Nerds fight the religious right on creationism

by Plutonium Page

80 years ago, on July 10, 1925, the Scopes "Monkey Trial"  opened.  Basically, the prosecution contended that John Scopes, a science teacher, had violated Tennessee's Butler Act, which provided:

 

...That it shall be unlawful for any teacher in any of the Universities, Normals and all other public schools of the State which are supported in whole or in part by the public school funds of the State, to teach any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals.

In other words, it was against the law to teach the evolution of man.

In the July 22, 1925 edition of The Nation, Joseph Wood Krutch, who covered the Scopes trial, wrote:

 

The zeal of the fundamentalists has been enormously quickened by an anticipatory taste of triumph, and they will push any victory they may gain to the fullest possible extent. Already one State legislator has announced his intention of "putting teeth" in the present law by making the penalty for its violation a prison sentence instead of a fine, and various extensions of the principle of State interference with teaching may be confidently predicted. Members of the D. A. R. will, sooner or later, seek to forbid in the schools any historical facts which tend to reflect upon the character or motives of Revolutionary heroes; conservative economists and sociologists will certainly follow their lead; and, unless the movement is definitely checked, the next twenty-five years will see the State schools and universities so shackled with legislation as to make them utterly worthless as institutions for education. The control of learning will pass into the hands of the uneducated, and youth will leave the schools more ignorant than when it entered them.

(Emphasis mine)

80 years later, teaching evolution in U.S. schools is yet again being treated with suspicion.  But this time, it's the scientists who are talking about pre-emptive legal action, not the Christian right.

Continued below the fold.

The Washington Post reports:

 

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.

This week's battle is focused on Kansas, where State Board of Education hearings begin Thursday on evolution and intelligent design, a carefully marketed theory that challenges accepted understandings of Earth's origins in favor of the idea that a creator played a guiding role.

[snip]

Teachers and trade groups around the country are working to build e-mail lists, lobby lawmakers and educate the public about the perceived perils of intelligent design. Lawyers are examining prospects for court challenges. Evolution's defenders would love to repeat the success of nuclear physicist Marshall Berman, who led a counterattack after winning a seat on the New Mexico education board. The activism marks a tactical shift for scientists and educators who dismissed intelligent design as little more than a fad of the religious right, only to see the concept gain favor and media attention. Where experts previously treated the issue as a hyper-rational debate over evidence they consider beyond dispute, they are learning what their opponents long knew. "It's a political battle. Education and evolution are hot-button items," said Jack Krebs, vice president of Kansas Citizens for Science. "Some scientists are starting to understand that this is a serious threat."

"Intelligent design"?  Definitely stealthy.  It's creationism, plain and simple.

In order to make a point, I've inserted the link to the Discovery Institute in the next excerpt from the Post article.  Note how slick the website is.  It "looks scientific".  Very convincing.  Dangerously so.  Anyway, the article continues:

 

The Discovery Institute, the strongest voice behind intelligent design, at one point gathered the names of 356 scientists who questioned evolution. In response, the National Center for Science Education located 543 scientists named Steve -- including a few Stephanies -- who declared the evidence "overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry."

The NCSE was created to fight the dilution of evolutionary theory. With an annual budget of about $700,000, the California-based operation serves as a clearinghouse for worried teachers and citizen groups. Its Web site is stocked with news bulletins and teaching guides. Executive director Eugenie C. Scott rides the circuit, debating intelligent design proponents and giving speeches in what has become a growth industry.

"We know a phenomenal amount about evolution," Scott told hundreds of science teachers in Dallas last month. "The science in creationism is terrible."

No kidding.  That "science" is analogous to the "science" that says global warming is a "hoax".

Check out who's one of the guys who talks about this on the national level:

 

At the national level, Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) demonstrated political savvy envied by scientists when he proposed an addition to the No Child Left Behind education bill in 2001: "Where biological evolution is taught, the curriculum should help students to understand why this subject generates so much continuing controversy, and should prepare the students to be informed participants in public discussions."

The measure seemed innocuous enough and a "sense of the Senate" action passed 91 to 8. Only later did science groups conclude that Santorum, working with the Discovery Institute, sought to create an opening in how evolution would be taught.

I fervently hope the scientists in Kansas, and elsewhere, will be successful.  The Bush administration has dealt blow after blow to education and science research in the U.S.  We don't need to "dumb down" the public education system any more.  And we don't need a repeat of the Scopes trial... ever.

Comments

[spartan 68]

I find it funny (but sad) that evolution from the religious perspective focuses solely on the human aspect. Most of what we just studied about evolution and natural selection deals with little things like the beak of a finch and plants that changed from algae to terrestial. Does the fundie group dispel these theories of evolution as well, or is it simply a case of wanting desperately not to be a hairless ape? Gah!

[Steve]

"543 scientists named Steve." I love it!

[emptypockets]

"The control of learning will pass into the hands of the uneducated, and youth will leave the schools more ignorant than when it entered them." (1925)

Any numbers on whether this came true? (Particularly in the South?)

[braq]

I personnally don'get get how if you believe in the creation you would want to talk about as a theory. But maybe that's just because i am not an integrist.

[Kelly Miller]

You can find out much more about the "543 scientists named Steve" at the National Center for Science Education's Project Steve website.

To quote from the NCSE press release,

NCSE's "Project Steve" is 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." (For examples of such lists, see the FAQs.)

Creationists draw up these lists to convince the public that evolution is somehow being rejected by scientists, that it is a "theory in crisis." Most members of the public lack sufficient contact with the scientific community to know that this claim is totally unfounded. NCSE has been exhorted by its members to compile a list of thousands of scientists affirming the validity of the theory of evolution, but although we easily could have done so, we have resisted such pressure. We did not wish to mislead the public into thinking that scientific issues are decided by who has the longer list of scientists!

Project Steve mocks this practice with a bit of humor, and because "Steves" are only about 1% of scientists, it incidentally makes the point that tens of thousands of scientists support evolution. And it honors the late Stephen Jay Gould, NCSE supporter and friend.

We'd like to think that after Project Steve, we'll have seen the last of bogus "scientists doubting evolution" lists, but it's probably too much to ask. We do hope that at least when such lists are proposed, reporters and other citizens will ask, "but how many Steves are on your list!?"

The current count on the Steve-o-meter is 563. And be sure to check out The Steve Song.

[Steve]

He who controls the Steves, controls the universe!

[spartan 68]

Didn't you hear? It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and STEVE!

[dday]

It's Inherit the Wind II: Judgment Day!

Who do you think they'll get to play Clarence Darrow and William Jenning Bryan this time?

Seriously, Intelligent Design is insidious, based on all sorts of logical fallacies, the reduction of with would be that science is so complex, there'd have to be a Creator to figger it all out!!!

[dday]

It's Inherit the Wind II: Judgment Day!

Who do you think they'll get to play Clarence Darrow and William Jenning Bryan this time?

Seriously, Intelligent Design is insidious, based on all sorts of logical fallacies, the reduction of with would be that science is so complex, there'd have to be a Creator to figger it all out!!!

[Sara]

Stephen Jay Gould was a College Classmate of mine, and a few years before he died, we had a nice long dinner together -- mostly a continuation of an argument that began in 1958 about Baseball. Anyhow, we talked at some length at the role he had played as an advocate -- a role he had become tired of playing. He had been a witness in Arkansas in one case, and in flying out shared a seat row with Bill Clinton just then starting his campaign for President. Once Clinton won, as Steve said, he tried to appoint him to all the boards and commissions having to do with Science -- so much so he would have had to move to Washington. He was upset that all too many of his collegues were willing to slap him on the back and praise him for doing the Professon's work -- but never were available when a chance to go witness in court came up. He likened the experience of doing dialogue with the Fundi's as equal to having a personal debate with a mass of Nuclear Missiles. "They are 'programed' and unless you know what your doing, it is unlikely you will change their minds."

I'm pleased the Science Types named their effort after him -- and that they perhaps comprehend the critical importance of the fight. Hopefully many of them will "qualify" as expert witnesses in Federal Court, and take up where Gould left off.