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

It’s no secret that critics of intelligent design desperately want to link design theory with religion. The critics know how guilt-by-association will make it much easier to simply ignore and marginalize the actual arguments. A recent AP article in the Hawk Eye about the treatment of Guillermo Gonzalez at Iowa State University highlights two common variants of this guilt-by-religion fallacy.

Gonzalez is a Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute and co-author of book, The Privileged Planet. The AP article highlighted how Gonzalez has been treated with hostility by fellow Iowa State University professors since he became involved with intelligent design. The article presents a good example of the fallacy of characterizing intelligent design as merely religious.

COLUMBUS, Ohio — February 15, 2006. Opponents of Ohio’s Critical Analysis of Evolution Lesson Plan convinced the Ohio State Board of Education (OSBE) yesterday to repeal both their benchmark requiring critical analysis of evolution and the approved lesson plan for teaching critical analysis of evolution. The Benchmark in Ohio’s Science Standards stated that students should “Describe how scientists continue to investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory.” It also acknowledged that “The intent of this benchmark does not mandate the teaching or testing of intelligent design.” By an 11-4 vote, the OSBE complied with the Darwinists who were urging the OSBE to repeal both the benchmark and the lesson plan. The 11 Board members who supported repealing the policy Read More ›

COLUMBUS, Ohio – February 15, 2006. Yesterday University of Akron biologist Dan Ely testified before the Ohio State Board of Education (OSBE) in favor of Ohio’s Critical Analysis of Evolution Lesson Plan. Addressing the OSBE after they had already repealed the lesson plan, Ely stated he was “dismayed how the board has caved in to outside lobbyists,” noting that “it’s amazing how much erroneous information is existing here.” Ely served on the science writing team that helped produce the Critical Analysis of Evolution Lesson Plan. Ely noted that this lesson does not have intelligent design. “I don’t see where any of you get intelligent design out of the lesson. I teach some intelligent design to our honor students at the Read More ›

COLUMBUS, Ohio — February 15. One Ohio citizen who supported the critical analysis benchmark to the Ohio State Board of Education yesterday was Katie Hess, a senior biology major at the Franciscan University of Steubenville, in Ohio. Hess, who graduated from Ohio public schools, now plans to become a high school biology teacher. She explained her desire to study science. “Part of my motivation to enter the sciences is from my love and openness to the world around us, and some observations of natural beauty that have filled me with an excitement and have left me with questions which have been explored coming to a great understanding of the world around us.” Hess then showed how asking these questions drives Read More ›

“This is a completely outrageous slap in the face to the 69% of Ohioans just polled who said they want students to hear the scientific evidence for and against Darwin’s theory,” said John G. West, associate director of Discovery Institute’s Center for Science & Culture. “Most people want students to learn the evidence critical of Darwinism, as well as the evidence that supports it, rather than just teaching Darwin’s theory as if it were sacred dogma.”

By more than a 3-to-1 margin, Ohio residents strongly support public school teachers presenting both the evidence for evolution, as well as the evidence challenging the theory, according to a new poll by Zogby International released today. (full poll report here)

“Ohioans want Darwin’s theory of evolution fully and completely presented, including the theory’s strengths and weaknesses,” said Robert Crowther, director of communications for Discovery Institute, which commissioned the Zogby poll. “The public is solidly behind the approach to teaching evolution that the Ohio state board of education has already adopted. Those attacking the school board for supporting teaching both the evidence for and against evolution don’t represent the views of the majority of Ohioans.”

Sixty-eight percent of respondents said they agreed with the following statement: Biology teachers should teach Darwin’s theory of evolution, but also the scientific evidence against it. Less than 20 percent supported the alternative statement: Biology teachers should teach only Darwin’s theory of evolution and the scientific evidence that supports it.

The February 13, 2006 issue of Time has a cover article asking “Is America Flunking Science?” The article notes that while the U.S. is still the world’s leader in science, it appears to be losing its edge. “Some critics have tried to put the blame for the U.S.’s scientific decline on President George W. Bush, citing … his statements in support of ”intelligent design’ as an alternative to evolution…” Yet given that intelligent design isn’t being mandated in a single district in the country, I’m pretty sure these critics are just blowing smoke. A much more reasonable observer would say, “if there’s a problem in science education in America today, then wouldn’t it stand to reason that the problem is Read More ›

“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.”