Posted by Nick Matzke on December 11, 2004 | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0)

The Annals of Improbable Research and the Luxuriant Flowing Hair Club for Scientists (LFHCfS) have just announced the Luxuriant Flowing Hair Club for Scientists (LFHCfS) Men and Women of the Year.  The first member of LFHCfS was, naturally enough, Harvard evolutionary biologist Stephen Pinker (who also happens to be a Project Steve Steve — he gets around).

I move that we find out if any PT posters belong in LFHCfS.  The best nomination I could think of was Ian Musgrave.

Continue reading  “LFHCfS Awards”

Posted by Matt Young on December 11, 2004 | Comments (14) | TrackBack (0)

This essay is a follow-up to my recent entry, “Debating with Evolution Deniers,” which may be found at http://www.pandasthumb.org/pt-archives/000632.html#more….  In that essay, I quoted a representative of the Discovery Institute, who had defended teaching so-called intelligent design in the public schools on the NPR program “Science Friday.” That representative was David DeWolf, a law professor at Gonzaga University.  Yesterday (December 10, 2004) on “Science Friday,” the Biology Department at Gonzaga University released the following statement:

Biology Department rejects intelligent design

On National Public Radio’s Talk of the Nation Science Friday program of November 19, GU Law Professor David DeWolf participated in a discussion on teaching intelligent design as an alternative to evolution. Although Professor DeWolf is on the faculty of Gonzaga University Law School, his views on intelligent design do not represent those of the University as a whole. In particular, the faculty of the Biology Department at Gonzaga are unanimous in their acceptance of evolutionary theory as a fundamental underlying tenet of the science of biology. The principles of evolution are as well-established as any other body of scientific knowledge, and a full and correct appreciation for those principles is necessary for understanding the nature of life. Intelligent design is not a scientific alternative to evolution. The flaws in the idea of intelligent design have been amply and publicly exposed, and the Biology Department feels that the teaching of intelligent design has no place in a science curriculum at any level.

For additional information on the issue of intelligent design vs. evolutionary theory, visit the National Center for Science Education.

In short, the people at Gonzaga who really understand biology have repudiated the views of Prof. DeWolf.  I was particularly gratified to see their link to the National Center for Science Education, which you may find at http://www.ncseweb.org….

Notes.  The statement above differs slightly from what was read on the air.  It may be found at http://gonzology.gonzaga.edu/view_news.php?e=1185….  It is reproduced here with permission.

Posted by Nick Matzke on December 11, 2004 | Comments (8) | TrackBack (8)

The York Daily Record has been doing a bang-up job reporting on the controversy in Dover, Pennsylvania about teaching “intelligent design” and Of Pandas and People.  Check their new special section on “Dover Biology” for a history of situation, and daily updates.

In case anyone’s faith in democracy, America, and apple pie has been quavering lately, I wanted to alert PT readers to three recent, and excellent, letters written to the York Daily Record by people from the Dover Area.

Here are the links, I will quote them below.

• York College profs disturbed by Dover

• It’s hard to bear the scientific nonsense in ‘Pandas’

• God expects us to use our brains

Continue reading  “Doverian doings”

Posted by Yang Yang on December 11, 2004 | Comments (404) | TrackBack (0)

With any tavern, one can expect that certain things that get said are out-of-place. But there is one place where almost any saying or scribble can find a home: the bathroom wall. This is where random thoughts and oddments that don’t follow the other entries at the Panda’s Thumb wind up. As with most bathroom walls, expect to sort through a lot of oyster guts before you locate any pearls of wisdom.

The previous wall got a little cluttered, so we’ve splashed a coat of paint on it.

Posted by PvM on December 10, 2004 | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

There still seems to be a confusion amongst ID proponents that ID actually provides an explanation or as some suggest ‘the better/best explanation”.  Seems it’s time for an FAQ on ‘Icons of ID’

A good example is the case of ID’s Bulldog whose postings exemplify a myriad of misunderstandings and confusions about both evolutionary theory as well as Intelligent Design. The name is a word play on Huxley who was called Darwin’s Bulldog

Part of the confusion about ID is undoubtably due to the poor definitions, contradictory claims, the equivocation and flawed theoretical foundation of ID but I believe that a large part is due to how ID is presented to its followers. In other words, ID is oversold and underdeveloped. We see a similar problem in Salvador’s attempt to defend or even apply the Explanatory filter or the concept of Complex Specified Information (CSI).

But it is essential for ID”s (short term) survival that it ignores any shortcomings in its foundations, or hides it in equivocation, sloppy definitions and ambiguity.

Continue reading  “Icons of ID: All bark, no bite”

Posted by PvM on December 09, 2004 | Comments (39) | TrackBack (0)

Intelligent Design proponents often pull a bait and switch when discussing the detection of design. On the one hand they argue that ID contributes to science since it adds the concept of design to science, on the other hand when pressed for examples to support their claims, they point to science making successful design inferences as evidence of the validity of design detection.
How can this be? On the one hand ID is portrayed as adding something to science, on the other hand science is argued to already have these concepts.

Of course ID proponents further muddle the issues by confusing Dembski’s design inference as being relevant to how science detects design. On ARN, Salvador is showing all the signs of these confusions as he tries in vain to address the critiques raised by Dayton, Charlie and RBH.

Continue reading  “Icons of ID: Equivocation on design”

Posted by PvM on December 09, 2004 | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)

The human parathyroid gland, which regulates the level of calcium in the blood, probably evolved from the gills of fish, according to researchers from King’s College London.
Anthony Graham and Dr Masataka Okabe published their findings in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Continue reading  “Human Gland Probably Evolved From Gills”

Posted by Jack Krebs on December 08, 2004 | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)

Unfortunately, I guess, the producer of “Janet Parshall’s America” called me up and cancelled my appearance on the show tomorrow, saying “they were going in a different direction” because of some “breaking news.”  I thanked him and asked him to keep me in mind, but I got the feeling ( I may be wrong) that the  opportunity has passed me by. Oh well ….  (It will be interesting to see who/what they have replaced me with.)

I think, however, that the little summary that I wrote here was worth the time - it helped me articulate my position, and I think I will have the opportunity to make the same points elsewhere, possible in more important venues.

Thanks to all who offered me support and advice.

Posted by John S. Wilkins on December 07, 2004 | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

I have blogged an article in Phi Beta Kappa, the online magazine of the Professional Association of Educators, on the true significance for education and society of the Wedge Strategy on my Evolving Thoughts blog.

The article, by educator Mark Terry, who works just down the road from the Disco, sorry, Discovery Institute, covers Huxley and religion and is a piece worth reading.

Posted by PvM on December 07, 2004 | Comments (38) | TrackBack (0)

The Dover area schoolboard has released a press-release for the Biology Curriculum

It includes the following statement:

Students will be made aware of gaps/problems in Darwin’s Theory and of other theories of evolution including, but not limited to Intelligent Design. The Origins of Life is not taught.

I will show that while there may be gaps in Darwin’s theory, it is not a theory in crisis. I will also show that by focusing on the gaps in Darwin’s theory, Intelligent Design is a ‘God of the Gaps’ theory which focuses on our ignorance rather than our knowledge. Finally I will show that there is no ‘Intelligent Design’ theory of evolution. Intelligent Design does not present any positive hypotheses to compete with scientific hypotheses but rather relies on scientific ignorance to makes it case. Finally I will show how the Intelligent Design approach is not only scientifically meaningless but also presents a significant risk to religious faith.

Continue reading  “Analysis of Dover Biology Curriculum”

Posted by Reed A. Cartwright on December 07, 2004 | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

Fresh Challenges in the Old Debate Over Evolution

David Jackson’s life straddles all the fault lines in the battle over the teaching of evolution in public schools.

Jackson is a professor of science education at the University of Georgia’s College of Education in Athens. He believes to his core that science has proved valid Charles Darwin’s theory of how life on Earth developed from a common ancestry and why life has such diversity.

About half the students he teaches to become middle school science instructors — and to teach evolution themselves — believe that God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, he said. Scientist friends tell him not to teach those students because anyone with those beliefs “shouldn’t teach.” But he tells them it is his job to make sure that his students understand evolution, not believe it.

Of course the problem with the title is that ID is not actually a fresh argument.

Posted by Nick Matzke on December 07, 2004 | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

I would like to announce the existence of a new Resources page on NCSE’s website: the NCSE Resources page on Of Pandas and People.  NCSE had a large amount of material in its files on Pandas, but almost none of it was digital, so good resources on the web were few and far between.  I took this on as a project, and have now digitized just about everything published in NCSE Reports or Bookwatch Reviews on Pandas in 1989 and throughout the 1990’s, and put it in one handy central location for the sake of posterity.

Many of the reviews have never been available on the web before, including Frank Sonleitner’s epic “What’s Wrong With Pandas?”, a review which is actually longer than the book itself (the images in Sonleitner’s document are not up yet since there may be copyright issues).  Various minor touch-up work still needs to be done on the collection — manual transcription and document conversion to HTML are not error-free processes — but on the whole it should be quite useable.  Please alert me to any typos, formatting errors, etc., that you detect (send to matzkeATncseweb.org).

Hopefully this material will be useful to the folks in Pennsylvania.  However, since the last edition of Pandas is now 11 years old, it seems more likely that future controversies will occur over the fabled third edition of Pandas, apparently now retitled The Design of Life.  Whatever the title, it will be useful to have some of the long and interesting history of Pandas, and thereby intelligent design, online and available to the public.

The page can be reached via NCSE homepage —> Resources —> Of Pandas and People, or simply http://www.ncseweb.org/article.asp?category=21.

To give a fuller overview, I’ll post the Introduction I wrote for the page, and the Table of Contents.

Continue reading  “Panda-monium: NCSE Resources Page on Pandas”

Posted by PvM on December 06, 2004 | Comments (49) | TrackBack (0)

In a previous posting I reported how I had met with a Christian friend of mine who considered “Intelligent design” to be dishonest. It seems that he is not the only Christian who has reached this conclusion. As a concerned Christian myself, I find this comforting as it seems that fellow Christians have realized the potential cost of “Intelligent Design” for religious faith and science.

Nevertheless, there are still many ID supporters who remain unaware of the lack of much of any scientific support for Intelligent Design and who are fooled into believing that there is a controversy in science on the topic of evolution, relevant to the concept of Intelligent Design. Thus we see supporters take their crusades to local schoolboards, newspapers and senators unaware of the cost of their actions to religious faith and science alike.

Continue reading  “Richard Colling: religious brothers are telling falsehoods”

Posted by Wesley R. Elsberry on December 06, 2004 | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

A searing op-ed in the York Dispatch by Paul Gross and Barbara Forrest leaves no doubt about what the Dover School Board has accomplished. Give it a read…

Posted by Timothy Sandefur on December 06, 2004 | Comments (35) | TrackBack (0)

Don Boudreaux thinks so.

Update: Dr. Boudreaux explains further.

Posted by Jack Krebs on December 05, 2004 | Comments (19) | TrackBack (0)

I have been invited to be on Janet Parshall’s America, a national conservative talk-show, next Thursday between 3:15 and 3:30 CST.  The producer Ron Stafford noticed a reference to me in a recent USA Today article, which said:

“Part of the job of the public school system is to make professional judgments about what children ought to learn,” says Jack Krebs, a teacher and vice president of Kansas Citizens for Science. “It doesn’t make any sense to give equal time to all these other ideas that are vastly unsupported. It’s misleading to kids.”

Ron was interested in the part about “professional judgments about what children ought to learn” in relation to the creation/evolution debate.  As part of preparing for the show, he asked me to let them know “more [about] where you’re coming from with regard to the creation/evolution debate on how this should be presented in schools.”

I thought this was a good question, and I’ve let them know that I appreciate their inviting me to discuss this issue from the point of curriculum in the public schools.  In response I wrote a short summary of some of the important main points, which I post below.  I’m sure there is plenty of material here for them to ask me some good questions in the short amount of time we’ll have.

Continue reading  “Guest Opportunity on Janet Parshall's America”

Posted by Ed Brayton on December 05, 2004 | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

In the aftermath of the decision by the Dover School Board in Pennsylvania to mandate the teaching of Intelligent Design in their science classrooms, there is quite a little fight brewing between the school board and the teachers. The York Daily Record has been following this story very closely and their latest update shows the internal battles. The science teachers are properly wondering what the heck they’re supposed to be teaching, since there really is no model or theory of intelligent design to be referred to. Quoting the head of the science department, Bertha Spahr:

Spahr said a problem could occur after the statement is read to the students. Once this topic is introduced, Miller said, she wonders how many questions will be asked as a result.

“I’m trained to teach to state standards,” Miller said. “(‘Intelligent design’) is currently not listed in those standards.”

Miller said she hopes it will be enough to read the statement or refer students to the “Pandas” book. But she realizes that students have the right to discuss curriculum items in class.

“This is all new and something we are not prepared for,” she said. “I worry that something I say could cause me to end up in some sort of litigation.”

Spahr said the science teachers feel like they’re in a battle that can’t be won.

“The Supreme Court has said it’s unconstitutional to teach creation in the classroom,” she said. “So we either risk violating a school board directive or risk breaking the law. What are we to do?”

Continue reading Science Teachers Balk at Dover Decision at Dispatches from the Culture Wars