Science Reporting

This morning’s New York Times article on Kansas has a much improved title, and despite its failure to report on the substance of the science testimony that took place yesterday, the article does drop good hints about what went on, such as:

a parade of Ph.D.’s testified Thursday about the flaws they saw in mainstream science’s explanation of the origins of life. It was one part biology lesson, one part political theater, and the biggest stage yet for the emerging movement known as intelligent design.

TOPEKA, KS — The first of three consecutive days of hearings before Kansas Science Committee concluded today. A number of scientists who are skeptical of chemical evolutionary explanations for the origin of the first life and/or neo-Darwinian evolution testified before the Committee that good science education demands that students learn the scientific weaknesses of these respective theories, in addition to the theories’ strengths.

Yet, after leaving the hearings, I came across a few news stories that read more like science fiction alternate histories than science news stories. The scope of the day’s hearings spanned numerous issues — but NO ONE advocated removing or “diluting” evolution. (For a good discussion of this and a good start on the Kansas Science Subcommittee hearings, see Rob Crowther’s post below.)

Here’s a brief rundown of the day’s testimony…

UPDATE, May 6: The New York Times has published this article under the new, and vastly improved and accurate headline: “In Kansas, Darwinism Goes on Trial Once More”. Topeka, KS — Indeed, Jodi Wilgoren’s lead from her story in The New York Times sums up what the scene was today in Memorial Hall in Topeka, the first day of hearings on how evolution should be taught in Kansas public schools. In the first of three daylong hearings characterized here as the direct descendant of the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, a parade of Ph.D.’s testified today about the flaws they find in Darwin’s theory of evolution, transforming a small auditorium into a forum on one of the most controversial questions in Read More ›

Topeka, KS — One wonders if Washington Post reporter Peter Slevin was even in the same room with the AP’s John Hanna, Wichita Eagle’s Josh Funk or Barbara Hollingsworth from the Topeka Capital Journal, or any of the other dozen journalists attending.

For some inexplicable reason, the Washington Post’s reporting on the Kansas debate over evolution is completely out of step with most other major media covering the story (here, here, and here).

Funk reports today that:

The debate centers on proposed changes to Kansas school science standards, designed to encourage a more critical approach to evolution, that the state board will vote on later this summer.

The AP, the Kansas City Star, and the Topeka Capital Journal all basically agree in their reports that this is the issue.

The Washington Times has an excellent editorial this morning outlining the real issue in Kansas. It concludes by faulting Darwinists for not being willing to engage in legitimate scientific debate, quoting Discovery Senior Fellow David Berlinski in the process: “The defense of Darwin’s theory … has fallen into the hands of biologists who believe in suppressing criticism when possible and ignoring it when not,” wrote David Berlinski recently in the Wichita Eagle. Mr. Berlinski, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, is widely recognized as a leading Darwinian skeptic. He continues, “It is not a strategy calculated to induce confidence in the scientific method.” It also doesn’t help our students.

Today the Kansas Board of Education opens its hearings on whether students should learn about all of the scientific evidence relating to Darwin’s theory, including the evidence that challenges the theory. The big question is whether journalists will actually report on the substance of the hearings, or will they simply follow the script supplied by the Darwin-only advocates, who have made clear that they want to prevent at all costs any discussion of the science. Darwinists in Kansas have virtually promised to smear and demonize the scientists who will be testifying at the hearings. What they cannot do is make those scientists disappear. After months of claiming that there are no scientific critics of Darwinism, and insisting that the only Read More ›

Washington Post reporter Peter Slevin seems to have become the new press secretary for the pro-Darwin National Center for Science Education (NCSE). But he apparently hasn’t informed his editors at the Post, who are continuing to publish his stories. At least, that’s the conclusion I’ve come to after reading Slevin’s histrionic piece in yesterday’s Post. While many local reporters in Kansas have been working overtime to accurately and fairly cover both sides of the evolution controversy, Slevin has weighed in with a piece that reads from the first sentence like one of the NCSE’s fundraising letters:

Alarmed by proposals to change how evolution is taught, scientists and teachers are mobilizing to fight back, asserting that educational standards are being threatened by what they consider a stealth campaign to return creationism to public schools.

Earlier this week, the website www.kansasscience2005.com disclosed an incredible internet post from an official with Kansas Citizens for Science, the group trying to prevent the inclusion of scientific criticisms of Darwin’s theory in the Kansas Science Standards. On February 10, Liz Craig (identified in this article as “a spokeswoman for Kansas Citizens for Science”) outlined her group’s outrageous disinformation plan for the newsmedia covering the Kansas science standards debate. Rather than talk about science, Ms. Craig described how she plans to use the newsmedia to smear and demonize anyone who opposes her group’s agenda: My strategy at this point is the same as it was in 1999: notify the national and local media about what’s going on and portray them Read More ›

Today’s Christian Science Monitor has an interesting article claiming that students are starting to question Darwin in science classes. Imagine that! Students are so interested in the subject they are actually asking teachers questions about it. The article features information about the Coldwater Media video Icons of Evolution, and it even lists the suggested questions to ask biology teachers drafted by biologist Jonathan Wells. Note the stock response of Darwinists in the story who apparently think having students ask questions in class is disruptive (!) and who claim that asking questions about Darwin is tantamount to injecting religion into the classroom. But, as the article clearly shows, the questions being raised about Darwin focus on science, not religion. Are Darwinists Read More ›

If you want to see how bad major media coverage can be, check out this over-the-top story filed by the British news agency Reuters. Titled “Evolution on trial as Kansas debates Adam vs Darwin,” the story starts off with the following gross misrepresentation of the Kansas hearings: More than two dozen witnesses will give testimony and be subject to cross-examination, with the majority expected to argue against teaching evolution. As pointed out previously on this blog, the scientists who will testify in Kansas are not going to argue against the teaching of evolution. They are going to argue for presenting students with scientific criticisms of Darwin’s theory as well as the evidence favoring the theory. Contrary to the fanciful reporting Read More ›