Here is an article from The Scientist 15[6]:1, Mar. 19, 2001. I send
this because of the discussion that occurred recently here on TIPS
regarding this topic.
Jeff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.the-scientist.com/yr2001/mar/russo_p1_010319.html
Fighting Darwin's Battles
Symposium marks evolutionist victory, anti-evolution growth
By Eugene Russo
For the past 80 years, the teaching of evolution has flirted with
extinction several times in several states. From the famous 1925 Scopes
Monkey Trial in Tennessee, to the recent debate in Kansas, Creationist
challenges to the teaching of Charles Darwin's theory have persisted
despite mounting evidence in support of it. According to a panel of
scientists and historians speaking at a symposium at last month's
American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting, such
challenges, often involving proposals to give "equal time" to
Creationist and evolutionist theories, will continue both nationally and
internationally.
The AAAS symposium took place four days after the February 14 decision
by the Kansas State Board of Education, which reinstated evolution in
that state's public school curriculum as mandatory, reversing a previous
board's decision from August 1999. The symposium itself was held to mark
the 20th anniversary of another important battleground for the teaching
of evolution: the landmark McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education trial.
In 1981, five scientists, four of whom spoke at the symposium, helped
invalidate an Arkansas statute requiring equal classroom time for
evolution and Creationism. "I don't think we could possibly have lost
that trial," said trial witness and Harvard University professor of
zoology Stephen J. Gould. "But it had to [take] place." He pointed out
that he and his colleagues were not trying to prove evolution, only show
that "Creationism, whatever it is, is not a science."
Gould, along with other McLean trial veterans--biology professor Harold
J. Morowitz of George Mason University, biology professor and ordained
priest Francisco Ayala of the University of California at Irvine, and
dean emeritus of Oregon State University's College of Oceanic &
Atmospheric Sciences G. Brent Dalrymple--discussed advances in their
respective fields in the past 20 years that have helped reinforce the
theory of evolution. Florida State University professor of philosophy
and zoology Michael J. Ruse, also a witness in McLean v. Arkansas Board
of Education, did not attend.
Gould suggested that paleontology has had a "very fruitful" 20 years. He
cited findings that have helped "fill the gaps" in the fossil record,
such as the 1994 discovery of the skeleton of the "walking whale"
(Ambulocetus) in northern Pakistan, an apparent intermediary between
aquatic and land mammals.1 Ayala noted that mitochondrial DNA evidence
from recent years lends support to the "out of Africa" theory for how
human ancestors migrated among the continents. Dalrymple pointed to
research out of western Australia from earlier this year reporting
mineral evidence for the existence of continental crust and oceans 4.4
billion years ago, an important contrast to "Young Earth Creationist"
claims of a much younger planet.2
The recent human genome papers have also elucidated human evolution by
highlighting humans' high number of nucleotide repeats, and the numerous
protein domains that humans share with other species.3 "The genome has
now a fossil record, a paleontological record, of the last billion years
of genome evolution," maintains Eric Lander, director of the Whitehead
Center for Genome Research in Cambridge, Mass.
Nevertheless, Creationist movements have increased budgets and bases of
support. The Young Earth Creationists (YEC), who believe, in part, that
God created Earth and all types of living things in six days 10,000
years ago, have two organizations with $5 million budgets: the Santee,
Calif.-based Institute for Creation Research, and the newer Answers In
Genesis. A February 2001 Gallup poll suggests that more Americans favor
some form of Creationism than they do any theory of evolution (See
www.gallup.com/Poll/releases/pr010305.asp for poll results). Public
opinion on the topic, according to annual poll results, has not deviated
significantly since Gallup first started asking about evolution and
Creationism in 1982.
According to Ron L. Numbers, an historian of science at the University
of Wisconsin, symposium discussant, and author of The Creationists,4
Creationist movements, though typically considered a uniquely American
phenomenon, have bloomed internationally as well. Numbers noted
well-established YEC movements in Australia, Korea, Russia, and Turkey.
Recently, a new facet of anti-evolution has surfaced in addition to YEC.
In the last 10 years, "Intelligent Design (ID) Theory," or "Intelligent
Design Creationism" as it's known by its critics, has captured much
attention.5 According to symposium participant and evolution activist
Eugenie Scott, McLean and a subsequent 1987 ruling against a statute in
Louisiana, which called for classroom time for evolution and
Creationism, "struck down Creation science, which resulted in
anti-evolutionists reinventing [it] under other guises." ID's major
organization is the Seattle-based Center for Renewal of Science and
Culture. Scott, director of the National Center for Science Education, a
nonprofit organization working to "defend the teaching of evolution
against sectarian attack," also noted the presence of several ID
theorists at secular institutions, which, she said, had given the
anti-evolution movement a respectability never experienced by the YEC.
Intelligent design theorists like Michael J. Behe, an associate
professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, and
author of Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution,6
reject the Creationist label, suggesting that theirs is a scientifically
viable theory. ID theorists generally do not agree with the main tenets
of YEC. The central notion in Behe's book is based on the concept of
"irreducible complexity;" the idea that certain systems, such as
bacteria flagellum, blood-clotting cascade, and other components of
cellular systems, are composed of well-matched interacting parts wherein
the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to stop
functioning. Behe contends that irreducible complexity implies the work
of a designer, though that designer need not necessarily be God (though
Behe himself believes that the designer is, in fact, God).
Scott charges that ID theory and irreducible complexity are not science
(that they are not testable nor falsifiable) and should not be included
in science curricula. The irreducible complexity concept, said Scott,
does not reflect an understanding of natural selection and implies a
"God at the gaps" argument--using God to explain phenomena that are not
yet well understood. Creationists contend that evolution is also neither
testable nor falsifiable.
Behe supports the teaching of evolution in schools, and welcomed the
Kansas board's reversal, but he would like to see the problems with
evolutionary theory discussed in the classroom as well. "I think it
should be taught warts and all," he told The Scientist. Behe adds that
any discussion involving the origins of anything, whether life or the
universe, necessarily involves philosophical implications. "People who
think that teaching Darwinian biology does not touch on philosophical
issues are kidding themselves," he comments.
Scott warned those at the symposium that although such suggestions seem
rational and in the spirit of routine scientific debate, they're
actually tantamount to devoting significant time to nonscience in a
science classroom. Such "equal time" proposals are being considered in
Arizona, Ohio, and Minnesota. Gould and Scott said they were not
particularly concerned about losing legal battles related to the
teaching of evolution, but about teachers bowing to "unstated
intimidation" at a local level--choosing not to teach evolution to avoid
conflict with parents or other teachers.
"There's no dispute in science over whether evolution took place," said
Scott. "That's the big distinction lost in the general public."
Eugene Russo can be contacted at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
References
1. J.G. Thewissen et al., "Fossil evidence for the origin of aquatic
locomotion in Archaeocete whales," Science, 263: 210-12, 1994.
2. S.A. Wilde et al., "Evidence from detrital zircons for the existence
of continental crust and oceans on the Earth 4.4 Gyr ago," Nature,
409:175-8, January 11, 2001.
3. W.H. Li et al., "Evolutionary analyses of the human genome," Nature,
409:847-9, February 15, 2001.
4. R.L. Numbers, The Creationists, New York: A.A. Knopf, 1992.
5. S. Bunk, "In a Darwinian world, what chance for design?" The
Scientist 12[8]:3, Apr. 13, 1998.
6. M.J. Behe, Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to
Evolution, New York: The Free Press, 1996.
--
Jeffry P. Ricker, Ph.D. Office Phone: (480) 423-6213
9000 E. Chaparral Rd. FAX Number: (480) 423-6298
Psychology Department [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scottsdale Community College
Scottsdale, AZ 85256-2626
"Science must begin with myths and with the criticism of myths"
Karl Popper
Listowner: Psychologists Educating Students to Think Skeptically (PESTS)
http://www.sc.maricopa.edu/sbscience/pests/index.html
