Science and Culture Today | Page 1435 | Discovering Design in Nature

“Evolution Sunday is the height of hypocrisy,” says Bruce Chapman, president of Discovery Institute the nation’s leading think tank researching scientific challenges to Darwinian evolution. “Why do Darwinists think it is not okay for people to criticize Darwin on religious grounds, but it is just fine to defend him on religious grounds?”

Sunday marks the 197th birthday of Charles Darwin and to celebrate 400 ministers have announced they will deliver pro-evolution sermons in conjunction with “Evolution Sunday.”

“Our view is not that pastors should speak out against evolution, but that the Darwinists are hypocrites for claiming–falsely–that opposition to Darwinism is merely faith based, and then turning around and trying to make the case that Darwinism itself is faith based,” added Chapman.

One day after an elected Fellow of The American Association for the Advancement of Science urged the Ohio State Board of Education (OSBE) to keep its evolution lesson plan that presents some of the scientific challenges to Darwinian evolution, a member of the National Academy of Sciences also encouraged the board to retain the lesson plan. The plan has recently come under attack from dogmatic Darwinists seeking to dumb down the teaching of evolution in Ohio.

Philip S. Skell, a Member of the National Academy of Sciences and the Evan Pugh Professor (Emeritus) of Chemistry at Penn State University, sent a letter to the OSBE stating: “I am writing–as a member of the National Academy of Sciences–to voice my strong support for the idea that students should be able to study scientific criticisms of the evidence for modern evolutionary theory along with the evidence favoring the theory. … Encouraging students to carefully examine the evidence for and against neo-Darwinism will help prepare students not only to understand current scientific arguments, but also to do good scientific research.”

An elected Fellow of The American Association for the Advancement of Science today urged the Ohio State Board of Education (OSBE) to keep its evolution lesson plan that presents some of the scientific challenges to Darwinian evolution.

Lyle H. Jensen, a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science as well as a Member, American Academy of the Arts and Sciences and a Professor (Emeritus) with the Department of Biological Structures and Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington wrote to the OSBE:

“While students should surely learn about the scientific strengths of evolution, they should also have the opportunity to learn about scientific weaknesses with the theory. I strongly urge you to retain the Critical Analysis of Evolution Lesson Plan so that Ohio students are objectively informed concerning the facts of biology and trained to be better scientists.”

Epidemic Update: Thanks to an alert from a correspondent blogger, we report with great dismay that False Fear Syndrome has indeed struck Michigan. This corrects our previous report that False Fear Syndrome had skipped Michigan and gone straight from Ohio to Wisconsin. This confirms a cluster in the Great Lakes region. False Fear Syndrome occurs when some educator or policymaker proposes that students critically analyze scientific theories, such as evolution, but then various opponents raise False Fears that critical analysis will bring intelligent design into the classroom. Here is a description of this latest case: Representative Brian Palmer in Michigan has submitted an excellent bill requiring critical analysis of scientific theories in schools. The language apparently states: “The course content Read More ›

Breaking News: False Fear Syndrome has skipped right over Michigan and spread directly from Ohio to Wisconsin. The primary symptom is the spreading of false fears about teaching intelligent design in states that are merely encouraging the critical analysis of evolution. The Syndrome is typically accompanied by paranoia among educators, politicians, and the newsmedia. This epidemic broke out in full force in Kansas last November. More recently it appeared in Ohio and South Carolina. Sadly, today there is a confirmed case in Wisconsin. A press release from Wisconsin Representative Terese Berceau indicates she has introduced a bill into the Wisconsin State Legislature seeking to “to stem the growing tide of intelligent design and other specious science.” This is interesting because Read More ›

Today’s Wall Street Journal news section features an article that should be read carefully at the American Museum of Natural History in New York. “How Pygmy Ota Benga Ended Up in Bronx Zoo as Darwinism Dawned,” by Cynthia Crossen, is an example of the embarrassing history you will not see acknowledged at the AMNH’s self-congratulatory Darwin retrospective — or anywhere else that Darwinists are in charge. Darwinism helped perpetuate and justify racism, as the Ota Benga story makes clear. It also produced the eugenics movement, where Darwinists (including, please note, the American Museum of Natural History) were the leaders. Eugenics was “science” and anyone who dissented was considered benighted. (See Richard Weikart’s “From Darwin to Hitler” for the eugenics story Read More ›

It appears that evolution is not as popular as many would expect in Darwin’s home country. The BBC reports, Britons unconvinced on evolution. Less than half responded that evolution best described their view on the origin of life. Furthermore, more than 40 percent believe that intelligent design should be included in science lessons.

While not directly relevant to the debate over intelligent design in the United States, the results are interesting, and came as a surprise to many scientists in Briton, including the President of the Royal Society.

In a 7700 word article, Shankar Vedantam writes in the Washington Post about Caroline Crocker’s treatment at George Mason University. Some Darwinists I’ve known — who have never experienced what it is like to be a scientific minority in today’s climate — argue that she was not fired from her job. “Her contract was simply not renewed for reasons unrelated to ID” they claim. True: her contract was not renewed, and technically speaking, she was not “fired.” But from information I have heard, the non-renewal of her contract had much to do with her views and the fact that she mentioned ID in a biology classroom. It seems to me that Crocker’s account in the Washington Post is very accurate. Read More ›