Science Reporting

World has a good news story on the Kansas science hearings, one that goes well beyond the MSM’s rusty boilerplate about scientists clashing with Bible thumpers:

In Kansas, Darwinists won back control of the State Board of Education in 2000 and restored the older standards. But conservatives have now retaken the board, and they are expected to vote this summer to adopt the revisions debated in Topeka.

The Darwinist response to such a challenge is no secret. “My strategy at this point is the same as it was in 1999,” wrote Liz Craig of Kansas Citizens For Science on the group’s discussion board in February. “Notify the national and local media about what’s going on and portray them in the harshest light possible, as political opportunists, evangelical activists, ignoramuses, breakers of rules, unprincipled bullies, etc. . . . we can sure make them look like asses as they do what they do.”

Then there are these facts, widely misreported by several major newspapers and magazines:

Biologist and Icons of Evolution author Jonathan Wells takes The New York Times and physicist Lawrence Krauss to task here and here for persistent misreporting of the science curricula battles in the state of Kansas.

Associated Press reporter John Hanna’s story about the definition of science currently used in Kansas appeared in papers all across the country over the weekend, and other reporters have touched on this issue as well.

And rightly so. This is one of the most important issues before the Kansas state board of education, namely, what is the proper definition of science.

Science writer Denyse O’Leary is bringing her incisive humor to the blogosphere. Post-Darwinist is a must read. An excerpt from her discussion of the Nightline debate between Michael Ruse and William Dembski epitomizes her style:

Lou Dobbs’ tackles the evolution education debate with Jonathan Wells (whom they correctly identify as a scientist, a molecular biologist no less), John Morris of ICR and Darwinist philosopher Michael Ruse. Poor Michael, this is the second time this week he’s lost this debate.

“Lou Dobbs Tonight” airs 6-7pm EST, but is regularly rebroadcast throughout the evening, so be sure to check your local listings (For instance, it is rerun again in Seattle from 8-9pm).

A transcript of the Fox News interchange on May 6 between Eugenie Scott and Discovery Institute’s Stephen Meyer has been posted on the Fox News website. During the segment Eugenie Scott continues her recent effort to defend “evolution” by virtually disowning Darwin in public.

If you don’t think a civilized discussion of the evolution controversy is possible, watch the May 7 edition of C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal,” which held a low-key and eminently reasonable discussion of the Kansas hearings and the controversy over how best to teach evolution. The program featured Mark Ryland, director of Discovery Institute’s Washington, D.C. office, and Peter Folger of the American Geophysical Union. If only the Darwinists in Kansas were as respectful and dignified as Mr. Folger! You can watch the program on the web by going here and clicking on the program for May 7. The discussion of evolution starts about an hour and twenty-two minutes into the show.

An essay of mine ran in today’s Kansas City Star. It begins:

It seems the Darwinists in Kansas are living in the past. Not the past of, say, the fossil record. The history written there tells of the abrupt appearance of major animal forms, nothing like the gradually branching tree of life that Darwin envisioned. The past that some evolutionists are living in, rather, is the Kansas science curriculum battle of 1999.

Knight-Ridder Newspapers is circulating a false news report after apparently being bamboozled by the Darwinist spin-machine in Kansas. The article claims that the expert witnesses in the Kansas evolution hearings have not read the science standards they are seeking to change. But the charge is false, and the fact that a major news organization would promote such a bogus story makes one wonder about how many reporters have actually read the science standards in question. The article begins:

Topeka, KS – As I’m writing it’s 8:30am of day two of the three most contentious days for science in Kansas, ever. After yesterday’s three-ring circus, complete with highwire acts like William Harris and the antics of sideshow barker Pedro Irigonegaray, today is downright decaffeinated, starting out as if Starbucks had run out of coffee. (Of course if I could find a Starbucks here, I’d know for sure.)

The hearing room is about 1/3 full, a decided difference from yesterday. Amateur videographers are all that remain to tape the proceedings. Several of the key local reporters are in attendance but the national media are largely absent now.

First up is an oceanographer, Dr. Edward Peltzer. Pelzer (http://www.mbari.org/staff/etp3/) is a Senior Research Specialist at Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute.