresent biological evolution and related topics in the earth and space sciences. We urge the Board to heed the advice of the scientific community and the experienced scientists and educators who drafted the TEKS: reject these and any other amendments which single out evolution for scrutiny beyond that applied to other scientific theories.
By adopting the TEKS crafted by your expert writing committees, the Board will serve the best educational interests of students in Texas's public schools.
American Anthropological Association
American Association of Physical Anthropologists
American Association of Physicists in Medicine
American Association of Physics Teachers
American Astronomical Society
American Geological Institute
American Institute for Biological Sciences
American Institute of Physics
American Physiological Society
American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
American Society for Cell Biology
American Society for Investigative Pathology
American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
American Society of Human Genetics
American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists
American Society of Naturalists
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Society of Plant Taxonomists
Association for Women Geoscientists
Association of American Geographers
Association of Anatomy, Cell Biology, and Neurobiology Chairs
Association of College & University Biology Educators
Association of Earth Science Editors
Association of Environmental & Engineering Geologists
Biological Sciences Curriculum Study
Biotechnology Institute
Botanical Society of America
Clay Minerals Society
Council on Undergraduate Research
Ecological Society of America
Federation for American Societies for Experimental Biology
Federation of American Scientists
Human Biology Association
Institute of Human Origins
National Association of Biology Teachers
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
National Earth Science Teachers Association
National Science Teachers Association
Natural Science Collection Alliance
Paleontological Society
Scientists and Engineers for America
Society for American Archaeology
Society for Developmental Biology
Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology
Society for Sedimentary Geology
Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles
Society for the Study of Evolution
Society of Economic Geologists
Society of Systematic Biologists
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
Southwestern Association of Naturalists
The Biophysical Society
The Helminthological Society of Washington
The Herpetologists' League
For the statement (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/webfm_send/797
For Texas Citizens for Science's collection of statements, visit: http://www.texscience.org/
For Agre and Leshner's op-ed in the San Antonio Express-News, visit: http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/Texas_case_threatens_education_and_competitiveness_nationally.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas
ANTIEVOLUTION BILL DEAD IN NEW MEXICO
New Mexico's Senate Bill 433 died in committee when the legislature adjourned sine die on March 21, 2009. The bill, if enacted, would have required 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 discrimination." SB 433 joins Iowa's House File 183 and Oklahoma's Senate Bill 320 as proposed "academic freedom" antievolution bills that failed in 2009; Alabama's House Bill 300 and Missouri's House Bill 656 are still active.
The bill mentioned only "biological evolution or chemical evolution," but its sponsor, Kent Cravens (R-District 27), described it as having wider applicability, telling the Santa Fe New Mexican (March 3, 2009), that it "just asks that if there's a controversial scientific theory being presented, that a teacher can't be reprimanded or fired or downgraded or any way harmed if the teacher happens to mention that there are other theories of controversial scientific nature, to include biological evolution, human cloning, global warming, you name a dozen different things." In a post at The Panda's Thumb blog (March 21, 2009), Dave Thomas suggested that Cravens may have intended to revise his bill accordingly.
Analyses of the bill performed by various state agencies were not enthusiastic. According to the Legislative Education Study Committee's summary analysis, the Public Education Department was worried that the bill would allow the teaching of creationism, thereby inviting litigation; the Higher Education Department observed that the New Mexico state science standards already require students to understand the evidential basis for evolution; and the Office of Education Accountability questioned the bill's premises "that the theory of evolution lacks scientific validity ... and that teachers and students need protection when addressing 'relevant scientific strengths or scientific weakness pertaining to biological evolution or chemical evolution.'"
For New Mexico's SB 433 as introduced, visit: http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/09%20Regular/bills/senate/SB0433.html
For the article in the Santa Fe New Mexican, visit: http://www.santafenewmexican.com/Bill-protects--controversial-science--teaching
For Dave Thomas's post at The Panda's Thumb, visit: http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2009/03/another-discove.html
For the LESC's analysis (PDF), visit: http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/09%20Regular/LESCAnalysis/SB0433.pdf
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in New Mexico, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/new-mexico
BRUSH AWARDED THE 2009 PAIS PRIZE
NCSE Supporter Stephen G. Brush was selected by the American Physical Society and the American Institute of Physics to receive the 2009 Abraham Pais Prize for the History of Physics "for his pioneering, in-depth studies in the history of nineteenth and twentieth-century physics," according to a story in the spring 2009 History of Physics Newsletter. Beginning his career as a physicist, Brush turned to the history of physics, publishing a number of historical monographs, including The Kind of Motion We Call Heat: A History of the Kinetic Theory of Gases in the 19th Century (North-Holland, 1976), which won the History of Science Society's Pfizer Award. He also coauthored the popular textbook Physics, the Human Adventure: From Copernicus to Einstein and Beyond (Rutgers University Press, 2001) with Gerald Holton. On retiring from the University of Maryland in 2006, he was named Distinguished University Professor Emeritus of the History of Science. Among his writings relevant to the creationism/evolution controversy are "Creationism versus physical science" and two refutations of creationist misuse of the history of science -- "Kelvin was not a creationist" and "Popper and evolution" -- for NCSE's journals. He is also Steve #71 in NCSE's Project Steve (now with over 1075 Steves).
For the story in the History of Physics Newsletter, visit: http://www.aps.org/units/fhp/newsletters/spring2009/pais.cfm
For the cited articles by Brush, visit:
http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200011/back-page.cfm
http://ncseweb.org/cej/3/2/kelvin-was-not-creationist
http://ncseweb.org/ncser/13/4/popper-evolution
>
> For information about Project Steve, visit:
> http://ncseweb.org/taking-action/project-steve
Evolution education update: March 13, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Texas is in the headlines again, with a new bill that appears to be
intended to exempt the Institute for Creation Research's graduate school
from state regulation as well as a profile of Don McLeroy, the avowed
creationist who chairs the state board of education, in the Austin
American-Statesman. Meanwhile, a legislator in Oklahoma, outraged by the
prospect of Richard Dawkins visiting the University of Oklahoma, introduced
two antievolution resolutions -- and Dawkins responded.
LEGISLATIVE SALVATION FOR THE ICR?
House Bill 2800, introduced in the Texas House of Representatives on March
9, 2009, would, if enacted, in effect exempt institutions such as the
Institute for Creation Research's graduate school from Texas's regulations
governing degree-granting institutions. The bill's sole sponsor is Leo
Berman (R-District 6), a member of the House Higher Education Committee. A
member of NCSE called Berman's office to ask whether the bill would apply
to the ICR's graduate school; a staffer answered that he thought that it
would, adding that he believed that the bill's objective was to aid
institutions that want to teach creation science or intelligent
design. Berman himself seems not to have offered any public statement
about HB 2800 so far.
As NCSE's Glenn Branch recounted in Reports of the NCSE, "When the
Institute for Creation Research moved its headquarters from Santee,
California, to Dallas, Texas, in June 2007, it expected to be able to
continue offering a master's degree in science education from its graduate
school. ... But the state's scientific and educational leaders voiced their
opposition, and at its April 24, 2008, meeting, the Texas Higher Education
Coordination Board unanimously voted to deny the ICR's request for a state
certificate of authority to offer the degree." Following the Texas Higher
Education Coordination Board's decision, the ICR appealed the decision,
while also taking its case to the court of public opinion with a series of
press releases and advertisements in Texas newspapers.
Now, however, it seems that HB 2800 would take the matter out of the
board's hands altogether. Subchapter G of Chapter 61 of Texas's Education
Code serves to regulate "the use of academic terminology in naming or
otherwise designating educational institutions, the advertising,
solicitation or representation by educational institutions or their agents,
and the maintenance and preservation of essential academic records"; it
provides, inter alia, "A person may not grant or award a degree or offer to
grant or award a degree on behalf of a private postsecondary educational
institution unless the institution has been issued a certificate of
authority to grant the degree by the board [that is, the Texas Higher
Education Coordination Board] in accordance with the provisions of this
subchapter."
HB 2800 would amend subchapter G by providing, "The provisions of this
subchapter do not apply to a private educational institution, including a
separate degree-granting program, unit, or school operated by the
institution, that: (1) does not accept state funding of any kind to support
its educational programs; (2) does not accept state-administered federal
funding to support its educational programs; (3) was formed as or is
affiliated with or controlled by a nonprofit corporation or nonprofit
unincorporated organization; and (4) offers bona fide degree programs that
require students to complete substantive course work in order to receive a
degree from the institution." Presumably the ICR would argue that its
graduate school satisfies all four requirements.
For Texas's HB 2800 as introduced (PDF), visit: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/pdf/HB02800I.pdf
For the story in Reports of the NCSE, visit: http://ncseweb.org/rncse/28/2/setback-icr-texas
For chapter 61 of Texas's Education Code, visit: http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/ED/content/htm/ed.003.00.000061.00.htm
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas
CREATIONIST BOARD CHAIR PROFILED
As the final vote on the proposed revision of the Texas state science
standards approaches, the Austin American-Statesman (March 8, 2009) offers
a profile of the chair of the Texas state board of education, avowed
creationist Don McLeroy. Describing his conversion to fundamentalism as a
dental student, the profile explained, "He is now a young earth
creationist, meaning that he believes God created Earth between 6,000 and
10,000 years ago," quoting him as saying, "When I became a Christian, it
was whole-hearted ... I was totally convinced the biblical principles were
right, and I was totally convinced that it could be accurate
scientifically." Particularly important to McLeroy is the biblical tenet
that humans were created in the image of God -- although Sid Hall, a
Methodist pastor in Austin, told the newspaper, "I would never want to
discount those works, but to take [the passage that humans were made in the
image of God] to mean something about how the universe is created is a
stretch to me ... That's code to me for 'I'm going to take my particular
myth of creationism and make it part of the science curriculum.' That's
scary to me."
At the board's January 21-23, 2009, meeting, McLeroy successfully proposed
a revision to section 7 of the draft of the high school biology standards
to require that students "analyze and evaluate the sufficiency or
insufficiency of common ancestry to explain the sudden appearance, stasis
and sequential nature of groups in the fossil record." As NCSE explains in
its call to Texas scientists, the requirement is not only unworkable and
confusing, but also evidently intended to promote the idea that living
things were specially created in their current forms. Moreover, a detailed
analysis by the Stand Up for Real Science blog strongly suggests that the
documentation that McLeroy provided in support of his revision at the
January meeting was in fact taken wholesale from creationist
sources. Undaunted, McLeroy told the American-Statesman that at the
board's March 25-27, 2009, meeting, he plans to "pitch another idea that he
says should be taught in public schools: the insufficiency of natural
selection to explain the complexity of cells" -- apparently a reference to
the "intelligent design" notion of "irreducible complexity" due to Michael
Behe.
David Hillis of the University of Texas, Austin, told the newspaper,
"McLeroy's amendments are not even intelligible. I wonder if perhaps he
wants the standards to be confusing so that he can open the door to
attacking mainstream biology textbooks and arguing for the addition of
creationist and other religious literature into the science classroom." He
added, "If Chairman McLeroy is successful in adding his amendments, it will
be a huge embarrassment to Texas, a setback for science education and a
terrible precedent for the state boards overriding academic experts in
order to further their personal religious or political agendas. The
victims will be the schoolchildren of Texas, who represent the future of
our state." Hillis is also a member of the Advisory Committee of the 21st
Century Science Coalition, which has recruited over 1400 Texas scientists
to endorse its call for the Texas state board of education to adopt state
science standards that "acknowledge that instruction on evolution is vital
to understanding all the biological sciences" and omit "all references to
'strengths and weaknesses,' which politicians have used to introduce
supernatural explanations into science courses."
Preparing for the March 25-27 board meeting at which the final vote on the
standards is expected, McLeroy is arming himself with "a large binder that
is adorned on the front with a picture of Albert Einstein" and contains
"numerous passages from books -- such as [Kenneth R.] Miller's and others
on evolutionary theory -- and articles that he plans to use as ammunition
in the fight this month over what should be in the state's science
standards." One page from his binder, the American-Statesman reports,
shows a diagram of the fossil record from a book by Miller, with McLeroy's
gloss, "What do we see?" 'Sudden appearance' of species." Miller -- a
professor of biology at Brown University and a Supporter of NCSE, who
recently received the Award for Public Understanding of Science and
Technology by the American Association for the Advancement of Science in
recognition of "his sustained efforts and excellence in communicating
evolutionary science" -- told the newspaper, "That diagram shows
evolution. If he thinks it says evolution does not occur, he is dead
wrong. It's really quite the opposite."
For the profile of McLeroy, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/03/08/0308mcleroy.html
For NCSE's call to Texas scientists, visit: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/analysis/analysis-proposed-texas-educational-knowledge-skills-teks-am
For the Stand Up for Real Science blog's analysis, visit: http://www.anevolvingcreation.net/collapse/index.htm
For the 21st Century Science Coalition, visit: http://www.texasscientists.org/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas
ANTIEVOLUTION RESOLUTIONS INTRODUCED IN OKLAHOMA
Two bills in the Oklahoma House of Representatives -- House Resolution 1014
and House Resolution 1015, introduced on March 3, 2009 - attack Richard
Dawkins's visit to the University of Oklahoma. The sole sponsor of both
bills is Todd Thomsen (R-District 25), a member of the House Education
Committee and the chair of the House Higher Education and Career Tech
Committee. Both measures, if adopted, would express the strong opposition
of the Oklahoma House of Representatives to "the invitation to speak on the
campus of the University of Oklahoma to Richard Dawkins of Oxford
University, whose published statements on the theory of evolution and
opinion about those who do not believe in the theory are contrary and
offensive to the views and opinions of most citizens of Oklahoma." Dawkins
spoke at the University of Oklahoma on March 6, 2009, as part of the
university's celebrations of the Darwin anniversaries.
While HR 1015 ends with a plea for civility -- "the Oklahoma House of
Representatives encourages the University of Oklahoma to engage in an open,
dignified, and fair discussion of the Darwinian theory of evolution and all
other scientific theories which is the approach that a public institution
should be engaged in and which represents the desire and interest of the
citizens of Oklahoma" -- HR 1014 attacks the University of Oklahoma's
Department of Zoology for "framing the Darwinian theory of evolution as
doctrinal dogmatism rather than a hypothetical construction within the
disciplines of the sciences" and engaging in "one-sided indoctrination of
an unproven and unpopular theory" while branding "all thinking in dissent
of this theory as anti-intellectual and backward rather than nurturing such
free thinking and allowing a free discussion of all ideas which is the
primary purpose of a university."
At the beginning of his talk, which was repeatedly interrupted by cheers
and applause, Dawkins opened by saying, "I don't want to blow my own
trumpet, but it isn't everybody who's the subject of legislation
..." Quoting HR 1014's complaint of his alleged "intolerance for cultural
diversity and diversity of thinking," he presented the stork theory of
human reproduction -- illustrated with a parody of the creationist
propaganda film Expelled -- as a view comparable to creationism. "They've
lost in the courts of law; they've long ago lost in the halls of science;
and they continue to lose with every new piece of evidence in support of
evolution. Taking offense is all they've got left. And the one thing you
can be sure of is that they don't actually know anything about what it is
that they reject," he added. He also announced that the Richard Dawkins
Foundation for Reason and Science would be donating $5000 to Oklahomans
for Excellence in Science Education, which fights against attempts to
undermine evolution education in Oklahoma.
For the text of Oklahoma's HR 1014 and 1015 as introduced (documents),
visit:
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2009-10HB/HR1014_int.rtf
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2009-10HB/HR1015_int.rtf
For information about the University of Oklahoma's celebrations, visit: http://www.ou.edu/darwin/Site/Home.html
For videos of the beginning of Dawkins's talk, visit: http://richarddawkins.net/article,3646,Richard-Dawkins-at-the-University-of-Oklahoma---Introduction,Richard-Dawkins
For information about the Dawkins Foundation, visit: http://richarddawkinsfoundation.org/
For Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education, visit: http://www.oklascience.org/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Oklahoma, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/oklahoma
Evolution education update: February 27, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
The thousandth signatory to NCSE's Project Steve arrived -- just in time for the Darwin anniversary celebrations! Plus NCSE is making a sample chapter from the second edition of Eugenie C. Scott's acclaimed Evolution vs. Creationism available. And a journal is calling for papers for a special issue on the teaching of evolution in a university setting.
PROJECT STEVE: N > 1000
With the addition of Steve #1000 on September 5, 2008, NCSE's Project Steve attained the kilosteve mark. A tongue-in-cheek parody of the long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of "scientists who doubt evolution" or "scientists who dissent from Darwinism," Project Steve mocks such lists by restricting its signatories to scientists whose first name is Steve. (Cognates are also accepted, such as Stephanie, Esteban, Istvan, Stefano, or even Tapani -- the Finnish equivalent.) About 1% of the United States population possesses such a first name, so each signatory represents about 100 potential signatories. ("Steve" was selected in honor of the late Stephen Jay Gould, a Supporter of NCSE and a dauntless defender of evolution education.)
Steve #1000 was announced at the Improbable Research press conference and crowned at the Improbable Research show, both held on February 13, 2008, as part of the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott and Steve Mirsky, long-time writer, columnist, and podcaster for Scientific American presented a commemorative plaque to -- of all people -- Steven P. Darwin, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology and director of the herbarium at Tulane University. In a February 14, 2009, press release, Darwin
commented, "This is the first time that being a Darwin - or a Steve - has paid off!" Videos of the press conference and the award ceremony, and a Scientific American podcast, are available on-line.
The fact that Steve #1000 hails from Louisiana is particularly ironic,
since the state recently enacted a law that threatens to open the door for creationism and scientifically unwarranted critiques of evolution to be taught in public school science classes. When a policy implementing the law was drafted, a provision that prohibited the use of materials that teach creationism in the public schools was deleted. Recently, the Society of Integrative and Comparative Biology announced that, due to the antievolution law, it would not hold its 2011 conference in New Orleans; a spokesperson for the New Orleans Metropolitan Convention and Visitors Bureau told the weekly New Orleans City Business (February 23, 2009) that the city would lose about $2.7 million as a result of SICB's decision.
Although the idea of Project Steve is frivolous, the statement is
serious. It reads, "Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying
principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is
overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically
irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to
'intelligent design,' to be introduced into the science curricula of our
nation's public schools."
Highlights from the history of Project Steve include the original press release, Glenn Branch and Skip Evans's description of the project for Geotimes, the announcement that Steven W. Hawking was Steve #300, the announcement (on St. Stephen's Day!) of Steve #400, and the announcements of Steves #600, #700, #800, and #900. And, of course, Project Steve proved to be scientifically fruitful in its own right. "The Morphology of Steve," by Eugenie C. Scott, Glenn Branch, Nick Matzke, and several hundred Steves, appeared in the prestigious Annals of Improbable Research; the paper provided "the first scientific analysis of the sex, geographic location, and body size of scientists named Steve."
Currently, there are 1046 signatories to Project Steve, including 100% of eligible Nobel laureates (Steven Weinberg and Steven Chu), 100% of eligible members of President Obama's Cabinet (Steven Chu, the Secretary of Energy), at least ten members of the National Academy of Sciences, the authors of widely used textbooks such as Molecular Biology of the Gene, Psychology: An Evolutionary Approach, and Introduction to Organic Geochemistry, and the authors of popular science books such as A Brief History of Time, Why We Age, and Darwin's Ghost. When last surveyed in February 2006, 54% of the signatories work in the biological sciences proper; 61% work in related fields in the life sciences.
Additionally, Project Steve appeared in Steven Pinker's recent book, The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature (Viking, 2007). Pinker, himself a single-digit Steve, described it as "the most formidable weapon in the fight against neo-creationism today," adding, "Part satire, part memorial to Stephen Jay Gould, the project maintains a Steve-O-Meter (now pointing past 800) and has spun off a T-shirt, a song, a mascot (Professor Steve Steve, a panda puppet), and a paper in the respected scientific journal Annals of Improbable Research called 'The Morphology of Steve' (based on the T-shirt sizes ordered by the signatories)."
For the 2009 press release, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2009/02/steve-darwin-is-steve-1000-004308
For the videos and podcast, visit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXEGfi9t7yU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgZTrdZL2Go
http://www.sciam.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=count-on-steves-to-defend-darwin-09-02-20
For NCSE's previous coverage of events in Louisiana, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/louisiana
For the story in New Orleans City Business, visit: http://www.neworleanscitybusiness.com/viewStory.cfm?recID=32768
For the 2003 press release, visit: http://ncseweb.org/taking-action/project-steve-press-release
For Branch and Evans's report in Geotimes, visit: http://www.geotimes.org/may03/column.html
And for "The Morphology of Steve" (PDF), visit: http://improbable.com/pages/airchives/paperair/volume10/v10i4/morph-steve-10-4.pdf
NEW BOOK, FREE CHAPTER
NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott's book Evolution vs. Creationism is now available in a second edition, updated to include the seminal case Kitzmiller v. Dover -- in which a federal court found that it was unconstitutional to teach "intelligent design" creationism in the public
schools -- as well as a new chapter on public opinion and media coverage and a new foreword by Judge John E. Jones III, who presided over the Kitzmiller trial.
The first edition of the book was praised by reviewers in The New York Times Book Review, Science Education, Choice (which named it a 2005 Outstanding Academic Title), the Journal of the History of Biology, Science Books & Films, Perspectives in Science and Christian Faith, Theology and Science, the Toronto Globe & Mail, and even the Institute for Creation Research's Back to Genesis.
Want to see for yourself? Now's your chance. For a limited time, we've posted a sample chapter -- chapter 1, on "Science: Truth without
Certainty" from the book. It's yours to download, read, print out, and share with others. See for yourself why the reviewer for NSTA Recommends concluded, "Evolution vs. Creationism would be an excellent resource for any science teacher, especially those who teach biology or the nature of science."
For the sample chapter (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/files/pub/creationism/Evo%20vs.%20Creationism--2nd%20edition--Chapter%201.pdf
For further information about Evolution vs. Creationism, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/evc
CALL FOR PAPERS: TEACHING EVOLUTION IN THE CLASSROOM
The Journal of Effective Teaching, a peer-reviewed electronic journal devoted to the discussion of teaching excellence in colleges and
universities, is calling for papers for a special issue on the teaching of evolution in a university setting. Topics may include Darwinism in the
history and philosophy of science, politics, and religion; evolution and the nature of science; barriers in the understanding of evolution;
strategies for teaching controversial issues related to evolution and/or Darwinism; educational research in the teaching of evolution; challenging
preconceptions in the classroom, and engaging students who have strong religious views in scientific investigations as part of a liberal arts
degree. Articles will be accepted until May 1, 2009.
For the call for papers (PDF), visit: http://www.uncw.edu/cte/ET/documents%5CCallForPapersSpecial.pdf
For information about the Journal of Effective Teaching, visit: http://www.uncw.edu/cte/ET/
Evolution education update: January 2, 2009
Dear Friends of NCSE,
The journal Nature provides a new resource summarizing fifteen lines of
evidence for evolution by natural selection. Meanwhile, Expelled makes a
brief and inglorious appearance in newspapers again, and the Geological
Society of Australia reaffirms its stance against creationism.
EVOLUTIONARY GEMS FROM NATURE
"15 Evolutionary Gems" is a new resource summarizing fifteen lines of
evidence for evolution by natural selection, provided by the journal
Nature. The editors explain, "About a year ago, an Editorial in these
pages urged scientists and their institutions to 'spread the word' and
highlight reasons why scientists can treat evolution by natural selection
as, in effect, an established fact ... This week we are following our own
prescription. In a year in which Darwin is being celebrated amid
uncertainty and hostility about his ideas among citizens, being aware of
the cumulatively incontrovertible evidence for those ideas is all the more
important. We trust that this document will help."
The fifteen evolutionary gems, as Nature describes them, are in three
categories: gems from the fossil record (land-living ancestors of whales,
from water to land, the origin of feathers, the evolutionary history of
teeth, and the origin of the vertebrate skeleton), gems from habitats
(natural selection in speciation, natural selection in lizards, a case of
co-evolution, differential dispersal in wild birds, selective survival in
wild guppies, and evolutionary history matters), and gems from molecular
processes (Darwin's Galapagos finches, microevolution meets macroevolution,
toxin resistance in snakes and clams, and variation versus
stability). References and links to relevant resources are provided.
For "15 Evolutionary Gems" (PDF), visit: http://www.nature.com/nature/newspdf/evolutiongems.pdf
For the editorial introduction, visit: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v457/n7225/full/457008b.html
GOOD NEWS AND BAD NEWS FOR EXPELLED
As 2008 drew to a close, the good news for the producers of Expelled: No
Intelligence Allowed was that their creationist propaganda movie was
getting a bit of press again. The bad news is that it was in the lists of
the worst movies of 2008. The Onion's A.V. Club (December 16, 2008), was
quickest out of the gate, commenting, "There are terrible movies, and then
there are terrible movies that cause harm to society by feeding into its
ignorance. Nathan Frankowski's odious anti-evolution documentary belongs
in the latter category. ... Few moments in cinema in 2008 were as shameless
and disgusting as the Expelled sequence where Stein solemnly visits a Nazi
death camp and unsubtly links 'survival of the fittest' theory to the
Holocaust."
John Serba of the Grand Rapids Press (December 26, 2008) wrote, "Ben Stein
hosts this pro-Intelligent Design documentary that forgets to include a
compelling argument for this viewpoint, and instead chooses to equate
Darwinism and its legions of rational scientist followers with Nazis and
the Holocaust. Facts rooted in reality are at a premium in this insidious,
crassly manipulative dreck." Roger Moore of the Orlando Sentinel (December
26, 2008) commented, "Ben Stein's documentary was a cynical attempt to
sucker Christian conservatives into thinking they're losing the
'intelligent design' debate because of academic 'prejudice.'" Stephen
Whitty of the Newark Star-Ledger (December 27, 2008) described Expelled as
lifting "its nonsensical knowledge of early man from an Alley Oop comic and
its sense of honest inquiry from a snake-handling preacher." In the LA
City Beat (December 30, 2008), Andy Klein wrote, "Stein's 'intelligent
design' documentary has all the red flags -- inadequate or misleading
identification of interviewees, aggressively manipulative editing,
extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence, and extreme leaps of
logic ... particularly suggesting guilt by association, even to the point
of laying blame for the Holocaust on Darwin." And Ken Hanke of the
Ashville, North Carolina, Mountain Xpress (December 31, 2008) said that
Expelled was "as corrupt a piece of work as you'll ever encounter."
Expelled fared no better north of the border. Jay Stone of the Canwest
News Service (December 26, 2008) described Expelled as "a masterwork of
intellectual dishonesty." And Richard Crouse of Canada AM (December 30,
2008) commented, "Wrapping his thesis in good old American jingoistic
rhetoric -- remember this guy used to write speeches for Nixon -- Stein
repeatedly compares Darwinist scientists to communists by the suggestion
that the only way they can get funding for research is to be good Darwinist
'comrades' and even makes the outrageous connection between Darwin's theory
and Nazism." Crouse added, "Perhaps it isn't just a coincidence that the
host's initials are B.S."
For the various lists and articles, visit:
http://www.avclub.com/content/feature/there_appears_to_be_an_event/2
http://www.mlive.com/entertainment/grpress/index.ssf?/base/entertainment-1/1230300922187990.xml&coll=6
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/orl-toptenmovies08dec26,0,5012155.story
http://www.nj.com/entertainment/tv/index.ssf/2008/12/worst_films_0f_2008_ten_films.html
http://www.lacitybeat.com/cms/story/detail/the_bottom_08/7903/
http://www.mountainx.com/movies/articles/123108cranky_hanke_and_justin_southers_best_and_worst_picks_for_2008
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081230/crouse_2008_list_081230
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/story.html?id=608915a7-383c-4afa-b97b-1036f1db2afb
For NCSE's Expelled Exposed website, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com/
AUSTRALIAN GEOLOGISTS STILL OPPOSE CREATIONISM
The Geological Society of Australia recently updated its policy statement
on science education and creationism. A previous version of the statement
(reprinted in the third edition of NCSE's Voices for Evolution) from 1995
read, in part, "The Geological Society of Australia considers that notions
such as Fundamental Creationism, including so called 'Flood Geology', which
disregard scientific evidence such as that based on repeatable observations
in the natural world and the geological record, are not science and cannot
be taught as science ... The Society states unequivocally that the dogmatic
teaching of notions such as Creationism within a science curriculum stifles
the development of critical thinking patterns in the developing mind and
seriously compromises the best interests of objective public education. ...
the Society dissociates itself from Creationist statements made by any
member." The 2008 update differs from the 1995 version only in specifying
that the statement applies to "intelligent design" and in bearing the
endorsements of all of the presidents of the society from 1994
onward. Established in 1952, the Geological Society of Australia is a
non-profit organization that seeks to promote, advance and support the
earth sciences in Australia.
For the GSA's statement (PDF), visit: http://gsa.org.au/pdfdocuments/management/POL_intel%20design_2008.pdf
For information about Voices for Evolution, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/media/voices
Evolution education update: December 12,
2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Judge Jones, who presided over Kitzmiller v. Dover, is interviewed in PLoS
Genetics. The fourth issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach is now
available. And Roger Ebert offers his opinion about Expelled.
JUDGE JONES IN PLOS GENETICS
Judge John E. Jones III, who presided over the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial,
was interviewed by Jane Gitschier for PLoS Genetics. After recounting his
legal career and sketching the legal history of the creationism/evolution
controversy, Jones talked about the trial itself. Describing the expert
testimony he heard, Jones commented, "I will always remember Ken Miller's
testimony in the sense that he did A-Z evolution. And then got into
intelligent design. And having laid the foundation with the description of
evolution, got into why intelligent design doesn't work as science, to the
point where it is predominantly a religious concept." He added, "But Ken
Miller went into the immune system, the blood clotting cascade, and the
bacterial flagellum -- all three are held out by intelligent design
proponents as irreducibly complex, and in effect, having no precursors. He
[Miller] knocked that down, I thought, quite effectively -- so
comprehensively and so well. By the time Miller was done testifying, over
the span of a couple of days, the defendants were really already in the
hole."
The expert witnesses for the defense were less impressive to
Jones: "Another remarkable moment on the science side was Michael Behe,
who was the lead witness for the defendants, and a very amiable fellow, as
was Ken Miller, but unlike Miller, in my view, Professor Behe did not
distinguish himself. He did not hold up well on cross-examination." And
the school board witnesses for the defense, whom Jones lambasted in his
decision, he described as "dreadful witnesses ... hence the description
'breathtaking inanity' and 'mendacity.' In my view, they clearly lied
under oath. They made a very poor account of themselves. They could not
explain why they did what they did. They really didn't even know what
intelligent design was. It was quite clear to me that they viewed
intelligent design as a method to get creationism into the public school
classroom. They were unfortunate and troublesome witnesses. Simply
remarkable, in that sense."
Noting that the plaintiffs and defendants both asked for a ruling on the
question of whether "intelligent design" constitutes science, Jones said,
"if you're going to measure the effect of a particular policy, in this case
juxtaposing intelligent design with evolution, on the intended recipients,
you have to delve into what the policy is about. What was it about? It
was about intelligent design. And to try to determine the effect on the
recipients you have to determine what does that concept or phrase stand
for? Hence, we got into a search and examination of what exactly does ID
say, what is its basis, what are its scientific bona fides or lack
thereof. That opens the door for a determination of whether ID is in fact
science. And that is what that part of the opinion was. ... I wrote about
whether ID, as presented to me, in that courtroom from September to
November of 2005, was science, and I said it was not. That it was the
progeny, the successor to creationism and creation science. That it was
dressed-up creationism."
Looking forward, Jones expressed uncertainty about the long-term effect of
the Kitzmiller decision, commenting, "This is speculation on my part -- I
don't think that the concept of ID itself has a lot of vitality going
forward. The Dover trial discredited that thing that is ID. To the extent
that I follow it -- I'm curious about it, but it doesn't go any further
than that -- the likely tack going forward is something like teach the
controversy, talk about the alleged flaws and gaps in the theory of
evolution and go to that place first." He noted that creationists in both
Texas and Louisiana seem to be taking such a tack. And, he noted, there is
no prospect of the creationism/evolution controversy subsiding any time
soon: "They gave me the last word in 'Judgment Day' [a NOVA program on the
trial] and I said this is not something that will be settled in my time or
even in my grandchildren's lifetimes. It's an enduring, quintessentially
American, dispute."
For the interview, visit: http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1000297
For information about Kitzmiller v. Dover, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/intelligent-design-trial-kitzmiller-v-dover
For the decisionin the case (PDF), visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/webfm_send/73
For NCSE's coverage of events in Texas and Louisiana, visit:
http://www.ncseweb.org/news/texas
http://www.ncseweb.org/news/louisiana
For information about Judgment Day, visit: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/
THE FOURTH ISSUE OF EVOLUTION: EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
The fourth issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach -- the new journal
aspiring to promote accurate understanding and comprehensive teaching of
evolutionary theory for a wide audience -- is now available on-line. The
theme of the issue is the evolution of the eye. Featured, accordingly, are
original scientific articles "A Genetic Perspective on Eye Evolution: Gene
Sharing, Convergence and Parallelism," "Charting Evolutions
Trajectory: Using Molluscan Eye Diversity to Understand Parallel and
Convergent Evolution," "Early Evolution of the Vertebrate Eye -- Fossil
Evidence," "Evolution of Insect Eyes: Tales of Ancient Heritage,
Deconstruction, Reconstruction, Remodeling, and Recycling," "Exceptional
Variation on a Common Theme: The Evolution of Crustacean Compound Eyes,"
"Opening the 'Black Box': The Genetic and Biochemical Basis of Eye
Evolution," "Suboptimal Optics: Vision Problems as Scars of Evolutionary
History," "The Causes and Consequences of Color Vision," "The Evolution of
Complex Organs," "The Evolution of Extraordinary Eyes: The Cases of
Flatfishes and Stalk-eyed Flies," and "The Origin of the Vertebrate
Eye." And there are resources for teachers and reviews of books, too,
including -- consistently with the issue's theme -- a discussion of
teaching about evolution with the example of blind cave fish and a review
of Jay Hosler's comic Optical Allusions.
Also included is the fourth installment of NCSE's regular column for
Evolution: Education and Outreach, Overcoming Obstacles to Evolution
Education. In their article "Misconceptions About the Evolution of
Complexity," Andrew J. Petto (a member of NCSE's board of directors) and
NCSE's Louise S. Mead take the vertebrate eye as their example, since "the
complexity of vertebrate eyes is a common antievolution argument." In the
abstract, they summarize, "Despite data and theory from comparative
anatomy, embryology, molecular biology, genomics, and evolutionary
developmental biology, antievolutionists continue to present the eye as an
example of a structure too complex to have evolved. They stress what we
have yet to explain about the development and evolution of eyes and present
incomplete information as evidence that evolution is a 'theory in
crisis.' An examination of the evidence, however, particularly evidence
that has accumulated in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, refutes
antievolutionists' claims. The distribution of eyes in extant organisms,
combined with what we now know about the control of eye development across
diverse groups of organisms, provides significant evidence for the
evolution of all major components of the eye, from molecular to
morphological, and provides an excellent test of predictions based on
common ancestry."
For the contents of the issue, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/120878/
For Petto and Mead's article, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/a7v3307m37236637/fulltext.html
ROGER EBERT ON EXPELLED
The popular film critic Roger Ebert reviewed the creationist propaganda
movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed in a December 3, 2008, post
entitled "Win Ben Stein's mind" on his blog on the Chicago Sun-Times
website -- and he pulled no punches. "The more you know about evolution,
or simple logic, the more you are likely to be appalled by the film. No
one with an ability for critical thinking could watch more than three
minutes without becoming aware of its tactics," he wrote.
"This film is cheerfully ignorant, manipulative, slanted, cherry-picks
quotations, draws unwarranted conclusions, makes outrageous juxtapositions
(Soviet marching troops representing opponents of ID), pussy-foots around
religion (not a single identified believer among the ID people), segues
between quotes that are not about the same thing, tells bald-faced lies,
and makes a completely baseless association between freedom of speech and
freedom to teach religion in a university class that is not about
religion," he added.
"And there is worse, much worse," Ebert continued, taking especial offense
at Expelled's claim that the acceptance of evolution resulted in the
Holocaust -- "It fills me with contempt." Previously, the Anti-Defamation
League said that the movie's claim "is outrageous and trivializes the
complex factors that led to the mass extermination of European
Jewry." Expelled's lead, Ben Stein, responded, "It's none of their f---ing
business," according to Peter McKnight, writing in the Vancouver Sun (June
21, 2008).
For a thorough critique of Expelled, including a collection of links to
reviews of the movie, visit NCSE's Expelled Exposed website. Additionally,
the next issue of Reports of the NCSE (volume 28, numbers 5-6) is a special
issue devoted to debunking Expelled, containing reports on its reception, a
summary of the ways in which organizations with a stake in the
creationism/evolution controversy reacted, a summary of the various
controversies over its use of copyrighted material, and a detailed
explanation of its unsuitability for the classroom.
For Ebert's blog post, visit: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/12/win_ben_steins_mind.html
For the ADL's statement, visit: http://www.adl.org/PresRele/HolNa_52/5277_52.htm
For Peter McKnight's column, visit: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=f022096b-6832-4ec1-929
d-92e8bc337364
For Expelled Exposed, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com
For subscription information for Reports of the NCSE, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/membership
ERRATUM
Although Kevin Padian discussed evolution and religion with Alan Jones, the
dean of Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, on November 22, 2008, the link
provided in the December 5, 2008, evolution education update was to a video
of a previous discussion between the two, filmed on November 4, 2007. The
later discussion was not filmed.
For the video of Padian's talk with Jones, visit: http://fora.tv/2007/11/04/Kevin_Padian_Investigating_Evolution
Evolution education update: December 5, 2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
The Cincinnati Zoo distances itself from a widely criticized promotion
involving Answers in Genesis's Creation Museum. Plus Kevin Padian, who
serves as president of NCSE's board of directors, is continuing to speak
and write in enthusiastic defense of the teaching of evolution. And a new
batch of selected content from NCSE's journal is now available on-line.
CREATION "MUSEUM" REBUFFED BY CINCINNATI ZOO
"A promotional deal between the Cincinnati Zoo and the Creation Museum was
scuttled Monday after the zoo received dozens of angry calls and emails
about the partnership," reported the Cincinnati Enquirer (December 1,
2008). The promotion involved a package deal for tickets to the zoo's
annual Festival of Lights and to a Christmas-themed event at Answers in
Genesis's Creation Museum. The museum, which opened its doors in northern
Kentucky during Memorial Day weekend 2007, aims to illuminate "the effects
of biblical history on our present and future world" -- that is, to
evangelize for Answers in Genesis's particular brand of young-earth
creationism.
On November 30, 2008, biologist and blogger P. Z. Myers complained about
the promotion at his blog Pharyngula, writing, "the Cincinnati Zoo has
betrayed its mission and its trust in a disgraceful way, by aligning
themselves with a creationist institution that is a laughing stock to the
rest of the world, and a mark of shame to the United States," and urging
his readers to write to the zoo to "point out the conflict between what
they are doing and what their goal as an educational and research
institution ought to be." Other bloggers echoed his call, and the zoo was
evidently flooded with calls and e-mails, prompting it to cancel the
promotion because of the uproar. No refunds will be necessary, since no
packages of tickets had been sold.
NCSE's previous coverage of the Creation "Museum" includes Daniel Phelps's
review and overview and Timothy H. Heaton's account of his visit. NCSE
also sponsored a statement, signed by almost one thousand scientists in the
three states surrounding the museum -- Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana --
expressing their concern about the effect of the scientifically inaccurate
materials displayed there: "Students who accept this material as
scientifically valid are unlikely to succeed in science courses at the
college level. These students will need remedial instruction in the nature
of science, as well as in the specific areas of science misrepresented by
Answers in Genesis."
For the story in the Cincinnati Enquirer, visit: http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081201/NEWS01/312010040
For P. Z. Myers's blog post, visit: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/shame_on_the_cincinnati_zoo.php
For Phelps's and Heaton's articles, visit:
http://www.ncseweb.org/creationism/general/anti-museum-overview-review-answers-genesis-creation-museum
http://www.ncseweb.org/rncse/27/1-2/visit-to-new-creation-museum
For the NCSE-sponsored statement of concern, visit: http://sciohost.org/states/?p=3
THE LATEST FROM KEVIN PADIAN
Kevin Padian, who serves as president of NCSE's board of directors, is
continuing to speak and write in enthusiastic defense of the teaching of
evolution. To inaugurate Evolution '09, San Francisco's celebration of the
bicentennial of Darwin's birth and the sesquicentennial of the publication
of the Origin of Species, Padian spent about sixty minutes in a spirited
and lively discussion of evolution and religion with Alan Jones, the dean
of Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, on November 22, 2008. Now video of
the event is available on-line from Fora.tv. Discussing the challenge of
educating the public about evolution, Padian suggested that scientists need
to talk about the major transitions in evolution -- his specialty as a
vertebrate paleontologist -- "faster, harder, and more often." For
specifics, see his commentary in the February 2008 issue of Geotimes and
his article in Integrative and Comparative Biology 2008; 48 (2): 175-188.
Additionally, Padian discusses "The evolution of creationists in the United
States: Where are they now, and where are they going?" in a forthcoming
paper in Comptes Rendus Biologies, the proceedings of the French Academy of
Sciences for life sciences. There he writes, "As evolutionary biology in
all its forms continues to bring forth amazing new insights from the origin
of whales to the evolution of microbial resistance, one would think that
the anti-evolutionists would have less to cling to each year, and that they
would give up their arguments as disproven misapprehensions. They will
not, despite recent victories against ID as science and the lunacy of
'creation science'. Creationists reject the notion of a rational universe
because they believe that evolution depends upon the dominance of 'random
processes' that allow no divine direction or teleological goal. This is
the core of the resistance to evolution in America, and it will not go away
anytime soon."
In addition to serving as president of NCSE's board of directors, Padian is
Professor of Integrative Biology at the University of California at
Berkeley and also Curator of Paleontology at the University of California's
Museum of Paleontology. He recently received the 2008 Western Evolutionary
Biologist of the Year award from the Network for Experimental Research on
Evolution. He testified for the plaintiffs in Kitzmiller v. Dover, the
2005 case establishing the unconstitutionality of teaching "intelligent
design" in the public schools. In his decision, Judge John E. Jones III
wrote, "Padian's demonstrative slides, prepared on the basis of
peer-review[ed] scientific literature, illustrate how Pandas systematically
distorts and misrepresents established, important evolutionary
principles." He also noted that "Padian bluntly and effectively stated
that in confusing students about science generally and evolution in
particular, the disclaimer makes students 'stupid.'"
For the video of Padian's talk with Jones, visit: http://fora.tv/2007/11/04/Kevin_Padian_Investigating_Evolution
For Padian's commentary in Geotimes, visit: http://www.geotimes.org/feb08/article.html?id=comment.html
For Padian's article in Integrative and Comparative Biology (subscription
required), visit: http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/48/2/175
For Padian's paper in Comptes Rendus Biologies (subscription required),
visit: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2008.07.004
For information about Padian's Webby award, visit: http://nere.bio.uci.edu/
For Padian's testimony in Kitzmiller, with the slides he used, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/padians-expert-testimony
For the Kitzmiller decision (PDF), visit: http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf
CATCHING UP WITH RNCSE
Selected content from volume 28, number 2, of Reports of the National
Center for Science Education is now available on NCSE's website. Featured
are NCSE's Josh Rosenau's account of how the e-word -- evolution -- was
finally included in Florida's state science standards and NCSE's Glenn
Branch's report on the Texas Higher Education Coordination Board's decision
to deny the Institute for Creation Research authority to offer a graduate
degree in science education. And there are reviews, too: NCSE Supporter
G. Brent Dalrymple discusses Pascal Richet's A Natural History of Time, Ken
Feder reviews David Standish's Hollow Earth, and Kevin C. Armitage assesses
Michael Lienesch's In the Beginning: Fundamentalism, The Scopes Trial, and
the Making of the Antievolution Movement.
If you like what you see, why not subscribe to RNCSE today? The next issue
(volume 28, numbers 5-6) is a special issue devoted to debunking the recent
creationist propaganda film, Expelled, containing not only the material
already to be found at Expelled Exposed, but also reports on the reception
of Expelled at the box office, among critics, and in Canada; a summary of
the ways in which organizations with a stake in the creationism/evolution
controversy reacted to the film; a summary of the various controversies
over Expelled's use of copyrighted material; and a detailed explanation of
Expelled's unsuitability for the classroom. Don't miss out -- subscribe
now!
For selected content from RNCSE 28:2, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/rncse/28/2
For Expelled Exposed, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com/
For subscription information for RNCSE, visit: http://www.sncseweb.org/membership
Evolution education update: November 28, 2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Video and audio of Barbara Forrest's recent talk in Texas is now
available. Plus NCSE Supporter Philip Kitcher wins a Lannan Literary Award
for his Living with Darwin. And a new batch of selected content from
NCSE's journal is now available on-line.
BARBARA FORREST IN TEXAS
Barbara Forrest explained "Why Texans Shouldn't Let Creationists Mess with
Science Education" on November 11, 2008, at Southern Methodist University
in Dallas. Now video and audio of her talk is available on-line. The talk
was sponsored by the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund, and the Annette
Caldwell Simmons School of Education and Human Development, the Center for
Teaching Excellence, the Department of Anthropology, the Department of
Biological Sciences, and the Department of Philosophy in the Dedman College
of Humanities and Sciences at Southern Methodist University.
Forrest is a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University;
she is also a member of NCSE's board of directors. She coauthored (with
Paul R. Gross) Creationism's Trojan Horse (rev. ed., Oxford U.P.
2007). She also testified for the plaintiffs in Kitzmiller v. Dover, and
Judge Jones wrote in his ruling, "Barbara Forrest ... has thoroughly and
exhaustively chronicled the history of ID in her book and other writings
for her testimony in this case. Her testimony, and the exhibits ...
admitted with it, provide a wealth of statements by ID leaders that reveal
ID's religious, philosophical, and cultural content."
For video and audio of Forrest's talk, visit:
http://smu.edu/flashvideo/?id=248
http://smu.edu/newsinfo/audio/barbara-forrest-11nov2008.mp3
For information about Creationism's Trojan Horse, visit: http://www.creationismstrojanhorse.com/
CONGRATULATIONS TO PHILIP KITCHER
Philip Kitcher's Living with Darwin: Evolution, Design, and the Future of
Faith (Oxford U.P., 2006) was the recipient of a Lannan Literary Award for
Notable Book for 2008 from the Lannan Foundation, which "hopes to stimulate
the creation of literature written originally in the English language and
to develop a wider audience for contemporary prose and poetry." The award
includes a $75,000 prize. A Supporter of NCSE, Kitcher is the John Dewey
Professor of Philosophy at Columbia University.
Discussing Living with Darwin in BioScience, NCSE deputy director Glenn
Branch wrote that Kitcher's aim was "not only to debunk intelligent design
and expound the case for evolution but also 'to respond to the concerns of
the thoughtful people who are beguiled by the advertisements for
intelligent design, to expose just what it is that is threatening about
Darwinism, and to point to the deeper issues that underlie this recurrent
conflict' ... He succeeds brilliantly."
For information about Living with Darwin, visit: http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Philosophy/?view=usa&ci=9780195314441
For information about the award, visit: http://www.lannan.org/lf/lit/awards-list/by-last-name/P80/12583
For Glenn Branch's comments in BioScience (PDF), visit: http://www.bioone.org/archive/0006-3568/57/3/pdf/i0006-3568-57-3-278.pdf
CATCHING UP WITH RNCSE
Selected content from volume 28, number 1, of Reports of the National
Center for Science Education is now available on NCSE's website. Featured
are Barbara Forrest's commentary on the forced resignation of Chris Comer
from the Texas Education Agency, NCSE's Louise S. Mead's report at a
symposium aimed at training teachers how to use the latest creationist
textbook, Explore Evolution, in the classroom, and Ulrich Kutschera's
latest report on creationism in Germany. And there are reviews,
too: David Morrison discusses the late Robert Schadewald's Worlds of Their
Own and Rebecca J. Flietstra assesses Deborah B. Haarsma and Loren D.
Haarsma's Origins: A Reformed Look at Creation, Design, & Evolution.
If you like what you see, why not subscribe to RNCSE today? The next issue
(volume 28, numbers 5-6) is a special issue devoted to debunking the recent
creationist propaganda film, Expelled, containing not only the material
already to be found at Expelled Exposed, but also reports on the reception
of Expelled at the box office, among critics, and in Canada; a summary of
the ways in which organizations with a stake in the creationism/evolution
controversy reacted to the film; a summary of the various controversies
over Expelled's use of copyrighted material; and a detailed explanation of
Expelled's unsuitability for the classroom. Don't miss out -- subscribe
now!
For selected content from RNCSE 28:1, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/rncse/28/1
For Expelled Exposed, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com/
For subscription information for RNCSE, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/membership
Evolution education update: November 7, 2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
In Florida, the new state science standards may have to be reconsidered,
while the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, will be hosting a
multidisciplinary student conference on "Darwin's Legacy: Evolution's
Impact on Science and Culture."
BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD IN FLORIDA?
After a long and contentious wrangle, the Florida state board of education
voted 4-3 at its February 19, 2008, meeting to adopt a new set of state
science standards in which evolution is presented as a "fundamental concept
underlying all of biology." But now there are concerns that, due to a
recent state law, the standards will have to be approved again. The St.
Petersburg Times (November 6, 2008) explains, "The new law requires the
state Board of Education to adopt new academic standards by the end of
2011. That may include a new set of science standards, because the Board
of Education adopted the latest standards a few months before the bill
passed and was signed into law by Gov. Charlie Crist."
It is not yet clear whether the standards will indeed have to be approved
again, but Brian Moore, a staff attorney, with the state legislature's
Joint Administrative Procedures Committee (which reviews the rules proposed
by state agencies to ensure that they are in compliance with state law),
told the department of education that he thought so. According to
Education Week's curriculum blog (November 5, 2008), "It's possible, Moore
explained, that Florida's commissioner of education could seek to have
various experts certify that the recently approved science standards comply
with the Next Generation law. But it appears likely that new standards
would have to be re-approved in some form by the state board of education."
If so, the prospect of a renewed fight over the treatment of evolution in
the standards looms. "Hallelujah" was the response of Terry Kemple, who
opposed the treatment of evolution in the new standards. "This is an
opportunity for both sides to step back and let this be a fairer endeavor,"
he said. Brandon Haught of the grassroots organization Florida Citizens
for Science told the Times, "Maybe the legislators simply overlooked this
and there's a simple solution," adding that the group would "hope for the
best but plan for the worst." For now, the situation remains uncertain. A
spokesperson for the department of education told the Times, "We are
currently researching the matter so there are no specifics to offer at this
point."
For the story in the St. Petersburg Times, visit: http://www.tampabay.com/news/education/k12/article892815.ece
For the story in Education Week's curriculum blog, visit: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2008/11/about_those_new_florida_scienc.html
For Florida Citizens for Science's website and blog, visit:
http://www.flascience.org
http://www.flascience.org/wp/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Florida, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/news/florida
CALL FOR PAPERS: DARWIN'S LEGACY
The Evolution Learning Community at the University of North Carolina,
Wilmington, will be hosting "Darwin's Legacy: Evolution's Impact on
Science and Culture" -- a multidisciplinary student conference to be held
March 19-21, 2009. The conference will be a unique opportunity for
undergraduate and graduate students in the natural sciences, social
sciences, humanities, and arts who are conducting research or creative
endeavors related to evolution to present their research, investigate
graduate study opportunities, network, enhance their CVs, and enrich the
body of knowledge surrounding evolution. Abstracts are due on January 30,
2009; authors will be notified of acceptance by February 12, 2009.
Abstracts may be submitted to any of the following theme
sessions: evolution and the social sciences; evolution and religion;
evolution and human uniqueness; economics of evolution and its
consequences; the biodiversity crisis and conservation; Darwin's impact on
art, music, and literature; sex and evolution; genomes, race, and medicine;
evolution and ethics; the future of humanity; species in space and time;
speciation and the species problem. Note that papers need not be submitted
to a theme session; presentations on any topic related to evolution are
welcome. In addition to the student presentations, there will be addresses
by keynote speakers, including Kevin Padian, David Mindell, David Buss, and
Peter Carruthers.
For information about the conference, visit: http://library.uncw.edu/web/outreach/evolution/conference.html
Evolution education update: October 10,
2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Texas newspapers are editorially supporting the treatment of evolution in
the recently released draft set of science standards, while a lawsuit
alleging that the Understanding Evolution website violates the First
Amendment failed on appeal.
EDITORIAL SUPPORT FOR SCIENCE STANDARDS IN TEXAS
Texas's newspapers are beginning to express their editorial support of the
draft set of science standards, released by the Texas Education Agency on
September 22, 2008, and applauded for their treatment of evolution by the
Texas Freedom Network, Texas Citizens for Science, and the newly formed
21st Century Science Coalition. Referring to the absence of the "strengths
and weaknesses" language from the draft standards, the Waco Tribune
(October 3, 2008) commented, "Explaining and investigating 'strengths and
weaknesses' of any theory is inherent in scientific inquiry. But having
such language in state standards, as has been the case for several years,
is code for those who want religion to have a foot in the door when Darwin
comes up," and added, "acknowledging the shortcomings of scientific
theories, no matter what they are, is one of the essences of science. But
when the objective is to inject matters spiritual, we are not talking about
science. We are talking about religion that wants a seat at the table."
The Austin American-Statesman (October 6, 2008) urged the board of
education to "defer to scientists and its own advisory committee when it
comes to determining what should be taught in biology classes. The
six-member advisory committee, which includes science teachers and
curriculum experts, recommended eliminating ideas 'based upon purported
forces outside of nature' from high school biology courses. In other
words, get rid of creationism and intelligent design, which teach that the
universe was created by God or some other higher power." Invoking the
increasing economic importance of evolutionary biology, the editorial
added, "McLeroy and other board members should be strengthening science
standards to accommodate a big push to attract world-class biomedical
researchers, companies and grants to Texas. Those are growth industries
that have not looked favorably on communities that water down science
studies with vague and unproven ideas."
For the Waco Tribune's editorial, visit: http://www.wacotrib.com/opin/content/news/opinion/stories/2008/10/03/10032008waceditorial.html
For the Austin American-Statesman's editorial, visit: http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/10/06/1006science_edit.html
For the pro-science organizations in Texas, visit:
http://www.tfn.org
http://www.texscience.org
http://www.texasscientists.org/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=TX
APPEAL OF UNDERSTANDING EVOLUTION LAWSUIT DISMISSED
After her lawsuit challenging the Understanding Evolution website on
constitutional grounds was dismissed for lack of standing on March 13,
2006, Jeanne Caldwell appealed the decision to the United States Court of
Appeal for the Ninth Circuit. In a ruling dated October 3, 2008, the
appeals court rejected her appeal, affirming the lower court's decision.
Understanding Evolution, a collaborative project of the University of
California Museum of Paleontology (with funding from the National Science
Foundation and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute) and the National Center
for Science Education, was originally intended as a resource for teachers;
it subsequently expanded to appeal to everyone interested in learning about
evolution.
Among the resources for teachers is a brief discussion of the idea, labeled
as a misconception, that evolution and religion are incompatible. The
website notes, "Of course, some religious beliefs explicitly contradict
science (e.g., the belief that the world and all life on it was created in
six literal days); however, most religious groups have no conflict with the
theory of evolution or other scientific findings," and provides a link to
NCSE's publication Voices for Evolution.
Arguing that Understanding Evolution thereby endorses particular religious
doctrines in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment,
Caldwell filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California. But her suit was dismissed because she failed to
allege that she had federal taxpayer standing, failed to sufficiently
allege state taxpayer standing, and failed to establish that she suffered a
concrete "injury in fact."
Upholding the lower court's decision in Caldwell v. Caldwell et alia (the
first defendant was Roy Caldwell, the director of UCMP), the appeals
court's decision concluded, "Accordingly, we believe there is too slight a
connection between Caldwell's generalized grievance, and the government
conduct about which she complains, to sustain her standing to proceed."
Jeanne Caldwell was represented by Kevin T. Snider of the Pacific Justice
Institute and her husband Larry Caldwell. It was a further legal defeat
for Larry Caldwell, who previously sued his local school district, alleging
that his civil rights were violated, after it declined to implement his
proposals for evolution education; on September 7, 2007, the defendants won
a motion for summary judgment in that case.
For the appeals court's decision (PDF), visit: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0615771p.pdf
For Understanding Evolution, visit: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in California, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=CA
Evolution education update: October 3, 2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
A new coalition of scientists is defending the teaching of evolution in
Texas, and the International Planetarium Society affirms the scientifically
ascertained ages of the earth and of the universe.
TEXAS SCIENTISTS SUPPORT TEACHING EVOLUTION
A new coalition of Texas scientists voiced its opposition to attempts to
dilute the treatment of evolution in Texas's state science standards, which
are presently undergoing revision. At a news conference in Austin on
September 30, 2008, representatives of the 21st Century Science Coalition
challenged the idea that students should be told that there are
"weaknesses" in evolution. Armed with a stack of scientific journals, Dan
Bolnick, who teaches biology at the University of Texas, Austin, explained,
"Not a single one [of the articles in these journals] gives us reason to
believe evolution did not occur," the Austin American-Statesman (October 1,
2008) reported. "So where are the weaknesses? Simple: They don't
exist. They are not based on scientific research or data and have been
refuted countless times."
The Texas Education Agency released proposed drafts of the state's science
standards on September 22, 2008. A requirement in the current standards
for high school biology that reads "The student is expected to analyze,
review, and critique scientific explanations, including hypotheses and
theories, as to their strengths and weaknesses using scientific evidence
and information" was replaced with "The student is expected to analyze and
evaluate scientific explanations using empirical evidence, logical
reasoning, and experimental and observational testing." The change is
significant because in 2003, the "strengths and weaknesses" language in the
Texas state science standards was selectively applied by members of the
state board of education attempting to dilute the treatment of evolution in
the biology textbooks then under consideration.
The chair of the state board of education, avowed creationist Don McLeroy,
favors the "strengths and weaknesses" language, telling the Austin
American-Statesman (September 23, 2008), "I'd argue it doesn't make sense
scientifically to take it out." The 21st Century Science Coalition
organized and mobilized in response. Already over 800 Texas scientists
with or working towards advanced degrees in life, physical, and
mathematical science have signed the coalition's statement calling on the
board to approve science standards that "acknowledge that instruction on
evolution is vital to understanding all the biological sciences" and that
"encourage valid critical thinking and scientific reasoning by leaving out
all references to 'strengths and weaknesses,' which politicians have used
to introduce supernatural explanations into science courses."
For the story in the Austin American-Stateman, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/10/01/1001evolution.html
For the 21st Century Science Coalition's website, visit: http://www.texasscientists.org/
For the previous story in the Austin American-Statesman, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/09/24/0924science.html
For the full text of the coalition's statement, visit: http://www.texasscientists.org/sign.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=TX
IPS STATEMENT ON THE AGE OF THE EARTH AND UNIVERSE
The International Planetarium Society recently issued a statement on the
ancient age of the earth and universe, noting that "Many independent lines
of scientific evidence show that the Earth and Universe are billions of
years old. Current measurements yield an age of about 4.6 billion years
for the Earth and about 14 billion years for the Universe." The statement
adds, "These measurements of age are accepted by nearly all astronomers,
including both research astronomers and planetarium educators. These
astronomers come from nations and cultures around the world and from a very
wide spectrum of religious beliefs."
The statement also explained the need for the society to take a
stand: "Planetariums are based on science and education and as such
reflect the ideals and principles of these disciplines. Planetarium
educators seek to present both scientific results and an understanding of
how these discoveries are made." The International Planetarium Society
describes itself as "the global association of planetarium
professionals. Its nearly 700 members come from 35 countries around the
world. They represent schools, colleges and universities, museums, and
public facilities of all sizes including both fixed and portable
planetariums." Its primary goal is "to encourage the sharing of ideas
among its members through conferences, publications, and networking."
For the IPS's statement, visit: http://www.ips-planetarium.org/pubs/age-of-universe.html
For the IPS's website, visit: http://www.ips-planetarium.org/
Evolution education update: September 26, 2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
Newly released drafts of the Texas science education standards are being
praised for their treatment of evolution. Rabbis in the United States are
expressing their support of teaching evolution, while the Church of England
is devoting a new section of its website to Darwin. And Canadian
geologists have voiced their opposition to teaching creationism in Canada's
classrooms.
DRAFT SCIENCE STANDARDS IN TEXAS
The Texas Education Agency released proposed drafts of the state's science
education standards on September 22, 2008. Not surprisingly in light of
the ongoing controversies over teaching evolution in Texas, reporters
focused on the place of evolution in the draft standards, with the Dallas
Morning News (September 23, 2008) reporting, "Proposed curriculum standards
for science courses in Texas schools would boost the teaching of evolution
by dropping the current requirement that students be exposed to
'weaknesses' in Charles Darwin's theory of how humans and other life forms
evolved. Science standards drafted by review committees of teachers and
academics also would put up roadblocks for teachers who want to discuss
creationism or 'intelligent design' in biology classes when covering the
subject of evolution."
In particular, a requirement in the current standards for high school
biology that reads "The student is expected to analyze, review, and
critique scientific explanations, including hypotheses and theories, as to
their strengths and weaknesses using scientific evidence and information"
would be replaced with "The student is expected to analyze and evaluate
scientific explanations using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and
experimental and observational testing," and a description of the limits of
science (adapted from the recent National Academy of Sciences publication
Science, Evolution, and Creationism) -- "Science uses observational
evidence to make predictions of natural phenomena and to construct testable
explanations. If ideas are based upon purported forces outside of nature,
they cannot be tested using scientific methods" -- would be added.
Such revisions may seem small and unimportant, but in 2003, the "strengths
and weaknesses" language in the Texas state science standards was
selectively applied by members of the board attempting to dilute the
treatment of evolution in the biology textbooks then under
consideration. At the time, board member Patricia Hardy observed that it
was invidious to apply the language only to a single topic; while if it
were applied across the board, "we'd need a crane to carry the books to the
schools." In the end, all of the textbooks were adopted without
substantial changes, but it was clear that the "strengths and weaknesses"
language would be a matter of contention when the standards were next
revised. As Kathy Miller of the Texas Freedom Network told The New York
Times (June 4, 2008), "'Strengths and weaknesses' are regular words that
have now been drafted into the rhetorical arsenal of creationists."
Groups supporting the integrity of science education therefore applauded
the changes. In a September 23, 2008, press release, the Texas Freedom
Network's Kathy Miller was quoted as saying, "These work groups have
crafted solid standards that provide a clear road map to a 21st-century
science education for Texas students ... These common-sense standards
respect the right of families to pass on their own religious beliefs to
their children while ensuring that public schools give students a sound
science education that prepares them to succeed in college and the jobs of
the future." "It's time for state board members to listen to classroom
teachers and true experts instead of promoting their own personal agendas,"
she added. "Our students can't succeed with a 19th-century science
education in their 21st-century classrooms. We applaud the science work
groups for recognizing that fact."
In a September 23, 2008, blog post for the Houston Chronicle, Texas
Citizens for Science's Steven Schafersman also welcomed the the addition of
the description of the limits of science and the removal of the "strengths
and weaknesses" language, which he described as "the primary weapon that
Creationists have to attempt to damage and corrupt science textbooks." He
expressed regret, however, that those revisions were not emulated in all of
the standards. Schafersman also lamented the omission from the biology
standards of any requirement to learn about human evolution in particular,
commenting, "I'm sure the competent teachers on the biology panel discussed
a requirement for human evolution, but they ultimately decided against
it. They should have included it and forced the [state board of education]
members to remove it by majority vote rather than by giving their prior
permission to continue censorship."
The chair of the state board of education, avowed creationist Don McLeroy,
defended the "strengths and weaknesses" language, telling the Austin
American-Statesman (September 23, 2008), "I'd argue it doesn't make sense
scientifically to take it out ... Evolution shouldn't have anything to
worry about -- if there's no weaknesses, there's no weaknesses. But if
there's scientifically testable explanations out there to refute it,
shouldn't those be included too?" The newspaper added, "he prefers the
'strengths and weaknesses' language because it allows the board to reject a
textbook that doesn't cover the weaknesses of evolution." But Kevin
Fisher, who helped to write the draft biology standards, told the
American-Statesman, "Something doesn't become a theory if it's got
weaknesses. There may be some questions that may yet to be answered, but
nothing that's to the level of a weakness."
What's next? The Texas Education Agency is expected shortly to solicit
public comment on and expert review of the draft standards. The draft
standards will then be revised in light of that input, and submitted to the
state board of education for its approval. Their fate is uncertain, since,
as the American-Statesman reported, "In previous public discussions, seven
of 15 board members appeared to support, on some level, the teaching of the
weaknesses of evolution in science classrooms. Six have been opposed, and
two -- Geraldine Miller, R-Dallas, and Rick Agosto, D-San Antonio -- are
considered swing votes." And, as Schafersman commented, "Since there are
no scientists on the SBOE and since seven members are Young Earth
Creationists -- most of whom have publicly stated their intention to
distort evolution standards and damage science instruction -- it is likely
that the public debate and approval will be contentious."
For the drafts of the standards, visit: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/teks/scienceTEKS.html
For the story in the Dallas Morning News, visit: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/092408dntexevolution.13ec04c.html
For information about Science, Evolution, and Creationism, visit: http://www.nap.edu/sec
For the story in The New York Times, visit: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/04/us/04evolution.html
For the Texas Freedom Network's press release, visit: http://www.tfn.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5453
For information about the Texas Freedom Network, visit: http://www.tfn.org/
For Steven Schafersman's blog at the Houston Chronicle, visit: http://www.chron.com/commons/readerblogs/evosphere.html
For information about Texas Citizens for Science, visit: http://www.texscience.org/
For the story in the Austin American-Statesman, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/09/24/0924science.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=TX
RABBIS IN SUPPORT OF TEACHING EVOLUTION
The Clergy Letter Project's "Open Letter Concerning Religion and Science
From American Rabbis" was the topic of a story in the Chicago Tribune
(September 19, 2008), beginning, "For Rabbi Gary Gerson of the Oak Park
Temple B'nai Abraham Zion, evolution does not oppose religious belief but
strengthens it. ... Seeing evidence of the divine in the theories of
Charles Darwin meant that Gerson did not hesitate to sign an open letter
drafted by a suburban Chicago rabbi this summer supporting the teaching of
evolution in public schools."
The letter, which urges public school boards to affirm their commitment to
teaching evolution, was written by Rabbi David Oler of Congregation Beth Or
in Deerfield, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago. It follows in the footsteps
of the Clergy Letter Project's similar open letter for Christian clergy,
formulated in 2004 and currently endorsed by over 11,000 members of the
clergy across the country and around the world. The Clergy Letter Project
also sponsors Evolution Weekend, on or about Darwin's birthday, in which
religious leaders are encouraged to discuss the compatibility of faith and
science.
Rabbi Oler told the Tribune, "I would say that as Jews, being a minority,
we're particularly sensitive to not having the views of others imposed on
us ... Creationism and intelligent design are particularly religious
matters that don't belong in [the] public school system." Michael
Zimmerman, the founder of the Clergy Letter Project, added, "the goal of
both letters is to say that religious leaders, both Jewish and Christian,
can come together and be secure in their faith without having their faith
impact and pervert modern science."
For the story in the Chicago Tribune, visit: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-relig-evolution-19-sep19,0,4695850.story
For the rabbis' letter, visit: http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/JewishClergy/RabbiLetter.htm
For further information about the Clergy Letter Project and Evolution
Weekend, visit:
http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/religion_science_collaboration.htm
http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/rel_evolution_weekend_2009.htm
APOLOGIES TO DARWIN?
Anticipating the bicentennial of Darwin's birth and the sesquicentennial of
the publication of On the Origin of Species, the Church of England unveiled
a new section of its website entitled "On the origin of Darwin," discussing
Darwin's relationship to the church and the development of his own views on
faith, and including a brief historical sketch, bibliography, and listing
of celebrations of the Darwin anniversaries. Attracting the most
attention, however, was "Good religion needs good science" -- a short essay
by the Church's director of mission and public affairs, the Rev. Malcolm
Brown -- owing to its call for the Church of England to apologize to Darwin.
Addressing Darwin, Brown wrote, "200 years from your birth, the Church of
England owes you an apology for misunderstanding you and, by getting our
first reaction wrong, encouraging others to misunderstand you still. We
try to practice the old virtues of 'faith seeking understanding' and hope
that makes some amends. But the struggle for your reputation is not over
yet, and the problem is not just your religious opponents but those who
falsely claim you in support of their own interests." As the Associated
Press (September 15, 2008) reported, however, Brown's statement was not an
official apology on behalf of the church.
Reaction to Brown's call for the church to apologize for misunderstanding
Darwin was mixed among his descendants. Andrew Darwin, a
great-great-grandson of Darwin, told the Daily Mail (September 13, 2008)
that the apology was pointless: "'Why bother?' he said. 'When an apology
is made after 200 years, it's not so much to right a wrong, but to make the
person or organisation making the apology feel better.'" But Horace
Barlow, a great-grandson of Darwin, thought that Darwin would have been
pleased to hear the church's apology; he noted also, "They buried him in
Westminster Abbey, which I suppose was an apology of sorts."
Reaction was also mixed in the Episcopal Church in the United States of
America, the Church of England's sister church. Episcopal News Service
(September 17, 2008) quoted the Rev. Norman Faramelli of Episcopal Divinity
School and Boston University as concurring with Brown's apology, with the
caveat that "it's not just the Church of England that owes him an
apology." The Rev. Canon Ed Rodman, a member of the Episcopal Church's
Executive Council and the council's Committee on Science, Faith and
Technology, however, felt that it didn't go far enough, saying that it was
time for the church to "fully acknowledge its culpability in discrediting
Darwin's work."
The question of apologizing to Darwin arose in the Catholic Church as well,
according to Reuters (September 16, 2008). In discussing "Biological
Evolution: Facts and Theories" -- a conference of scientists, theologians,
and philosophers addressing the Origin, to take place in Rome in March 2009
-- Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, the Vatican's culture minister, indicated
that the church was not planning to issue a posthumous apology to
Darwin. "Maybe we should abandon the idea of issuing apologies as if
history was a court eternally in session," he said, while adding that
Darwin's theories were "never condemned by the Catholic Church nor was his
book ever banned."
For the "On the origin of Darwin" website, visit: http://www.cofe.anglican.org/darwin
For the Associated Press story (via the International Herald-Tribune),
visit: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/09/15/europe/EU-REL-Britain-Church-Darwin.php
For the Daily Mail story, visit: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1055597/Church-makes--8216-ludicrous-8217-apology-Charles-Darwin--126-years-death.html
For the Episcopal News Service story, visit: http://www.episcopal-life.org/79901_100750_ENG_HTM.htm
For the Reuters story, visit: http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSLG62672220080916
For information about the "Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories"
conference, visit: http://www.evolution-rome2009.net/
CANADIAN GEOLOGISTS ADD THEIR VOICE FOR EVOLUTION
The Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences recently issued a statement on
creationism, beginning, "Canadian media report growing public pressure to
introduce Creationism and its equivalent Intelligent Design (ID) in school
curricula, hinting that Creationism/ID is a 'theory', thus suggesting that
it shares common ground with science-based theories. Such reporting
ignores the fundamental difference between faith and measurable
facts. CFES-FCST is extremely concerned about this trend, and not only
because of the demonstrated importance of science to Canadian society."
"Creationism and ID do not qualify as science, because the scientific
method is not deployed and these ideas are therefore not theories or
hypotheses in universally accepted scientific sense," the statement
continues. "Hence, Creationism and ID do not belong in any K-12 science
curriculum." The Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences describes itself as
"the unified voice of more than 15 Canadian learned and professional earth
science societies"; it represents more than 15,000 practicing earth
scientists in Canada.
For the CFES statement, visit: http://www.geoscience.ca/creationism.html
For information about CFES, visit: http://www.geoscience.ca
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Canada, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=CN
Evolution education update: September 12, 2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology is the latest organization to denounce the antievolution law in Louisiana. Meanwhile, the United Church Observer reviews the state of the creationism/evolution controversy in Canada, and NCSE's Project Steve attains its 900th signatory -- and by now its 930th.
PALEONTOLOGISTS DECRY LOUISIANA'S ANTIEVOLUTION LAW
In a September 4, 2008, press release, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology urged Louisiana citizens and legislators to repeal the recently enacted "Science Education Act" in their state, writing, "The Act was drafted under the guise of 'academic freedom' and appeals to cherished values of fairness and free speech. However, SVP says the Act intends to garner support and legal protection for the introduction of religious, creationist concepts, including intelligent design, in public school science curricula. By permitting instructional materials that are not reviewed by the state's science standards committees, the Louisiana Act and those like it encourage teachers and administrators to work outside these standards. This makes it possible for local school boards to define science and science education to suit their own agendas, thereby compromising the quality of science education for students, and allowing religious discrimination in America's public school science classrooms."
Founded in 1940, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology is the leading North American scientific and educational organization concerned with vertebrate paleontology. According to its position statement on evolution education, "Evolution is fundamental to the teaching of good biology and geology ... The record of vertebrate evolution is exciting, inspirational, instructive, and enjoyable, and it is our view that everyone should have the opportunity and the privilege to understand it as paleontologists do." In decrying the Louisiana law, the Society joins a host of scientific organizations, including the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute of Biological Sciences and seven of its member societies, and (together) the Society for the Study of Evolution and the Society of Systematic Biologists.
For the SVP's press release, visit: http://www.vertpaleo.org/news/permalinks/2008/09/04/
For the SVP's position statement on evolution education, visit: http://www.vertpaleo.org/education/index.cfm
For the protests from the ASBMB, AAAS (PDF), AIBS, and SSE and SSB (PDF), visit:
http://www.asbmb.org/News.aspx?id=1054
http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2008/media/0620-la-gov-jindal-veto.pdf
http://www.aibs.org/position-statements/20080620_joint_statement.html
http://www.evolutionsociety.org/download/SSElettertoJindal.pdf
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Louisiana, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=LA
UPDATE FROM CANADA
Writing in the September 2008 issue of the United Church Observer, Drew Halfnight discusses the public understanding of evolution in Canada. With the evolution wars constantly raging to the south, "Canadians see themselves as spectators to someone else's battle," he writes, adding, "Though it may not have the profile or scope here that it has in the U.S., the tension between a Bible-based understanding of the origins of creation and the science of evolution evidently does not stop at the border."
As NCSE previously reported, according to the latest poll of Canadian public opinion, 58 percent accept evolution, while 22 percent think that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years, and 20 percent are unsure. (In the United States, 50% of respondents preferred the pro-evolution responses, with 44 percent preferring "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so," and with only 5 percent volunteering a different response or declining to answer.)
The article devotes several paragraphs to the episode in which Brian Alters's project to study the effects of the popularization of "intelligent design" on Canadian students, teachers, parents, administrators, and policymakers was denied funding by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, in part on the grounds that the proposal lacked adequate "justification for the assumption in the proposal that the theory of evolution, and not intelligent-design theory, was correct."
Halfnight writes, "The problem, of course, is that evolution is a scientific theory, while ID theory is not. Evolutionary biology is based on mountains of observable evidence, while ID cannot be tested at all. In short, ID has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with belief." Jason Wiles, who manages the Evolution Education Research Centre at McGill University, commented that the SSHRC "put evolution and ID on the same footing, then said, 'Our position is to have no position.'"
Evolution is neglected in Canada's public school curricula, too: "In all but one provincial science curriculum, evolution is relegated to a single unit in a Grade 11 or 12 elective course taken by a sliver of each graduating class. It would not be a stretch to say the majority of Canadian high school students graduate without ever encountering Darwin's theory of natural selection." Additionally, private religious schools are allowed to teach creationism alongside evolution.
As in the United States, there is plenty of opposition to the teaching of evolution in Canadian schools. Leesa Blake, vice-president of the Science Teachers' Association of Ontario, told Halfnight that teachers often experience pressure from parents or students to teach creationism. And as with their counterparts in the United States, Canadian teachers often feel unprepared to teach evolution: "A lot of the people who are teaching biology don't actually have the training" to teach evolution, Blake told Halfnight.
The article ends with a plea for keeping religious views out of science classes, quoting Denis Lamoureux, described as "a devout evangelical Christian and confirmed evolutionist who teaches science and religion at St. Joseph's College in the University of Alberta." (He is also the author of Evolutionary Creationism [Wipf & Stock, 2008].) "'So how are we going to teach biology?' he asks. 'Teach the science as metaphysically free as possible. In other words, keep God out of it, keep the atheistic world view out of it.'"
For the story in the United Church Observer, visit: http://www.ucobserver.org/ethics/2008/09/wheres_darwin/
To buy Evolutionary Creationism from Amazon.com (and benefit NCSE in the process), visit: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/1556355815/nationalcenter02
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Canada, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=CN
PROJECT STEVE: N = 900
With the addition of Steven K. Nordeen on September 5, 2008, NCSE's Project Steve attained its 900th signatory -- and the Steveometer is now at 930. A tongue-in-cheek parody of a long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of "scientists who doubt evolution" or "scientists who dissent from Darwinism," Project Steve mocks such lists by restricting its signatories to scientists whose first name is Steve (or a cognate, such as Stephanie, Esteban, Istvan, Stefano, or even Tapani -- the Finnish equivalent). About 1% of the United States population possesses such a first name, so each signatory represents about 100 potential signatories. ("Steve" was selected in honor of the late Stephen Jay Gould, a Supporter of NCSE and a dauntless defender of evolution education.)
Although the idea of Project Steve is frivolous, the statement is serious. It reads, "Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to 'intelligent design,' to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools."
Highlights from the history of Project Steve include the original press release, Glenn Branch and Skip Evans's description of the project for Geotimes, the announcement that Steven W. Hawking was Steve #300, the announcement (on St. Stephen's Day!) of Steve #400, the publication of a front-page story on Project Steve in a leading Canadian newspaper, and the announcements of Steves #600, #700, and #800. And, of course, Project Steve proved to be scientifically fruitful in its own right. "The Morphology of Steve," by Eugenie C. Scott, Glenn Branch, Nick Matzke, and several hundred Steves, appeared in the prestigious Annals of Improbable Research; the paper provided "the first scientific analysis of the sex, geographic location, and body size of scientists named Steve."
Additionally, Project Steve appeared in Steven Pinker's recent book, The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature (Viking 2007). Pinker, himself a single-digit Steve, described it as "the most formidable weapon in the fight against neo-creationism today," adding, "Part satire, part memorial to Stephen Jay Gould, the project maintains a Steve-O-Meter (now pointing past 800) and has spun off a T-shirt, a song, a mascot (Professor Steve Steve, a panda puppet), and a paper in the respected scientific journal Annals of Improbable Research called 'The Morphology of Steve' (based on the T-shirt sizes ordered by the signatories)."
For information about Project Steve, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/3541_project_steve_2_16_2003.asp
For "The Morphology of Steve" (PDF), visit: http://improbable.com/pages/airchives/paperair/volume10/v10i4/morph-steve-10-4.pdf
Evolution education update: August 29, 2008
Dear Friends of NCSE,
A brave teacher in Florida is featured on the front page of The New York
Times, while Church and State examines the latest antievolution law from
Louisiana.
"A TEACHER ON THE FRONT LINE"
"A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash" -- a story on the
front page of The New York Times (August 24, 2008) -- examines the
creationism/evolution controversy as it plays out in the classroom of David
Campbell, a biology teacher in Orange Park, Florida. The Times's reporter
Amy Harmon writes, "in a nation where evangelical Protestantism and other
religious traditions stress a literal reading of the biblical description
of God's individually creating each species, students often arrive at
school fearing that evolution, and perhaps science itself, is hostile to
their faith." Campbell's students are a case in point, and "their abiding
mistrust in evolution, he feared, jeopardized their belief in the basic
power of science to explain the natural world -- and their ability to make
sense of it themselves."
In addition to helping his own students, Campbell also helped to improve
the treatment of evolution throughout Florida by co-founding the grassroots
organization Florida Citizens for Science and by serving on the committee
that revised Florida's state science standards in 2007. The new standards
describe evolution as a "fundamental concept underlying all of biology" --
a far cry from their predecessors, which sedulously avoided even using the
e-word. Harmon writes, "Campbell defended his fellow writers against
complaints that they had not included alternative explanations for life's
diversity, like intelligent design. His attempt at humor came with an
edge: 'We also failed to include astrology, alchemy and the concept of the
moon being made of green cheese,' he said. 'Because those aren't science,
either.'"
As well as explaining the scientific evidence for common descent and
natural selection, Campbell discusses the limits of science, telling his
students, "Faith is not based on science ... And science is not based on
faith. I don't expect you to 'believe' the scientific explanation of
evolution that we're going to talk about over the next few weeks. But I do
... expect you to understand it." The approach seems to be helpful, to
judge from a case recounted in the article. One student who earlier
refused to answer a test question that asked for two forms of evidence
supporting evolutionary change and natural selection, writing, "I refuse to
answer ... I don't believe in this," later relented. Grading the student's
retest, Campbell found that "the question that asked for evidence of
evolutionary change had been answered."
Accompanying the article is a sidebar discussing the treatment of evolution
in state science standards, comparing the ratings assigned by Lawrence S.
Lerner in his 2000 study Good Science, Bad Science with NCSE's assessment,
using Lerner's criteria, of the standards currently used. The standards
"have improved in many states since 2000 ... [b]ut most states' standards
do not explicity require teachers to explain that humans evolved from
earlier life forms." There is also a historical timeline illustrating "A
Fading Resistance to Evolution Education," furnished by NCSE, and,
apparently only on the newspaper's website, a version of NCSE's answers to
Jonathan Wells's "Ten questions to ask your biology teacher about
evolution." For a more extensive rebuttal of Wells's claims about
evolution, see Alan D. Gishlick's "Icons of Evolution?"
For the article in the Times, visit: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/education/24evolution.html
For Florida Citizens for Science's website and blog, visit:
http://www.flascience.org/
http://www.flascience.org/wp
For the sidebar and timeline in the Times, visit:
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/08/24/education/24evolutiongr1.ready.html
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/08/24/education/24evolutionGR2.ready.html
For Good Science, Bad Science, visit: http://www.edexcellence.net/detail/news.cfm?news_id=42
For NCSE's answers to Jonathan Wells, visit:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/us/WEB-tenquestions.html
http://www.ncseweb.org/icons/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Florida, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=FL
"ERODING EVOLUTION" IN LOUISIANA
"Eroding Evolution," a new article in the July/August 2008 issue of Church
and State, addresses the recently enacted "Science Education Act" in
Louisiana, which threatens to open the door for creationism and
scientifically unwarranted critiques of evolution to be taught in public
school science classes. Veteran science teacher Patsye Peebles told Church
and State that she worries about the scientific literacy of Louisiana's
students: "Now this muddies the waters and keeps students from having a
really good education," she said. "When they go to college, they will be
at a disadvantage because they will not have a good understanding of
science."
As New Scientist (July 9, 2008) reported, "Supporters of the new law
clearly hope that teachers and administrators who wish to raise
alternatives to evolution in science classes will feel protected if they do
so. The law expressly permits the use of 'supplemental' classroom
materials in addition to state-approved textbooks." Creationists have
historically often tried to undermine evolution education by proposing
supplementary materials: Of Pandas and People is a notorious
example. NCSE's Joshua Rosenau told Church and State, "They may not be
saying 'Noah's flood' or 'Adam and Eve' anymore, but it is the same
creationist argument they are making."
Barbara Forrest, a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana
University, a member of NCSE's board of directors, co-author of
Creationism's Trojan Horse (Oxford University Press, 2007), and a leader in
the pro-science grassroots group Louisiana Coalition for Science, put the
law in historical context. Referring to the radical religious right
organization that engineered the bill, the Louisiana Family Forum, she
explained, "The LFF has been lobbying the legislature for nine years laying
this groundwork. They have been waiting for a number of factors to come
together -- now the legislature as a whole is conservative and we have a
governor who favors creationism."
After observing that a previous antievolution law in Louisiana occasioned
the Supreme Court's decision in Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) that it is
unconstitutional to teach creationism in the public schools, the article
observes, "It looks like Louisiana is repeating history, despite concerns
from teachers, scientists and legal scholars." And, returning to the
perspective of the science teacher, it concludes by quoting Peebles
again: "They just aren't even paying attention to what teachers are
telling them ... We don't need this, we don't want it." Church and State
is a publication of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a
non-profit organization that protects separation of church and state.
For "Eroding Evolution," visit: http://www.au.org/site/News2?abbr=cs_&page=NewsArticle&id=9947
For New Scientist's report, visit: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19926643.300-new-legal-threat-to-school-science-in-the-us.html
For information about Of Pandas and People, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/article.asp?category=21
For information about Creationism's Trojan Horse, visit: http://www.creationismstrojanhorse.com/
For Louisiana Coalition for Science's website, visit: http://lasciencecoalition.org/
For American United's website, visit: http://www.au.org/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Louisiana, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=LA
|
![](/img/blank.gif) |