A new resource on NCSE's website provides the details on seventeen key legal cases in the creationism/evolution controversy. A new issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach is available. And the text of Science's recent interview of Eugenie C. Scott is now posted in NCSE's website.

"CREATIONISM AND THE LAW"

Looking for the legal skinny on the court cases that shaped the landscape of the creationism/evolution controversy? NCSE's new Creationism and the Law resource provides the details on seventeen key cases, from Scopes to Selman, that made a difference. Simply click on the name of a case to get a thorough summary; a list of source documents (typically PDFs, arranged in chronological order); and to relevant NCSE news stories, timelines, and presentations; and a selection of links to third-party sources. This new NCSE resource is free and aimed at journalists, lawyers, school administrators, school boards, and anyone interested in the legal history of evolution, creationism, and public school science education.

For "Creationism and the Law," visit: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/creationism-law

THE LATEST ISSUE OF EVOLUTION: EDUCATION AND OUTREACH

The latest issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach -- the new journal aspiring to promote accurate understanding and comprehensive teaching of evolutionary theory for a wide audience -- is now available on-line. Taking transitional forms as its theme, the issue positively teems with exciting paleontology. Among the authors are Jennifer A. Clack writing on "The Fish-Tetrapod Transition: New Fossils and Interpretations," Luis M. Chiappe writing on "Downsized Dinosaurs: The Evolutionary Transition to Modern Birds," Kenneth D. Angielczyk writing on "Dimetrodon Is Not a Dinosaur: Using Tree Thinking to Understand the Ancient Relatives of Mammals and their Evolution," J. G. M. Thewissen, Lisa Noelle Cooper, John C. George, and Sunil Bajpai writing on "From Land to Water: the Origin of Whales, Dolphins, and Porpoises," and Donald R. Prothero writing on "Evolutionary Transitions in the Fossil Record of Terrestrial Hoofed Mammals."

Also included is the latest installment of NCSE's regular column for Evolution: Education and Outreach, Overcoming Obstacles to Evolution Education. In "Transforming Our Thinking about Transitional Forms," NCSE's Education Project Director Louise S. Mead explains, "A common misconception of evolutionary biology is that it involves a search for 'missing links' in the history of life. Relying on this misconception, antievolutionists present the supposed absence of transitional forms from the fossil record as evidence against evolution. Students of biology need to understand that evolution is a branching process, paleontologists do not expect to find 'missing links,' and evolutionary research uses independent lines of evidence to test hypotheses and make conclusions about the history of life. Teachers can facilitate such learning by incorporating cladistics and tree-thinking into the curriculum and using evograms to focus on important evolutionary transitions."

For the latest issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/120878/
For Mead's article, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/501371w1h0h58385/fulltext.html

EUGENIE C. SCOTT INTERVIEWED IN SCIENCE (NOW WITH FULL TEXT)

Last week's Evolution Education Update summarized Science's interview with NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott. Now, with the kind permission of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the complete text of the interview is available on NCSE's website.

For the interview, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2009/06/eugenie-c-scott-interviewed-science-004823

Thanks for reading! And don't forget to visit NCSE's website -- http://ncseweb.org -- where you can always find the latest news on evolution education and threats to it.

Evolution education update: April 3, 2009

Dear Friends of NCSE,

Plenty of news in Texas again: the Texas state board of education voted to adopt a flawed set of state science standards, and Chris Comer's suit against the Texas Education Agency was dismissed. In Florida, the Florida Academy of Sciences denounced the antievolution bill still in the state senate. A few seats remain aboard NCSE's next excursion to the Grand Canyon.

A SETBACK FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION IN TEXAS

At its March 25-27, 2009, meeting, the Texas state board of education voted to adopt a flawed set of state science standards, which will dictate what is taught in science classes in elementary and secondary schools, as well as provide the material for state tests and textbooks, for the next decade. Although creationists on the board were unsuccessful in inserting the controversial "strengths and weaknesses" language from the old set of standards, they proposed a flurry of synonyms -- such as "sufficiency or insufficiency" and "supportive and not supportive" -- and eventually prevailed with a requirement that students examine "all sides of scientific evidence." Additionally, the board voted to add or amend various standards in a way that encourages the presentation of creationist claims about the complexity of the cell, the completeness of the fossil record, and the age of the universe.

The proceedings were confusing and contentious, and it is understandable that journalists differed in their initial assessments of the significance of the vote: for example, the Dallas Morning News (March 28, 2009) headlined its article as "Conservatives lose another battle over evolution," while the Wall Street Journal (March 27, 2009) headlined its article as "Texas Opens Classroom Door for Evolution Doubts," and the Austin-American-Statesman (March 28, 2009) played it safe with "State education board approves science standards." As the dust settled, though, NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott -- who was invited to testify before the board at its meeting -- commented, in a March 30, 2009, press release, "The final vote was a triumph of ideology and politics over science."

"The board majority chose to satisfy creationist constituents and ignore the expertise of highly qualified Texas scientists and scientists across the country," Scott added. Among the organizations calling upon the board to adopt the standards as originally drafted by a panel of Texas scientists and educators were the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Association of Geoscience Teachers, the Paleontological Society, the National Association of Biology Teachers, and the Texas Association of Biology Teachers, as well as fifty-four scientific and education societies that endorsed a statement circulated by NCSE. The board's chair, avowed creationist Don McLeroy, responded by crying (video is available on NCSE's YouTube channel), during the meeting, "Somebody's got to stand up to experts!"

Writing in Salon (March 29, 2009), Gordy Slack -- the author of The Battle Over the Meaning of Everything: Evolution, Intelligent Design, and a School Board in Dover, PA (Jossey-Bass 2007) -- explained that after Kitzmiller v. Dover, "advocates of teaching neo-creationism have been forced to seek other ways into public science classrooms. Enter the 'strengths and weaknesses' strategy." After the creationist faction on the board failed to reinsert the "strengths and weaknesses" language, NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott commented, "they had a fallback position, which was to continue amending the standards to achieve through the back door what they couldn't achieve upfront." Slack added, "Each of the amendments singles out an old creationist argument, strips it of its overtly ideological language, and requires teachers and textbook publishers to adopt it."

Rachel Courtland, a blogger for New Scientist (March 31, 2009), examined a case in point: the deletion of a reference in the standards to the age of the universe ("about 14 billion years ago"). As revised, the standards require students to learn "current theories of the evolution of the universe including estimates for the age of the universe," with the actual age absent. "Is the new standard an invitation for young-Earth proponents to teach students that the Earth and the universe beyond it is just a few thousand years old?" asked Courtland, adding, "Some teachers could conceivably see it as an opening. According to a 2008 study ["Evolution and Creationism in America's Classrooms: A National Portrait" from PLoS Biology 2008; 6 (5)], 16% of US science teachers believe humans were created by God in the last 10,000 years."

Texas groups defending the integrity of science education were dismayed at the result. Kathy Miller, the president of the Texas Freedom Network, Kathy Miller, said in a March 27, 2009, statement, "The word 'weaknesses' no longer appears in the science standards. But the document still has plenty of potential footholds for creationist attacks on evolution to make their way into Texas classrooms. Through a series of contradictory and convoluted amendments, the board crafted a road map that creationists will use to pressure publishers into putting phony arguments attacking established science into textbooks." There is a historical precedent in the textbook adoption process from 2003, when creationists selectively applied the "strengths and weaknesses" language to try to dilute the treatment of evolution in the textbooks under consideration.

On his blog for the Houston Chronicle (March 27, 2009), Steven Schafersman of Texas Citizens for Science optimistically commented, "I think we can work around the few flawed standards," but lamented, "But the point is that there shouldn't be ANY flawed standards. The science standards as submitted by the science writing teams were excellent and flaw-free. All the flaws were added by politically unscrupulous SBOE members with an extreme right-wing religious agenda to support Creationism." Having attended (and blogged from) all three days of the meeting and observed the confusion and contention among the members of the board, he ruefully added, "this is not the way to develop educational policy in one of the most wealthy and powerful states in the most wealthy and powerful country in the world in the 21st century."

Even The New York Times (March 30, 2009) took notice of the plight of science education in Texas, editorially commenting, "This was not a straightforward battle over whether to include creationism or its close cousin, intelligent design, in the science curriculum. Rather, this was a struggle to insert into the state science standards various phrases and code words that may seem innocuous or meaningless at first glance but could open the door to doubts about evolution. ... At the end of a tense, confusing three-day meeting, Darwin's critics claimed that this and other compromise language amounted to a huge victory that would still allow their critiques into textbooks and classrooms. One can only hope that teachers in Texas will use common sense and teach evolution as scientists understand it."

The Austin American-Statesman (April 1, 2009) editorially complained, "Chairman Don McLeroy, Dunbar and others have turned the education board into a national joke. But when it comes to teaching Texas children, what they have done is not funny. Last week's discussion about shaping the teaching of science to allow doubts about evolution was surreal. Biology texts now must include 'all sides' of scientific theories ... The underlying point is that a board majority wants creationism to be part of the scientific discussion. And they got enough of a foot in the door with their language about teaching 'all sides' of scientific theories that publishers will have to include criticism of evolution if they want to sell science textbooks to Texas schools."

Detailed, candid, and often uninhibited running commentary on the proceedings is available on a number of blogs: Texas Citizens for Science's Steven Schafersman was blogging and posting photographs on the Houston Chronicle's Evo.Sphere blog, the Texas Freedom Network was blogging on its TFN Insider blog, and NCSE's Joshua Rosenau was blogging on his personal blog, Thoughts from Kansas (hosted by ScienceBlogs). For those wanting to get their information from the horse's mouth, minutes and audio recordings of the board meeting will be available on the Texas Education Agency's website as well as on Tony Whitson's Curricublog. NCSE's previous reports on events in Texas are available on-line, and of course NCSE will continue to monitor the situation as well as to assist those defending the teaching of evolution in the Lone Star State.

COMER CASE DISMISSED

In a March 31, 2009, decision, Chris Comer's lawsuit against the Texas Education Agency, challenging the agency's policy of requiring neutrality about evolution and creationism, was dismissed. The Austin American-Statesman (April 1, 2009) reported, "The state's attorneys argued in court filings that the agency is allowed to bar its employees from giving the appearance that the agency is taking positions on issues that the State Board of Education must decide, such as the content of the science curriculum." The newspaper quoted Texas Education Commissioner Robert Scott as saying, "We are sorry that this situation resulted in a lawsuit but we were confident we would prevail," and John Oberdorfer, one of Comer's lawyers, as saying of the dismissal, "We'll look at it and decide what we'll do next."

Comer, the former director of science at the Texas Education Agency, was forced to resign in November 2007 after she forwarded a note announcing a talk by Barbara Forrest in Austin. As NCSE's Glenn Branch -- who sent the offending e-mail -- explained in a post at the Beacon Broadside blog (December 19, 2007), "Less than two hours after sending the e-mail, she was called on the carpet and instructed to send a disclaimer. And then she was forced to resign. Although a memorandum recommending her dismissal referred to various instances of alleged 'misconduct and insubordination' on her part, it was clear what her real offense was: 'the TEA requires, as agency policy, neutrality when talking about evolution and creationism.'" The TEA was widely criticized in editorials and by scientific and educational societies.

In June 2008, Comer filed suit in federal court in the Western District of Texas, arguing, "the Agency's firing of its Director of Science for not remaining 'neutral' on the subject violates the Establishment Clause, because it employs the symbolic and financial support of the State of Texas to achieve a religious purpose, and so has the purpose or effect of endorsing religion. By professing 'neutrality,' the Agency credits creationism as a valid scientific theory. Finally, the Agency fired Director Comer without according her due process as required by the 14th Amendment -- a protection especially important here because Director Comer was fired for contravening an unconstitutional policy." The judge ruled, however, that the TEA's neutrality policy is not a violation of the Establishment Clause. (Additional legal documentation for this case is archived on NCSE's website.)

Although Comer's lawsuit was dismissed, her plight (discussed in a brief video commissioned by NCSE) is still a disquieting indication of the condition of science education in Texas. Shortly after her forced resignation was in the headlines, the Houston Chronicle (December 4, 2007) editorially commented, "With a State Board of Education review of the science portion of the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills scheduled early next year, Comer's ouster could portend a renewed effort to establish creationism and intelligent design as science class fare." In light of the recent adoption of a set of state science standards that encourages the presentation of creationist arguments, the TEA's "neutrality when talking about evolution and creationism" is likely to be under scrutiny again.

For the story in the Austin American-Statesman, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/04/01/0401comer.html
For Glenn Branch's post on Beacon Broadside, visit: http://www.beaconbroadside.com/broadside/2007/12/muzzling-dissen.html
For a sampling of the criticism leveled at the TEA, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2007/12/latest-comer-controversy-001154
For Comer's lawsuit (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/webfm_send/750
For the dismissal of the case (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/webfm_send/798
For NCSE's archives of documents in Comer v. Scott, visit: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/chris-comer-docs
For the video about Comer's plight, visit: http://ncseweb.org/multimedia/chris-comer-expelled-real
For the Houston Chronicle's editorial, visit: http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2007_4472569
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas

CRITICISM FOR FLORIDA'S ANTIEVOLUTION BILL

Florida's Senate Bill 2396, which would, if enacted, amend a section of Florida law to require "[a] thorough presentation and critical analysis of the scientific theory of evolution," was in the headlines after the Florida Academy of Sciences denounced it. In its March 20, 2009, statement, the academy described SB 2396 as "a deliberate attempt to undermine the adopted science standards," adding, "SB 2396, in effect, leaves the door open for the introduction in the public school curriculum of nonscientific and covertly religious doctrines. The proposed bill would be damaging to the quality of science education of Florida's children and the scientific literacy of our citizens. It would further undermine the reputation of our state and adversely affect our economic future as we try to attract new high-tech and biomedical jobs to Florida."

David Karlen, a Tampa biologist and a member of the Florida Academy of Sciences, told the Tampa Tribune (March 28, 2009), "'Critical analysis' is the latest buzzword in the creationist movement to sneak intelligent design or creationism into the curriculum," and noted that it is typically only evolution for which "critical analysis" is applied. Observing that the bill has yet to receive a hearing in committee -- the bill was referred to the Education Pre-K-12 and the Education Pre-K-12 Appropriations committees in the Senate -- or a counterpart in the Florida House of Representatives, the Tribune reported that the bill "apparently is going nowhere this year," especially because the legislature is presently busy with budgetary issues. May 1, 2009, is the last day of the current legislative session.

For the academy's statement (PDF), visit: http://www.flascience.org/fas_statement.pdf
For the story in the Tampa Tribune, visit: http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/mar/28/na-anti-evolution-bill-still-a-fruitless-exercise/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Florida, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/florida

VISIT THE GRAND CANYON WITH SCOTT AND GISH!

A few seats remain aboard NCSE's next excursion to the Grand Canyon -- as featured in The New York Times (October 6, 2005). From July 3 to 10, 2009, NCSE will again explore the wonders of creation and evolution on a Grand Canyon river run conducted by NCSE's Genie Scott and Alan ("Gish") Gishlick. Call or write now: seats are limited. Because this is an NCSE trip, we offer more than just the typically grand float down the Canyon, the spectacular scenery, fascinating natural history, brilliant night skies, exciting rapids, delicious meals, and good company. It is, in fact, a unique "two-model" raft trip, on which we provide both the creationist view of the Grand Canyon and the evolutionist view -- and let you make up your own mind. The cost is $2480; a deposit of $500 will hold your spot.

For information on the excursion, visit: http://ncseweb.org/about/excursions/gcfaq
For NCSE's story about the article in The New York Times, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2005/10/seeing-creation-evolution-grand-canyon-00771

Evolution education update: March 27, 2009

Dear Friends of NCSE,

Plenty of news in Texas, as the state board of education prepares to conduct its final vote on the state science standards. New Mexico's antievolution bill is dead. And NCSE Supporter Stephen G. Brush is to receive the 2009 Abraham Pais Prize for the History of Physics.

"STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES" NIXED IN TEXAS AGAIN

The Texas state board of education again narrowly voted against a proposal to restore the controversial "strengths and weaknesses" language to the set of state science standards now under review. As the Dallas Morning News (March 26, 2009) reported, "Board members deadlocked 7-7 on a motion to restore a long-time curriculum rule that 'strengths and weaknesses' of all scientific theories -- notably Charles Darwin's theory of evolution -- be taught in science classes and covered in textbooks for those subjects. Voting for the requirement were the seven Republican board members aligned with social conservative groups. Against the proposal were three other Republicans and four Democrats." A final vote is expected on March 27, 2009, but the outcome is not likely to change . It remains to be seen whether the board will vote to rescind the flawed amendments undermining the teaching of evolution proposed at the board's January 2009 meeting.

The debate is attracting national attention, with the Wall Street Journal (March 23, 2009) quoting NCSE's Steven Newton as saying, "This is the most specific assault I've seen against evolution and modern science," and the Washington Post (March 24, 2009) editorially urging, "The Texas State Board of Education must hold firm to its decision to strip the 'strengths and weaknesses' language from the state's science standard. Texans, like everyone else, are free to believe what they want, but in science class, they should teach science." Closer to home, the Dallas Morning News (March 25, 2009) editorially commented, "Doubting evolution shouldn't be Texas' legacy. More importantly, our students should not be subject to an erroneous line of teaching," and reminded its readers that because Texas is such a huge market for textbooks, "what happens in Texas doesn't stay here."

Writing in the Guardian (March 26, 2009), Jerry Coyne echoed the sentiment: "What happens in Texas doesn't stay in Texas. That state is a sizeable consumer of public school textbooks, and it's likely that if it waters down its science standards, textbook publishers all over the country will follow suit. This makes every American school hostage to the caprices of a few benighted Texas legislators." (House Bill 4224, introduced in the Texas House of Representatives on March 13, 2009, would, if enacted, require the Texas state board of education to restore the "strengths and weaknesses" language in the Texas state science standards.) A professor of the Department of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago, Coyne is the author of Why Evolution is True (Viking, 2009), which NCSE's Eugenie C. Scott recently praised in Nature as "a good choice to give to the neighbour or teacher who wants to know more about evolutionary biology."

NCSE's Joshua Rosenau and Eugenie C. Scott are in Austin for the meeting; both testified on March 25, 2009. Detailed, candid, and often uninhibited running commentary on the proceedings is available on a number of blogs: Texas Citizens for Science's Steven Schafersman is blogging and posting photographs on the Houston Chronicle's Evo.Sphere blog, the Texas Freedom Network is blogging on its TFN Insider blog, and NCSE's Joshua Rosenau is blogging on his personal blog, Thoughts from Kansas (hosted by ScienceBlogs). For those wanting to get their information from the horse's mouth, minutes and audio recordings of the board meeting will be available on the Texas Education Agency's website. NCSE's previous reports on events in Texas are available on-line, and of course NCSE will continue to monitor the situation as well as to assist those defending the teaching of evolution in the Lone Star State.

For the story in the Dallas Morning News, visit: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/032609dntexevolution.72be216f.html
For the story in the Wall Street Journal, visit: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123777413372910705.html
For the editorial in the Washington Post, visit: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/24/AR2009032403356.html
For the editorial in the Dallas Morning News, visit: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-science_0326edi.State.Edition1.212982b.html
For Jerry Coyne's op-ed in the Guardian, visit: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/mar/26/evolution-science-texas-school-board
To purchase Why Evolution is True from Amazon.com (and benefit NCSE in the process), visit: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/0670020532/nationalcenter02/
For Eugenie C. Scott's review in Nature (subscription required), visit: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v458/n7234/full/458034a.html
For the blog coverage of the hearings, visit:
http://www.chron.com/commons/readerblogs/evosphere.html
http://tfnblog.wordpress.com/
http://www.scienceblogs.com/tfk/
For the minutes and records from the TEA, visit:
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/minutes_archived.html
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/audio_archived.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas

TEXAS NEEDS TO GET IT RIGHT

As the Texas state board of education prepares for its final vote on a new set of state science standards, no fewer than fifty-four scientific and educational societies are calling for the approval of the standards as originally submitted -- without misleading language about "strengths and weaknesses" and without the flawed amendments undermining the teaching of evolution proposed at the board's January 2009 meeting. In their statement, organized by the National Center for Science Education, the societies write, "Evolution is the foundation of modern biology, and is also crucial in fields as diverse as agriculture, computer science, engineering, geology, and medicine. We oppose any efforts to undermine the teaching of biological evolution and related topics in the earth and space sciences, whether by misrepresenting those subjects, or by inaccurately and misleadingly describing them as controversial and in need of special scrutiny." (The full statement is reproduced below.)

Independently, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Association of Geoscience Teachers, the Paleontological Society, the National Association of Biology Teachers, and the Texas Association of Biology Teachers have issued their own statements, collected by Texas Citizens for Science, with advice for the Texas state board of education as it considers its final vote on the standards. And the AAAS's president Peter Agre (a Nobel laureate) and chief executive officer Alan I. Leshner contributed a commentary to the San Antonio Express-News (March 23, 2009), concluding, "Leveraging science and technology to create new jobs will require properly educating all potential innovators. It's time for the Texas State Board of Education to reject misleading amendments to science education standards, once and for all. As Texas science education standards go, so goes the nation. Texas needs to get it right."

***
A Message to the Texas State Board of Education

The undersigned scientific and educational societies call on the Texas State Board of Education to support accurate science education for all students by adopting the science standards (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills or TEKS) as recommended to you by the scientists and educators on your writing committees.

Evolution is the foundation of modern biology, and is also crucial in fields as diverse as agriculture, computer science, engineering, geology, and medicine. We oppose any efforts to undermine the teaching of biological evolution and related topics in the earth and space sciences, whether by misrepresenting those subjects, or by inaccurately and misleadingly describing them as controversial and in need of special scrutiny.

At its January 2009 meeting, the Texas Board of Education rightly rejected attempts to add language to the TEKS about "strengths and weaknesses" -- used in past efforts to undermine the teaching of evolution in Texas. We urge the Board to stand firm in rejecting any such attempts to compromise the teaching of evolution.

At its January 2009 meeting, the Board also adopted a series of amendments to the TEKS that misrepresent biological evolution and related topics in the earth and space sciences. We urge the Board to heed the advice of the scientific community and the experienced scientists and educators who drafted the TEKS: reject these and any other amendments which single out evolution for scrutiny beyond that applied to other scientific theories.

By adopting the TEKS crafted by your expert writing committees, the Board will serve the best educational interests of students in Texas's public schools.

American Anthropological Association
American Association of Physical Anthropologists
American Association of Physicists in Medicine
American Association of Physics Teachers
American Astronomical Society
American Geological Institute
American Institute for Biological Sciences
American Institute of Physics
American Physiological Society
American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
American Society for Cell Biology
American Society for Investigative Pathology
American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
American Society of Human Genetics
American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists
American Society of Naturalists
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Society of Plant Taxonomists
Association for Women Geoscientists
Association of American Geographers
Association of Anatomy, Cell Biology, and Neurobiology Chairs
Association of College & University Biology Educators
Association of Earth Science Editors
Association of Environmental & Engineering Geologists
Biological Sciences Curriculum Study
Biotechnology Institute
Botanical Society of America
Clay Minerals Society
Council on Undergraduate Research
Ecological Society of America
Federation for American Societies for Experimental Biology
Federation of American Scientists
Human Biology Association
Institute of Human Origins
National Association of Biology Teachers
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
National Earth Science Teachers Association
National Science Teachers Association
Natural Science Collection Alliance
Paleontological Society
Scientists and Engineers for America
Society for American Archaeology
Society for Developmental Biology
Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology
Society for Sedimentary Geology
Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles
Society for the Study of Evolution
Society of Economic Geologists
Society of Systematic Biologists
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
Southwestern Association of Naturalists
The Biophysical Society
The Helminthological Society of Washington
The Herpetologists' League
For the statement (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/webfm_send/797
For Texas Citizens for Science's collection of statements, visit: http://www.texscience.org/
For Agre and Leshner's op-ed in the San Antonio Express-News, visit: http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/Texas_case_threatens_education_and_competitiveness_nationally.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas

ANTIEVOLUTION BILL DEAD IN NEW MEXICO

New Mexico's Senate Bill 433 died in committee when the legislature adjourned sine die on March 21, 2009. The bill, if enacted, would have required schools to allow teachers to inform students "about relevant scientific information regarding either the scientific strengths or scientific weaknesses pertaining to biological evolution or chemical evolution," protecting teachers who choose to do so from "reassignment, termination, discipline or other discrimination." SB 433 joins Iowa's House File 183 and Oklahoma's Senate Bill 320 as proposed "academic freedom" antievolution bills that failed in 2009; Alabama's House Bill 300 and Missouri's House Bill 656 are still active.

The bill mentioned only "biological evolution or chemical evolution," but its sponsor, Kent Cravens (R-District 27), described it as having wider applicability, telling the Santa Fe New Mexican (March 3, 2009), that it "just asks that if there's a controversial scientific theory being presented, that a teacher can't be reprimanded or fired or downgraded or any way harmed if the teacher happens to mention that there are other theories of controversial scientific nature, to include biological evolution, human cloning, global warming, you name a dozen different things." In a post at The Panda's Thumb blog (March 21, 2009), Dave Thomas suggested that Cravens may have intended to revise his bill accordingly.

Analyses of the bill performed by various state agencies were not enthusiastic. According to the Legislative Education Study Committee's summary analysis, the Public Education Department was worried that the bill would allow the teaching of creationism, thereby inviting litigation; the Higher Education Department observed that the New Mexico state science standards already require students to understand the evidential basis for evolution; and the Office of Education Accountability questioned the bill's premises "that the theory of evolution lacks scientific validity ... and that teachers and students need protection when addressing 'relevant scientific strengths or scientific weakness pertaining to biological evolution or chemical evolution.'"

For New Mexico's SB 433 as introduced, visit: http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/09%20Regular/bills/senate/SB0433.html
For the article in the Santa Fe New Mexican, visit: http://www.santafenewmexican.com/Bill-protects--controversial-science--teaching
For Dave Thomas's post at The Panda's Thumb, visit: http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2009/03/another-discove.html
For the LESC's analysis (PDF), visit: http://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/09%20Regular/LESCAnalysis/SB0433.pdf
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in New Mexico, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/new-mexico

BRUSH AWARDED THE 2009 PAIS PRIZE

NCSE Supporter Stephen G. Brush was selected by the American Physical Society and the American Institute of Physics to receive the 2009 Abraham Pais Prize for the History of Physics "for his pioneering, in-depth studies in the history of nineteenth and twentieth-century physics," according to a story in the spring 2009 History of Physics Newsletter. Beginning his career as a physicist, Brush turned to the history of physics, publishing a number of historical monographs, including The Kind of Motion We Call Heat: A History of the Kinetic Theory of Gases in the 19th Century (North-Holland, 1976), which won the History of Science Society's Pfizer Award. He also coauthored the popular textbook Physics, the Human Adventure: From Copernicus to Einstein and Beyond (Rutgers University Press, 2001) with Gerald Holton. On retiring from the University of Maryland in 2006, he was named Distinguished University Professor Emeritus of the History of Science. Among his writings relevant to the creationism/evolution controversy are "Creationism versus physical science" and two refutations of creationist misuse of the history of science -- "Kelvin was not a creationist" and "Popper and evolution" -- for NCSE's journals. He is also Steve #71 in NCSE's Project Steve (now with over 1075 Steves).
For the story in the History of Physics Newsletter, visit: http://www.aps.org/units/fhp/newsletters/spring2009/pais.cfm
For the cited articles by Brush, visit:
http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200011/back-page.cfm
http://ncseweb.org/cej/3/2/kelvin-was-not-creationist
http://ncseweb.org/ncser/13/4/popper-evolution > > For information about Project Steve, visit: > http://ncseweb.org/taking-action/project-steve

Evolution education update: March 13, 2009

Dear Friends of NCSE,

Texas is in the headlines again, with a new bill that appears to be intended to exempt the Institute for Creation Research's graduate school from state regulation as well as a profile of Don McLeroy, the avowed creationist who chairs the state board of education, in the Austin American-Statesman. Meanwhile, a legislator in Oklahoma, outraged by the prospect of Richard Dawkins visiting the University of Oklahoma, introduced two antievolution resolutions -- and Dawkins responded.

LEGISLATIVE SALVATION FOR THE ICR?

House Bill 2800, introduced in the Texas House of Representatives on March 9, 2009, would, if enacted, in effect exempt institutions such as the Institute for Creation Research's graduate school from Texas's regulations governing degree-granting institutions. The bill's sole sponsor is Leo Berman (R-District 6), a member of the House Higher Education Committee. A member of NCSE called Berman's office to ask whether the bill would apply to the ICR's graduate school; a staffer answered that he thought that it would, adding that he believed that the bill's objective was to aid institutions that want to teach creation science or intelligent design. Berman himself seems not to have offered any public statement about HB 2800 so far.

As NCSE's Glenn Branch recounted in Reports of the NCSE, "When the Institute for Creation Research moved its headquarters from Santee, California, to Dallas, Texas, in June 2007, it expected to be able to continue offering a master's degree in science education from its graduate school. ... But the state's scientific and educational leaders voiced their opposition, and at its April 24, 2008, meeting, the Texas Higher Education Coordination Board unanimously voted to deny the ICR's request for a state certificate of authority to offer the degree." Following the Texas Higher Education Coordination Board's decision, the ICR appealed the decision, while also taking its case to the court of public opinion with a series of press releases and advertisements in Texas newspapers.

Now, however, it seems that HB 2800 would take the matter out of the board's hands altogether. Subchapter G of Chapter 61 of Texas's Education Code serves to regulate "the use of academic terminology in naming or otherwise designating educational institutions, the advertising, solicitation or representation by educational institutions or their agents, and the maintenance and preservation of essential academic records"; it provides, inter alia, "A person may not grant or award a degree or offer to grant or award a degree on behalf of a private postsecondary educational institution unless the institution has been issued a certificate of authority to grant the degree by the board [that is, the Texas Higher Education Coordination Board] in accordance with the provisions of this subchapter."

HB 2800 would amend subchapter G by providing, "The provisions of this subchapter do not apply to a private educational institution, including a separate degree-granting program, unit, or school operated by the institution, that: (1) does not accept state funding of any kind to support its educational programs; (2) does not accept state-administered federal funding to support its educational programs; (3) was formed as or is affiliated with or controlled by a nonprofit corporation or nonprofit unincorporated organization; and (4) offers bona fide degree programs that require students to complete substantive course work in order to receive a degree from the institution." Presumably the ICR would argue that its graduate school satisfies all four requirements.

For Texas's HB 2800 as introduced (PDF), visit: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/pdf/HB02800I.pdf
For the story in Reports of the NCSE, visit: http://ncseweb.org/rncse/28/2/setback-icr-texas
For chapter 61 of Texas's Education Code, visit: http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/ED/content/htm/ed.003.00.000061.00.htm
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas

CREATIONIST BOARD CHAIR PROFILED

As the final vote on the proposed revision of the Texas state science standards approaches, the Austin American-Statesman (March 8, 2009) offers a profile of the chair of the Texas state board of education, avowed creationist Don McLeroy. Describing his conversion to fundamentalism as a dental student, the profile explained, "He is now a young earth creationist, meaning that he believes God created Earth between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago," quoting him as saying, "When I became a Christian, it was whole-hearted ... I was totally convinced the biblical principles were right, and I was totally convinced that it could be accurate scientifically." Particularly important to McLeroy is the biblical tenet that humans were created in the image of God -- although Sid Hall, a Methodist pastor in Austin, told the newspaper, "I would never want to discount those works, but to take [the passage that humans were made in the image of God] to mean something about how the universe is created is a stretch to me ... That's code to me for 'I'm going to take my particular myth of creationism and make it part of the science curriculum.' That's scary to me."

At the board's January 21-23, 2009, meeting, McLeroy successfully proposed a revision to section 7 of the draft of the high school biology standards to require that students "analyze and evaluate the sufficiency or insufficiency of common ancestry to explain the sudden appearance, stasis and sequential nature of groups in the fossil record." As NCSE explains in its call to Texas scientists, the requirement is not only unworkable and confusing, but also evidently intended to promote the idea that living things were specially created in their current forms. Moreover, a detailed analysis by the Stand Up for Real Science blog strongly suggests that the documentation that McLeroy provided in support of his revision at the January meeting was in fact taken wholesale from creationist sources. Undaunted, McLeroy told the American-Statesman that at the board's March 25-27, 2009, meeting, he plans to "pitch another idea that he says should be taught in public schools: the insufficiency of natural selection to explain the complexity of cells" -- apparently a reference to the "intelligent design" notion of "irreducible complexity" due to Michael Behe.

David Hillis of the University of Texas, Austin, told the newspaper, "McLeroy's amendments are not even intelligible. I wonder if perhaps he wants the standards to be confusing so that he can open the door to attacking mainstream biology textbooks and arguing for the addition of creationist and other religious literature into the science classroom." He added, "If Chairman McLeroy is successful in adding his amendments, it will be a huge embarrassment to Texas, a setback for science education and a terrible precedent for the state boards overriding academic experts in order to further their personal religious or political agendas. The victims will be the schoolchildren of Texas, who represent the future of our state." Hillis is also a member of the Advisory Committee of the 21st Century Science Coalition, which has recruited over 1400 Texas scientists to endorse its call for the Texas state board of education to adopt state science standards that "acknowledge that instruction on evolution is vital to understanding all the biological sciences" and omit "all references to 'strengths and weaknesses,' which politicians have used to introduce supernatural explanations into science courses."

Preparing for the March 25-27 board meeting at which the final vote on the standards is expected, McLeroy is arming himself with "a large binder that is adorned on the front with a picture of Albert Einstein" and contains "numerous passages from books -- such as [Kenneth R.] Miller's and others on evolutionary theory -- and articles that he plans to use as ammunition in the fight this month over what should be in the state's science standards." One page from his binder, the American-Statesman reports, shows a diagram of the fossil record from a book by Miller, with McLeroy's gloss, "What do we see?" 'Sudden appearance' of species." Miller -- a professor of biology at Brown University and a Supporter of NCSE, who recently received the Award for Public Understanding of Science and Technology by the American Association for the Advancement of Science in recognition of "his sustained efforts and excellence in communicating evolutionary science" -- told the newspaper, "That diagram shows evolution. If he thinks it says evolution does not occur, he is dead wrong. It's really quite the opposite."

For the profile of McLeroy, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/03/08/0308mcleroy.html
For NCSE's call to Texas scientists, visit: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/analysis/analysis-proposed-texas-educational-knowledge-skills-teks-am
For the Stand Up for Real Science blog's analysis, visit: http://www.anevolvingcreation.net/collapse/index.htm
For the 21st Century Science Coalition, visit: http://www.texasscientists.org/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/texas

ANTIEVOLUTION RESOLUTIONS INTRODUCED IN OKLAHOMA

Two bills in the Oklahoma House of Representatives -- House Resolution 1014 and House Resolution 1015, introduced on March 3, 2009 - attack Richard Dawkins's visit to the University of Oklahoma. The sole sponsor of both bills is Todd Thomsen (R-District 25), a member of the House Education Committee and the chair of the House Higher Education and Career Tech Committee. Both measures, if adopted, would express the strong opposition of the Oklahoma House of Representatives to "the invitation to speak on the campus of the University of Oklahoma to Richard Dawkins of Oxford University, whose published statements on the theory of evolution and opinion about those who do not believe in the theory are contrary and offensive to the views and opinions of most citizens of Oklahoma." Dawkins spoke at the University of Oklahoma on March 6, 2009, as part of the university's celebrations of the Darwin anniversaries.

While HR 1015 ends with a plea for civility -- "the Oklahoma House of Representatives encourages the University of Oklahoma to engage in an open, dignified, and fair discussion of the Darwinian theory of evolution and all other scientific theories which is the approach that a public institution should be engaged in and which represents the desire and interest of the citizens of Oklahoma" -- HR 1014 attacks the University of Oklahoma's Department of Zoology for "framing the Darwinian theory of evolution as doctrinal dogmatism rather than a hypothetical construction within the disciplines of the sciences" and engaging in "one-sided indoctrination of an unproven and unpopular theory" while branding "all thinking in dissent of this theory as anti-intellectual and backward rather than nurturing such free thinking and allowing a free discussion of all ideas which is the primary purpose of a university."

At the beginning of his talk, which was repeatedly interrupted by cheers and applause, Dawkins opened by saying, "I don't want to blow my own trumpet, but it isn't everybody who's the subject of legislation ..." Quoting HR 1014's complaint of his alleged "intolerance for cultural diversity and diversity of thinking," he presented the stork theory of human reproduction -- illustrated with a parody of the creationist propaganda film Expelled -- as a view comparable to creationism. "They've lost in the courts of law; they've long ago lost in the halls of science; and they continue to lose with every new piece of evidence in support of evolution. Taking offense is all they've got left. And the one thing you can be sure of is that they don't actually know anything about what it is that they reject," he added. He also announced that the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science would be donating $5000 to Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education, which fights against attempts to undermine evolution education in Oklahoma.

For the text of Oklahoma's HR 1014 and 1015 as introduced (documents), visit:
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2009-10HB/HR1014_int.rtf
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2009-10HB/HR1015_int.rtf
For information about the University of Oklahoma's celebrations, visit: http://www.ou.edu/darwin/Site/Home.html
For videos of the beginning of Dawkins's talk, visit: http://richarddawkins.net/article,3646,Richard-Dawkins-at-the-University-of-Oklahoma---Introduction,Richard-Dawkins
For information about the Dawkins Foundation, visit: http://richarddawkinsfoundation.org/
For Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education, visit: http://www.oklascience.org/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Oklahoma, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/oklahoma

Evolution education update: February 27, 2009

Dear Friends of NCSE,

The thousandth signatory to NCSE's Project Steve arrived -- just in time for the Darwin anniversary celebrations! Plus NCSE is making a sample chapter from the second edition of Eugenie C. Scott's acclaimed Evolution vs. Creationism available. And a journal is calling for papers for a special issue on the teaching of evolution in a university setting.

PROJECT STEVE: N > 1000

With the addition of Steve #1000 on September 5, 2008, NCSE's Project Steve attained the kilosteve mark. A tongue-in-cheek parody of the long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of "scientists who doubt evolution" or "scientists who dissent from Darwinism," Project Steve mocks such lists by restricting its signatories to scientists whose first name is Steve. (Cognates are also accepted, such as Stephanie, Esteban, Istvan, Stefano, or even Tapani -- the Finnish equivalent.) About 1% of the United States population possesses such a first name, so each signatory represents about 100 potential signatories. ("Steve" was selected in honor of the late Stephen Jay Gould, a Supporter of NCSE and a dauntless defender of evolution education.)

Steve #1000 was announced at the Improbable Research press conference and crowned at the Improbable Research show, both held on February 13, 2008, as part of the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott and Steve Mirsky, long-time writer, columnist, and podcaster for Scientific American presented a commemorative plaque to -- of all people -- Steven P. Darwin, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology and director of the herbarium at Tulane University. In a February 14, 2009, press release, Darwin commented, "This is the first time that being a Darwin - or a Steve - has paid off!" Videos of the press conference and the award ceremony, and a Scientific American podcast, are available on-line.

The fact that Steve #1000 hails from Louisiana is particularly ironic, since the state recently enacted a law that threatens to open the door for creationism and scientifically unwarranted critiques of evolution to be taught in public school science classes. When a policy implementing the law was drafted, a provision that prohibited the use of materials that teach creationism in the public schools was deleted. Recently, the Society of Integrative and Comparative Biology announced that, due to the antievolution law, it would not hold its 2011 conference in New Orleans; a spokesperson for the New Orleans Metropolitan Convention and Visitors Bureau told the weekly New Orleans City Business (February 23, 2009) that the city would lose about $2.7 million as a result of SICB's decision.

Although the idea of Project Steve is frivolous, the statement is serious. It reads, "Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to 'intelligent design,' to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools."

Highlights from the history of Project Steve include the original press release, Glenn Branch and Skip Evans's description of the project for Geotimes, the announcement that Steven W. Hawking was Steve #300, the announcement (on St. Stephen's Day!) of Steve #400, and the announcements of Steves #600, #700, #800, and #900. And, of course, Project Steve proved to be scientifically fruitful in its own right. "The Morphology of Steve," by Eugenie C. Scott, Glenn Branch, Nick Matzke, and several hundred Steves, appeared in the prestigious Annals of Improbable Research; the paper provided "the first scientific analysis of the sex, geographic location, and body size of scientists named Steve."

Currently, there are 1046 signatories to Project Steve, including 100% of eligible Nobel laureates (Steven Weinberg and Steven Chu), 100% of eligible members of President Obama's Cabinet (Steven Chu, the Secretary of Energy), at least ten members of the National Academy of Sciences, the authors of widely used textbooks such as Molecular Biology of the Gene, Psychology: An Evolutionary Approach, and Introduction to Organic Geochemistry, and the authors of popular science books such as A Brief History of Time, Why We Age, and Darwin's Ghost. When last surveyed in February 2006, 54% of the signatories work in the biological sciences proper; 61% work in related fields in the life sciences.

Additionally, Project Steve appeared in Steven Pinker's recent book, The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature (Viking, 2007). Pinker, himself a single-digit Steve, described it as "the most formidable weapon in the fight against neo-creationism today," adding, "Part satire, part memorial to Stephen Jay Gould, the project maintains a Steve-O-Meter (now pointing past 800) and has spun off a T-shirt, a song, a mascot (Professor Steve Steve, a panda puppet), and a paper in the respected scientific journal Annals of Improbable Research called 'The Morphology of Steve' (based on the T-shirt sizes ordered by the signatories)."

For the 2009 press release, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/2009/02/steve-darwin-is-steve-1000-004308
For the videos and podcast, visit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXEGfi9t7yU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgZTrdZL2Go
http://www.sciam.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=count-on-steves-to-defend-darwin-09-02-20
For NCSE's previous coverage of events in Louisiana, visit: http://ncseweb.org/news/louisiana
For the story in New Orleans City Business, visit: http://www.neworleanscitybusiness.com/viewStory.cfm?recID=32768
For the 2003 press release, visit: http://ncseweb.org/taking-action/project-steve-press-release
For Branch and Evans's report in Geotimes, visit: http://www.geotimes.org/may03/column.html
And for "The Morphology of Steve" (PDF), visit: http://improbable.com/pages/airchives/paperair/volume10/v10i4/morph-steve-10-4.pdf

NEW BOOK, FREE CHAPTER

NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott's book Evolution vs. Creationism is now available in a second edition, updated to include the seminal case Kitzmiller v. Dover -- in which a federal court found that it was unconstitutional to teach "intelligent design" creationism in the public schools -- as well as a new chapter on public opinion and media coverage and a new foreword by Judge John E. Jones III, who presided over the Kitzmiller trial.

The first edition of the book was praised by reviewers in The New York Times Book Review, Science Education, Choice (which named it a 2005 Outstanding Academic Title), the Journal of the History of Biology, Science Books & Films, Perspectives in Science and Christian Faith, Theology and Science, the Toronto Globe & Mail, and even the Institute for Creation Research's Back to Genesis.

Want to see for yourself? Now's your chance. For a limited time, we've posted a sample chapter -- chapter 1, on "Science: Truth without Certainty" from the book. It's yours to download, read, print out, and share with others. See for yourself why the reviewer for NSTA Recommends concluded, "Evolution vs. Creationism would be an excellent resource for any science teacher, especially those who teach biology or the nature of science."

For the sample chapter (PDF), visit: http://ncseweb.org/files/pub/creationism/Evo%20vs.%20Creationism--2nd%20edition--Chapter%201.pdf
For further information about Evolution vs. Creationism, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/evc

CALL FOR PAPERS: TEACHING EVOLUTION IN THE CLASSROOM

The Journal of Effective Teaching, a peer-reviewed electronic journal devoted to the discussion of teaching excellence in colleges and universities, is calling for papers for a special issue on the teaching of evolution in a university setting. Topics may include Darwinism in the history and philosophy of science, politics, and religion; evolution and the nature of science; barriers in the understanding of evolution; strategies for teaching controversial issues related to evolution and/or Darwinism; educational research in the teaching of evolution; challenging preconceptions in the classroom, and engaging students who have strong religious views in scientific investigations as part of a liberal arts degree. Articles will be accepted until May 1, 2009.

For the call for papers (PDF), visit: http://www.uncw.edu/cte/ET/documents%5CCallForPapersSpecial.pdf
For information about the Journal of Effective Teaching, visit: http://www.uncw.edu/cte/ET/

Evolution education update: January 2, 2009

Dear Friends of NCSE,

The journal Nature provides a new resource summarizing fifteen lines of evidence for evolution by natural selection. Meanwhile, Expelled makes a brief and inglorious appearance in newspapers again, and the Geological Society of Australia reaffirms its stance against creationism.

EVOLUTIONARY GEMS FROM NATURE

"15 Evolutionary Gems" is a new resource summarizing fifteen lines of evidence for evolution by natural selection, provided by the journal Nature. The editors explain, "About a year ago, an Editorial in these pages urged scientists and their institutions to 'spread the word' and highlight reasons why scientists can treat evolution by natural selection as, in effect, an established fact ... This week we are following our own prescription. In a year in which Darwin is being celebrated amid uncertainty and hostility about his ideas among citizens, being aware of the cumulatively incontrovertible evidence for those ideas is all the more important. We trust that this document will help."

The fifteen evolutionary gems, as Nature describes them, are in three categories: gems from the fossil record (land-living ancestors of whales, from water to land, the origin of feathers, the evolutionary history of teeth, and the origin of the vertebrate skeleton), gems from habitats (natural selection in speciation, natural selection in lizards, a case of co-evolution, differential dispersal in wild birds, selective survival in wild guppies, and evolutionary history matters), and gems from molecular processes (Darwin's Galapagos finches, microevolution meets macroevolution, toxin resistance in snakes and clams, and variation versus stability). References and links to relevant resources are provided.

For "15 Evolutionary Gems" (PDF), visit: http://www.nature.com/nature/newspdf/evolutiongems.pdf
For the editorial introduction, visit: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v457/n7225/full/457008b.html

GOOD NEWS AND BAD NEWS FOR EXPELLED

As 2008 drew to a close, the good news for the producers of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed was that their creationist propaganda movie was getting a bit of press again. The bad news is that it was in the lists of the worst movies of 2008. The Onion's A.V. Club (December 16, 2008), was quickest out of the gate, commenting, "There are terrible movies, and then there are terrible movies that cause harm to society by feeding into its ignorance. Nathan Frankowski's odious anti-evolution documentary belongs in the latter category. ... Few moments in cinema in 2008 were as shameless and disgusting as the Expelled sequence where Stein solemnly visits a Nazi death camp and unsubtly links 'survival of the fittest' theory to the Holocaust."

John Serba of the Grand Rapids Press (December 26, 2008) wrote, "Ben Stein hosts this pro-Intelligent Design documentary that forgets to include a compelling argument for this viewpoint, and instead chooses to equate Darwinism and its legions of rational scientist followers with Nazis and the Holocaust. Facts rooted in reality are at a premium in this insidious, crassly manipulative dreck." Roger Moore of the Orlando Sentinel (December 26, 2008) commented, "Ben Stein's documentary was a cynical attempt to sucker Christian conservatives into thinking they're losing the 'intelligent design' debate because of academic 'prejudice.'" Stephen Whitty of the Newark Star-Ledger (December 27, 2008) described Expelled as lifting "its nonsensical knowledge of early man from an Alley Oop comic and its sense of honest inquiry from a snake-handling preacher." In the LA City Beat (December 30, 2008), Andy Klein wrote, "Stein's 'intelligent design' documentary has all the red flags -- inadequate or misleading identification of interviewees, aggressively manipulative editing, extraordinary claims without extraordinary evidence, and extreme leaps of logic ... particularly suggesting guilt by association, even to the point of laying blame for the Holocaust on Darwin." And Ken Hanke of the Ashville, North Carolina, Mountain Xpress (December 31, 2008) said that Expelled was "as corrupt a piece of work as you'll ever encounter."

Expelled fared no better north of the border. Jay Stone of the Canwest News Service (December 26, 2008) described Expelled as "a masterwork of intellectual dishonesty." And Richard Crouse of Canada AM (December 30, 2008) commented, "Wrapping his thesis in good old American jingoistic rhetoric -- remember this guy used to write speeches for Nixon -- Stein repeatedly compares Darwinist scientists to communists by the suggestion that the only way they can get funding for research is to be good Darwinist 'comrades' and even makes the outrageous connection between Darwin's theory and Nazism." Crouse added, "Perhaps it isn't just a coincidence that the host's initials are B.S."

For the various lists and articles, visit:
http://www.avclub.com/content/feature/there_appears_to_be_an_event/2
http://www.mlive.com/entertainment/grpress/index.ssf?/base/entertainment-1/1230300922187990.xml&coll=6
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment/orl-toptenmovies08dec26,0,5012155.story
http://www.nj.com/entertainment/tv/index.ssf/2008/12/worst_films_0f_2008_ten_films.html
http://www.lacitybeat.com/cms/story/detail/the_bottom_08/7903/
http://www.mountainx.com/movies/articles/123108cranky_hanke_and_justin_southers_best_and_worst_picks_for_2008
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081230/crouse_2008_list_081230
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/story.html?id=608915a7-383c-4afa-b97b-1036f1db2afb
For NCSE's Expelled Exposed website, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com/

AUSTRALIAN GEOLOGISTS STILL OPPOSE CREATIONISM

The Geological Society of Australia recently updated its policy statement on science education and creationism. A previous version of the statement (reprinted in the third edition of NCSE's Voices for Evolution) from 1995 read, in part, "The Geological Society of Australia considers that notions such as Fundamental Creationism, including so called 'Flood Geology', which disregard scientific evidence such as that based on repeatable observations in the natural world and the geological record, are not science and cannot be taught as science ... The Society states unequivocally that the dogmatic teaching of notions such as Creationism within a science curriculum stifles the development of critical thinking patterns in the developing mind and seriously compromises the best interests of objective public education. ... the Society dissociates itself from Creationist statements made by any member." The 2008 update differs from the 1995 version only in specifying that the statement applies to "intelligent design" and in bearing the endorsements of all of the presidents of the society from 1994 onward. Established in 1952, the Geological Society of Australia is a non-profit organization that seeks to promote, advance and support the earth sciences in Australia.

For the GSA's statement (PDF), visit: http://gsa.org.au/pdfdocuments/management/POL_intel%20design_2008.pdf
For information about Voices for Evolution, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/media/voices

Evolution education update: December 12, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

Judge Jones, who presided over Kitzmiller v. Dover, is interviewed in PLoS Genetics. The fourth issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach is now available. And Roger Ebert offers his opinion about Expelled.

JUDGE JONES IN PLOS GENETICS

Judge John E. Jones III, who presided over the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, was interviewed by Jane Gitschier for PLoS Genetics. After recounting his legal career and sketching the legal history of the creationism/evolution controversy, Jones talked about the trial itself. Describing the expert testimony he heard, Jones commented, "I will always remember Ken Miller's testimony in the sense that he did A-Z evolution. And then got into intelligent design. And having laid the foundation with the description of evolution, got into why intelligent design doesn't work as science, to the point where it is predominantly a religious concept." He added, "But Ken Miller went into the immune system, the blood clotting cascade, and the bacterial flagellum -- all three are held out by intelligent design proponents as irreducibly complex, and in effect, having no precursors. He [Miller] knocked that down, I thought, quite effectively -- so comprehensively and so well. By the time Miller was done testifying, over the span of a couple of days, the defendants were really already in the hole."

The expert witnesses for the defense were less impressive to Jones: "Another remarkable moment on the science side was Michael Behe, who was the lead witness for the defendants, and a very amiable fellow, as was Ken Miller, but unlike Miller, in my view, Professor Behe did not distinguish himself. He did not hold up well on cross-examination." And the school board witnesses for the defense, whom Jones lambasted in his decision, he described as "dreadful witnesses ... hence the description 'breathtaking inanity' and 'mendacity.' In my view, they clearly lied under oath. They made a very poor account of themselves. They could not explain why they did what they did. They really didn't even know what intelligent design was. It was quite clear to me that they viewed intelligent design as a method to get creationism into the public school classroom. They were unfortunate and troublesome witnesses. Simply remarkable, in that sense."

Noting that the plaintiffs and defendants both asked for a ruling on the question of whether "intelligent design" constitutes science, Jones said, "if you're going to measure the effect of a particular policy, in this case juxtaposing intelligent design with evolution, on the intended recipients, you have to delve into what the policy is about. What was it about? It was about intelligent design. And to try to determine the effect on the recipients you have to determine what does that concept or phrase stand for? Hence, we got into a search and examination of what exactly does ID say, what is its basis, what are its scientific bona fides or lack thereof. That opens the door for a determination of whether ID is in fact science. And that is what that part of the opinion was. ... I wrote about whether ID, as presented to me, in that courtroom from September to November of 2005, was science, and I said it was not. That it was the progeny, the successor to creationism and creation science. That it was dressed-up creationism."

Looking forward, Jones expressed uncertainty about the long-term effect of the Kitzmiller decision, commenting, "This is speculation on my part -- I don't think that the concept of ID itself has a lot of vitality going forward. The Dover trial discredited that thing that is ID. To the extent that I follow it -- I'm curious about it, but it doesn't go any further than that -- the likely tack going forward is something like teach the controversy, talk about the alleged flaws and gaps in the theory of evolution and go to that place first." He noted that creationists in both Texas and Louisiana seem to be taking such a tack. And, he noted, there is no prospect of the creationism/evolution controversy subsiding any time soon: "They gave me the last word in 'Judgment Day' [a NOVA program on the trial] and I said this is not something that will be settled in my time or even in my grandchildren's lifetimes. It's an enduring, quintessentially American, dispute."

For the interview, visit: http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1000297
For information about Kitzmiller v. Dover, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/intelligent-design-trial-kitzmiller-v-dover
For the decisionin the case (PDF), visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/webfm_send/73
For NCSE's coverage of events in Texas and Louisiana, visit:
http://www.ncseweb.org/news/texas
http://www.ncseweb.org/news/louisiana
For information about Judgment Day, visit: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

THE FOURTH ISSUE OF EVOLUTION: EDUCATION AND OUTREACH

The fourth issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach -- the new journal aspiring to promote accurate understanding and comprehensive teaching of evolutionary theory for a wide audience -- is now available on-line. The theme of the issue is the evolution of the eye. Featured, accordingly, are original scientific articles "A Genetic Perspective on Eye Evolution: Gene Sharing, Convergence and Parallelism," "Charting Evolutions Trajectory: Using Molluscan Eye Diversity to Understand Parallel and Convergent Evolution," "Early Evolution of the Vertebrate Eye -- Fossil Evidence," "Evolution of Insect Eyes: Tales of Ancient Heritage, Deconstruction, Reconstruction, Remodeling, and Recycling," "Exceptional Variation on a Common Theme: The Evolution of Crustacean Compound Eyes," "Opening the 'Black Box': The Genetic and Biochemical Basis of Eye Evolution," "Suboptimal Optics: Vision Problems as Scars of Evolutionary History," "The Causes and Consequences of Color Vision," "The Evolution of Complex Organs," "The Evolution of Extraordinary Eyes: The Cases of Flatfishes and Stalk-eyed Flies," and "The Origin of the Vertebrate Eye." And there are resources for teachers and reviews of books, too, including -- consistently with the issue's theme -- a discussion of teaching about evolution with the example of blind cave fish and a review of Jay Hosler's comic Optical Allusions.

Also included is the fourth installment of NCSE's regular column for Evolution: Education and Outreach, Overcoming Obstacles to Evolution Education. In their article "Misconceptions About the Evolution of Complexity," Andrew J. Petto (a member of NCSE's board of directors) and NCSE's Louise S. Mead take the vertebrate eye as their example, since "the complexity of vertebrate eyes is a common antievolution argument." In the abstract, they summarize, "Despite data and theory from comparative anatomy, embryology, molecular biology, genomics, and evolutionary developmental biology, antievolutionists continue to present the eye as an example of a structure too complex to have evolved. They stress what we have yet to explain about the development and evolution of eyes and present incomplete information as evidence that evolution is a 'theory in crisis.' An examination of the evidence, however, particularly evidence that has accumulated in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, refutes antievolutionists' claims. The distribution of eyes in extant organisms, combined with what we now know about the control of eye development across diverse groups of organisms, provides significant evidence for the evolution of all major components of the eye, from molecular to morphological, and provides an excellent test of predictions based on common ancestry."

For the contents of the issue, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/120878/
For Petto and Mead's article, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/a7v3307m37236637/fulltext.html

ROGER EBERT ON EXPELLED

The popular film critic Roger Ebert reviewed the creationist propaganda movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed in a December 3, 2008, post entitled "Win Ben Stein's mind" on his blog on the Chicago Sun-Times website -- and he pulled no punches. "The more you know about evolution, or simple logic, the more you are likely to be appalled by the film. No one with an ability for critical thinking could watch more than three minutes without becoming aware of its tactics," he wrote.

"This film is cheerfully ignorant, manipulative, slanted, cherry-picks quotations, draws unwarranted conclusions, makes outrageous juxtapositions (Soviet marching troops representing opponents of ID), pussy-foots around religion (not a single identified believer among the ID people), segues between quotes that are not about the same thing, tells bald-faced lies, and makes a completely baseless association between freedom of speech and freedom to teach religion in a university class that is not about religion," he added.

"And there is worse, much worse," Ebert continued, taking especial offense at Expelled's claim that the acceptance of evolution resulted in the Holocaust -- "It fills me with contempt." Previously, the Anti-Defamation League said that the movie's claim "is outrageous and trivializes the complex factors that led to the mass extermination of European Jewry." Expelled's lead, Ben Stein, responded, "It's none of their f---ing business," according to Peter McKnight, writing in the Vancouver Sun (June 21, 2008).

For a thorough critique of Expelled, including a collection of links to reviews of the movie, visit NCSE's Expelled Exposed website. Additionally, the next issue of Reports of the NCSE (volume 28, numbers 5-6) is a special issue devoted to debunking Expelled, containing reports on its reception, a summary of the ways in which organizations with a stake in the creationism/evolution controversy reacted, a summary of the various controversies over its use of copyrighted material, and a detailed explanation of its unsuitability for the classroom.

For Ebert's blog post, visit: http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2008/12/win_ben_steins_mind.html
For the ADL's statement, visit: http://www.adl.org/PresRele/HolNa_52/5277_52.htm
For Peter McKnight's column, visit: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=f022096b-6832-4ec1-929 d-92e8bc337364
For Expelled Exposed, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com
For subscription information for Reports of the NCSE, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/membership

ERRATUM

Although Kevin Padian discussed evolution and religion with Alan Jones, the dean of Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, on November 22, 2008, the link provided in the December 5, 2008, evolution education update was to a video of a previous discussion between the two, filmed on November 4, 2007. The later discussion was not filmed.

For the video of Padian's talk with Jones, visit: http://fora.tv/2007/11/04/Kevin_Padian_Investigating_Evolution

Evolution education update: December 5, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

The Cincinnati Zoo distances itself from a widely criticized promotion involving Answers in Genesis's Creation Museum. Plus Kevin Padian, who serves as president of NCSE's board of directors, is continuing to speak and write in enthusiastic defense of the teaching of evolution. And a new batch of selected content from NCSE's journal is now available on-line.

CREATION "MUSEUM" REBUFFED BY CINCINNATI ZOO

"A promotional deal between the Cincinnati Zoo and the Creation Museum was scuttled Monday after the zoo received dozens of angry calls and emails about the partnership," reported the Cincinnati Enquirer (December 1, 2008). The promotion involved a package deal for tickets to the zoo's annual Festival of Lights and to a Christmas-themed event at Answers in Genesis's Creation Museum. The museum, which opened its doors in northern Kentucky during Memorial Day weekend 2007, aims to illuminate "the effects of biblical history on our present and future world" -- that is, to evangelize for Answers in Genesis's particular brand of young-earth creationism.

On November 30, 2008, biologist and blogger P. Z. Myers complained about the promotion at his blog Pharyngula, writing, "the Cincinnati Zoo has betrayed its mission and its trust in a disgraceful way, by aligning themselves with a creationist institution that is a laughing stock to the rest of the world, and a mark of shame to the United States," and urging his readers to write to the zoo to "point out the conflict between what they are doing and what their goal as an educational and research institution ought to be." Other bloggers echoed his call, and the zoo was evidently flooded with calls and e-mails, prompting it to cancel the promotion because of the uproar. No refunds will be necessary, since no packages of tickets had been sold.

NCSE's previous coverage of the Creation "Museum" includes Daniel Phelps's review and overview and Timothy H. Heaton's account of his visit. NCSE also sponsored a statement, signed by almost one thousand scientists in the three states surrounding the museum -- Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana -- expressing their concern about the effect of the scientifically inaccurate materials displayed there: "Students who accept this material as scientifically valid are unlikely to succeed in science courses at the college level. These students will need remedial instruction in the nature of science, as well as in the specific areas of science misrepresented by Answers in Genesis."

For the story in the Cincinnati Enquirer, visit: http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081201/NEWS01/312010040
For P. Z. Myers's blog post, visit: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/11/shame_on_the_cincinnati_zoo.php
For Phelps's and Heaton's articles, visit:
http://www.ncseweb.org/creationism/general/anti-museum-overview-review-answers-genesis-creation-museum
http://www.ncseweb.org/rncse/27/1-2/visit-to-new-creation-museum
For the NCSE-sponsored statement of concern, visit: http://sciohost.org/states/?p=3

THE LATEST FROM KEVIN PADIAN

Kevin Padian, who serves as president of NCSE's board of directors, is continuing to speak and write in enthusiastic defense of the teaching of evolution. To inaugurate Evolution '09, San Francisco's celebration of the bicentennial of Darwin's birth and the sesquicentennial of the publication of the Origin of Species, Padian spent about sixty minutes in a spirited and lively discussion of evolution and religion with Alan Jones, the dean of Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, on November 22, 2008. Now video of the event is available on-line from Fora.tv. Discussing the challenge of educating the public about evolution, Padian suggested that scientists need to talk about the major transitions in evolution -- his specialty as a vertebrate paleontologist -- "faster, harder, and more often." For specifics, see his commentary in the February 2008 issue of Geotimes and his article in Integrative and Comparative Biology 2008; 48 (2): 175-188.

Additionally, Padian discusses "The evolution of creationists in the United States: Where are they now, and where are they going?" in a forthcoming paper in Comptes Rendus Biologies, the proceedings of the French Academy of Sciences for life sciences. There he writes, "As evolutionary biology in all its forms continues to bring forth amazing new insights from the origin of whales to the evolution of microbial resistance, one would think that the anti-evolutionists would have less to cling to each year, and that they would give up their arguments as disproven misapprehensions. They will not, despite recent victories against ID as science and the lunacy of 'creation science'. Creationists reject the notion of a rational universe because they believe that evolution depends upon the dominance of 'random processes' that allow no divine direction or teleological goal. This is the core of the resistance to evolution in America, and it will not go away anytime soon."

In addition to serving as president of NCSE's board of directors, Padian is Professor of Integrative Biology at the University of California at Berkeley and also Curator of Paleontology at the University of California's Museum of Paleontology. He recently received the 2008 Western Evolutionary Biologist of the Year award from the Network for Experimental Research on Evolution. He testified for the plaintiffs in Kitzmiller v. Dover, the 2005 case establishing the unconstitutionality of teaching "intelligent design" in the public schools. In his decision, Judge John E. Jones III wrote, "Padian's demonstrative slides, prepared on the basis of peer-review[ed] scientific literature, illustrate how Pandas systematically distorts and misrepresents established, important evolutionary principles." He also noted that "Padian bluntly and effectively stated that in confusing students about science generally and evolution in particular, the disclaimer makes students 'stupid.'"

For the video of Padian's talk with Jones, visit: http://fora.tv/2007/11/04/Kevin_Padian_Investigating_Evolution
For Padian's commentary in Geotimes, visit: http://www.geotimes.org/feb08/article.html?id=comment.html
For Padian's article in Integrative and Comparative Biology (subscription required), visit: http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/48/2/175
For Padian's paper in Comptes Rendus Biologies (subscription required), visit: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2008.07.004
For information about Padian's Webby award, visit: http://nere.bio.uci.edu/
For Padian's testimony in Kitzmiller, with the slides he used, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/creationism/legal/padians-expert-testimony
For the Kitzmiller decision (PDF), visit: http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf

CATCHING UP WITH RNCSE

Selected content from volume 28, number 2, of Reports of the National Center for Science Education is now available on NCSE's website. Featured are NCSE's Josh Rosenau's account of how the e-word -- evolution -- was finally included in Florida's state science standards and NCSE's Glenn Branch's report on the Texas Higher Education Coordination Board's decision to deny the Institute for Creation Research authority to offer a graduate degree in science education. And there are reviews, too: NCSE Supporter G. Brent Dalrymple discusses Pascal Richet's A Natural History of Time, Ken Feder reviews David Standish's Hollow Earth, and Kevin C. Armitage assesses Michael Lienesch's In the Beginning: Fundamentalism, The Scopes Trial, and the Making of the Antievolution Movement.

If you like what you see, why not subscribe to RNCSE today? The next issue (volume 28, numbers 5-6) is a special issue devoted to debunking the recent creationist propaganda film, Expelled, containing not only the material already to be found at Expelled Exposed, but also reports on the reception of Expelled at the box office, among critics, and in Canada; a summary of the ways in which organizations with a stake in the creationism/evolution controversy reacted to the film; a summary of the various controversies over Expelled's use of copyrighted material; and a detailed explanation of Expelled's unsuitability for the classroom. Don't miss out -- subscribe now!

For selected content from RNCSE 28:2, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/rncse/28/2
For Expelled Exposed, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com/
For subscription information for RNCSE, visit: http://www.sncseweb.org/membership

Evolution education update: November 28, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

Video and audio of Barbara Forrest's recent talk in Texas is now available. Plus NCSE Supporter Philip Kitcher wins a Lannan Literary Award for his Living with Darwin. And a new batch of selected content from NCSE's journal is now available on-line.

BARBARA FORREST IN TEXAS

Barbara Forrest explained "Why Texans Shouldn't Let Creationists Mess with Science Education" on November 11, 2008, at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. Now video and audio of her talk is available on-line. The talk was sponsored by the Texas Freedom Network Education Fund, and the Annette Caldwell Simmons School of Education and Human Development, the Center for Teaching Excellence, the Department of Anthropology, the Department of Biological Sciences, and the Department of Philosophy in the Dedman College of Humanities and Sciences at Southern Methodist University.

Forrest is a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University; she is also a member of NCSE's board of directors. She coauthored (with Paul R. Gross) Creationism's Trojan Horse (rev. ed., Oxford U.P. 2007). She also testified for the plaintiffs in Kitzmiller v. Dover, and Judge Jones wrote in his ruling, "Barbara Forrest ... has thoroughly and exhaustively chronicled the history of ID in her book and other writings for her testimony in this case. Her testimony, and the exhibits ... admitted with it, provide a wealth of statements by ID leaders that reveal ID's religious, philosophical, and cultural content."

For video and audio of Forrest's talk, visit:
http://smu.edu/flashvideo/?id=248
http://smu.edu/newsinfo/audio/barbara-forrest-11nov2008.mp3
For information about Creationism's Trojan Horse, visit: http://www.creationismstrojanhorse.com/

CONGRATULATIONS TO PHILIP KITCHER

Philip Kitcher's Living with Darwin: Evolution, Design, and the Future of Faith (Oxford U.P., 2006) was the recipient of a Lannan Literary Award for Notable Book for 2008 from the Lannan Foundation, which "hopes to stimulate the creation of literature written originally in the English language and to develop a wider audience for contemporary prose and poetry." The award includes a $75,000 prize. A Supporter of NCSE, Kitcher is the John Dewey Professor of Philosophy at Columbia University.

Discussing Living with Darwin in BioScience, NCSE deputy director Glenn Branch wrote that Kitcher's aim was "not only to debunk intelligent design and expound the case for evolution but also 'to respond to the concerns of the thoughtful people who are beguiled by the advertisements for intelligent design, to expose just what it is that is threatening about Darwinism, and to point to the deeper issues that underlie this recurrent conflict' ... He succeeds brilliantly."

For information about Living with Darwin, visit: http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Philosophy/?view=usa&ci=9780195314441
For information about the award, visit: http://www.lannan.org/lf/lit/awards-list/by-last-name/P80/12583
For Glenn Branch's comments in BioScience (PDF), visit: http://www.bioone.org/archive/0006-3568/57/3/pdf/i0006-3568-57-3-278.pdf

CATCHING UP WITH RNCSE

Selected content from volume 28, number 1, of Reports of the National Center for Science Education is now available on NCSE's website. Featured are Barbara Forrest's commentary on the forced resignation of Chris Comer from the Texas Education Agency, NCSE's Louise S. Mead's report at a symposium aimed at training teachers how to use the latest creationist textbook, Explore Evolution, in the classroom, and Ulrich Kutschera's latest report on creationism in Germany. And there are reviews, too: David Morrison discusses the late Robert Schadewald's Worlds of Their Own and Rebecca J. Flietstra assesses Deborah B. Haarsma and Loren D. Haarsma's Origins: A Reformed Look at Creation, Design, & Evolution.

For selected content from RNCSE 28:1, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/rncse/28/1
For Expelled Exposed, visit: http://www.expelledexposed.com/
For subscription information for RNCSE, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/membership

Evolution education update: November 7, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

In Florida, the new state science standards may have to be reconsidered, while the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, will be hosting a multidisciplinary student conference on "Darwin's Legacy: Evolution's Impact on Science and Culture."

BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD IN FLORIDA?

After a long and contentious wrangle, the Florida state board of education voted 4-3 at its February 19, 2008, meeting to adopt a new set of state science standards in which evolution is presented as a "fundamental concept underlying all of biology." But now there are concerns that, due to a recent state law, the standards will have to be approved again. The St. Petersburg Times (November 6, 2008) explains, "The new law requires the state Board of Education to adopt new academic standards by the end of 2011. That may include a new set of science standards, because the Board of Education adopted the latest standards a few months before the bill passed and was signed into law by Gov. Charlie Crist."

It is not yet clear whether the standards will indeed have to be approved again, but Brian Moore, a staff attorney, with the state legislature's Joint Administrative Procedures Committee (which reviews the rules proposed by state agencies to ensure that they are in compliance with state law), told the department of education that he thought so. According to Education Week's curriculum blog (November 5, 2008), "It's possible, Moore explained, that Florida's commissioner of education could seek to have various experts certify that the recently approved science standards comply with the Next Generation law. But it appears likely that new standards would have to be re-approved in some form by the state board of education."

If so, the prospect of a renewed fight over the treatment of evolution in the standards looms. "Hallelujah" was the response of Terry Kemple, who opposed the treatment of evolution in the new standards. "This is an opportunity for both sides to step back and let this be a fairer endeavor," he said. Brandon Haught of the grassroots organization Florida Citizens for Science told the Times, "Maybe the legislators simply overlooked this and there's a simple solution," adding that the group would "hope for the best but plan for the worst." For now, the situation remains uncertain. A spokesperson for the department of education told the Times, "We are currently researching the matter so there are no specifics to offer at this point."

For the story in the St. Petersburg Times, visit: Evolution education update: March 27, 2009

Dear Friends of NCSE,

"STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES" NIXED IN TEXAS AGAIN

TEXAS NEEDS TO GET IT RIGHT

***
A Message to the Texas State Board of Education

By adopting the TEKS crafted by your expert writing committees, the Board will serve the best educational interests of students in Texas's public schools.

ANTIEVOLUTION BILL DEAD IN NEW MEXICO

BRUSH AWARDED THE 2009 PAIS PRIZE

Evolution education update: March 13, 2009

Dear Friends of NCSE,

LEGISLATIVE SALVATION FOR THE ICR?

CREATIONIST BOARD CHAIR PROFILED

ANTIEVOLUTION RESOLUTIONS INTRODUCED IN OKLAHOMA

Evolution education update: February 27, 2009

Dear Friends of NCSE,

PROJECT STEVE: N > 1000

NEW BOOK, FREE CHAPTER

CALL FOR PAPERS: TEACHING EVOLUTION IN THE CLASSROOM

For the call for papers (PDF), visit: http://www.uncw.edu/cte/ET/documents%5CCallForPapersSpecial.pdf
For information about the Journal of Effective Teaching, visit: http://www.uncw.edu/cte/ET/

Evolution education update: January 2, 2009

Dear Friends of NCSE,

EVOLUTIONARY GEMS FROM NATURE

GOOD NEWS AND BAD NEWS FOR EXPELLED

AUSTRALIAN GEOLOGISTS STILL OPPOSE CREATIONISM

For the GSA's statement (PDF), visit: http://gsa.org.au/pdfdocuments/management/POL_intel%20design_2008.pdf
For information about Voices for Evolution, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/media/voices

Evolution education update: December 12, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

JUDGE JONES IN PLOS GENETICS

THE FOURTH ISSUE OF EVOLUTION: EDUCATION AND OUTREACH

For the contents of the issue, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/120878/
For Petto and Mead's article, visit: http://www.springerlink.com/content/a7v3307m37236637/fulltext.html

ROGER EBERT ON EXPELLED

ERRATUM

For the video of Padian's talk with Jones, visit: http://fora.tv/2007/11/04/Kevin_Padian_Investigating_Evolution

Evolution education update: December 5, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

CREATION "MUSEUM" REBUFFED BY CINCINNATI ZOO

THE LATEST FROM KEVIN PADIAN

CATCHING UP WITH RNCSE

Evolution education update: November 28, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

BARBARA FORREST IN TEXAS

CONGRATULATIONS TO PHILIP KITCHER

CATCHING UP WITH RNCSE

Evolution education update: November 7, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD IN FLORIDA?

For the story in the St. Petersburg Times, visit: http://www.tampabay.com/news/education/k12/article892815.ece
For the story in Education Week's curriculum blog, visit: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2008/11/about_those_new_florida_scienc.html
For Florida Citizens for Science's website and blog, visit:
http://www.flascience.org
http://www.flascience.org/wp/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Florida, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/news/florida

CALL FOR PAPERS: DARWIN'S LEGACY

The Evolution Learning Community at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, will be hosting "Darwin's Legacy: Evolution's Impact on Science and Culture" -- a multidisciplinary student conference to be held March 19-21, 2009. The conference will be a unique opportunity for undergraduate and graduate students in the natural sciences, social sciences, humanities, and arts who are conducting research or creative endeavors related to evolution to present their research, investigate graduate study opportunities, network, enhance their CVs, and enrich the body of knowledge surrounding evolution. Abstracts are due on January 30, 2009; authors will be notified of acceptance by February 12, 2009.

Abstracts may be submitted to any of the following theme sessions: evolution and the social sciences; evolution and religion; evolution and human uniqueness; economics of evolution and its consequences; the biodiversity crisis and conservation; Darwin's impact on art, music, and literature; sex and evolution; genomes, race, and medicine; evolution and ethics; the future of humanity; species in space and time; speciation and the species problem. Note that papers need not be submitted to a theme session; presentations on any topic related to evolution are welcome. In addition to the student presentations, there will be addresses by keynote speakers, including Kevin Padian, David Mindell, David Buss, and Peter Carruthers.

For information about the conference, visit: http://library.uncw.edu/web/outreach/evolution/conference.html

Evolution education update: October 10, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

Texas newspapers are editorially supporting the treatment of evolution in the recently released draft set of science standards, while a lawsuit alleging that the Understanding Evolution website violates the First Amendment failed on appeal.

EDITORIAL SUPPORT FOR SCIENCE STANDARDS IN TEXAS

Texas's newspapers are beginning to express their editorial support of the draft set of science standards, released by the Texas Education Agency on September 22, 2008, and applauded for their treatment of evolution by the Texas Freedom Network, Texas Citizens for Science, and the newly formed 21st Century Science Coalition. Referring to the absence of the "strengths and weaknesses" language from the draft standards, the Waco Tribune (October 3, 2008) commented, "Explaining and investigating 'strengths and weaknesses' of any theory is inherent in scientific inquiry. But having such language in state standards, as has been the case for several years, is code for those who want religion to have a foot in the door when Darwin comes up," and added, "acknowledging the shortcomings of scientific theories, no matter what they are, is one of the essences of science. But when the objective is to inject matters spiritual, we are not talking about science. We are talking about religion that wants a seat at the table."

The Austin American-Statesman (October 6, 2008) urged the board of education to "defer to scientists and its own advisory committee when it comes to determining what should be taught in biology classes. The six-member advisory committee, which includes science teachers and curriculum experts, recommended eliminating ideas 'based upon purported forces outside of nature' from high school biology courses. In other words, get rid of creationism and intelligent design, which teach that the universe was created by God or some other higher power." Invoking the increasing economic importance of evolutionary biology, the editorial added, "McLeroy and other board members should be strengthening science standards to accommodate a big push to attract world-class biomedical researchers, companies and grants to Texas. Those are growth industries that have not looked favorably on communities that water down science studies with vague and unproven ideas."

For the Waco Tribune's editorial, visit: http://www.wacotrib.com/opin/content/news/opinion/stories/2008/10/03/10032008waceditorial.html
For the Austin American-Statesman's editorial, visit: http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/10/06/1006science_edit.html
For the pro-science organizations in Texas, visit:
http://www.tfn.org
http://www.texscience.org
http://www.texasscientists.org/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=TX

APPEAL OF UNDERSTANDING EVOLUTION LAWSUIT DISMISSED

After her lawsuit challenging the Understanding Evolution website on constitutional grounds was dismissed for lack of standing on March 13, 2006, Jeanne Caldwell appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit. In a ruling dated October 3, 2008, the appeals court rejected her appeal, affirming the lower court's decision.

Understanding Evolution, a collaborative project of the University of California Museum of Paleontology (with funding from the National Science Foundation and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute) and the National Center for Science Education, was originally intended as a resource for teachers; it subsequently expanded to appeal to everyone interested in learning about evolution.

Among the resources for teachers is a brief discussion of the idea, labeled as a misconception, that evolution and religion are incompatible. The website notes, "Of course, some religious beliefs explicitly contradict science (e.g., the belief that the world and all life on it was created in six literal days); however, most religious groups have no conflict with the theory of evolution or other scientific findings," and provides a link to NCSE's publication Voices for Evolution.

Arguing that Understanding Evolution thereby endorses particular religious doctrines in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, Caldwell filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. But her suit was dismissed because she failed to allege that she had federal taxpayer standing, failed to sufficiently allege state taxpayer standing, and failed to establish that she suffered a concrete "injury in fact."

Upholding the lower court's decision in Caldwell v. Caldwell et alia (the first defendant was Roy Caldwell, the director of UCMP), the appeals court's decision concluded, "Accordingly, we believe there is too slight a connection between Caldwell's generalized grievance, and the government conduct about which she complains, to sustain her standing to proceed."

Jeanne Caldwell was represented by Kevin T. Snider of the Pacific Justice Institute and her husband Larry Caldwell. It was a further legal defeat for Larry Caldwell, who previously sued his local school district, alleging that his civil rights were violated, after it declined to implement his proposals for evolution education; on September 7, 2007, the defendants won a motion for summary judgment in that case.

For the appeals court's decision (PDF), visit: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0615771p.pdf
For Understanding Evolution, visit: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in California, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=CA

Evolution education update: October 3, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

A new coalition of scientists is defending the teaching of evolution in Texas, and the International Planetarium Society affirms the scientifically ascertained ages of the earth and of the universe.

TEXAS SCIENTISTS SUPPORT TEACHING EVOLUTION

A new coalition of Texas scientists voiced its opposition to attempts to dilute the treatment of evolution in Texas's state science standards, which are presently undergoing revision. At a news conference in Austin on September 30, 2008, representatives of the 21st Century Science Coalition challenged the idea that students should be told that there are "weaknesses" in evolution. Armed with a stack of scientific journals, Dan Bolnick, who teaches biology at the University of Texas, Austin, explained, "Not a single one [of the articles in these journals] gives us reason to believe evolution did not occur," the Austin American-Statesman (October 1, 2008) reported. "So where are the weaknesses? Simple: They don't exist. They are not based on scientific research or data and have been refuted countless times."

The Texas Education Agency released proposed drafts of the state's science standards on September 22, 2008. A requirement in the current standards for high school biology that reads "The student is expected to analyze, review, and critique scientific explanations, including hypotheses and theories, as to their strengths and weaknesses using scientific evidence and information" was replaced with "The student is expected to analyze and evaluate scientific explanations using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing." The change is significant because in 2003, the "strengths and weaknesses" language in the Texas state science standards was selectively applied by members of the state board of education attempting to dilute the treatment of evolution in the biology textbooks then under consideration.

The chair of the state board of education, avowed creationist Don McLeroy, favors the "strengths and weaknesses" language, telling the Austin American-Statesman (September 23, 2008), "I'd argue it doesn't make sense scientifically to take it out." The 21st Century Science Coalition organized and mobilized in response. Already over 800 Texas scientists with or working towards advanced degrees in life, physical, and mathematical science have signed the coalition's statement calling on the board to approve science standards that "acknowledge that instruction on evolution is vital to understanding all the biological sciences" and that "encourage valid critical thinking and scientific reasoning by leaving out all references to 'strengths and weaknesses,' which politicians have used to introduce supernatural explanations into science courses."

For the story in the Austin American-Stateman, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/10/01/1001evolution.html
For the 21st Century Science Coalition's website, visit: http://www.texasscientists.org/
For the previous story in the Austin American-Statesman, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/09/24/0924science.html
For the full text of the coalition's statement, visit: http://www.texasscientists.org/sign.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=TX

IPS STATEMENT ON THE AGE OF THE EARTH AND UNIVERSE

The International Planetarium Society recently issued a statement on the ancient age of the earth and universe, noting that "Many independent lines of scientific evidence show that the Earth and Universe are billions of years old. Current measurements yield an age of about 4.6 billion years for the Earth and about 14 billion years for the Universe." The statement adds, "These measurements of age are accepted by nearly all astronomers, including both research astronomers and planetarium educators. These astronomers come from nations and cultures around the world and from a very wide spectrum of religious beliefs."

The statement also explained the need for the society to take a stand: "Planetariums are based on science and education and as such reflect the ideals and principles of these disciplines. Planetarium educators seek to present both scientific results and an understanding of how these discoveries are made." The International Planetarium Society describes itself as "the global association of planetarium professionals. Its nearly 700 members come from 35 countries around the world. They represent schools, colleges and universities, museums, and public facilities of all sizes including both fixed and portable planetariums." Its primary goal is "to encourage the sharing of ideas among its members through conferences, publications, and networking."

For the IPS's statement, visit: http://www.ips-planetarium.org/pubs/age-of-universe.html
For the IPS's website, visit: http://www.ips-planetarium.org/

Evolution education update: September 26, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

Newly released drafts of the Texas science education standards are being praised for their treatment of evolution. Rabbis in the United States are expressing their support of teaching evolution, while the Church of England is devoting a new section of its website to Darwin. And Canadian geologists have voiced their opposition to teaching creationism in Canada's classrooms.

DRAFT SCIENCE STANDARDS IN TEXAS

The Texas Education Agency released proposed drafts of the state's science education standards on September 22, 2008. Not surprisingly in light of the ongoing controversies over teaching evolution in Texas, reporters focused on the place of evolution in the draft standards, with the Dallas Morning News (September 23, 2008) reporting, "Proposed curriculum standards for science courses in Texas schools would boost the teaching of evolution by dropping the current requirement that students be exposed to 'weaknesses' in Charles Darwin's theory of how humans and other life forms evolved. Science standards drafted by review committees of teachers and academics also would put up roadblocks for teachers who want to discuss creationism or 'intelligent design' in biology classes when covering the subject of evolution."

In particular, a requirement in the current standards for high school biology that reads "The student is expected to analyze, review, and critique scientific explanations, including hypotheses and theories, as to their strengths and weaknesses using scientific evidence and information" would be replaced with "The student is expected to analyze and evaluate scientific explanations using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing," and a description of the limits of science (adapted from the recent National Academy of Sciences publication Science, Evolution, and Creationism) -- "Science uses observational evidence to make predictions of natural phenomena and to construct testable explanations. If ideas are based upon purported forces outside of nature, they cannot be tested using scientific methods" -- would be added.

Such revisions may seem small and unimportant, but in 2003, the "strengths and weaknesses" language in the Texas state science standards was selectively applied by members of the board attempting to dilute the treatment of evolution in the biology textbooks then under consideration. At the time, board member Patricia Hardy observed that it was invidious to apply the language only to a single topic; while if it were applied across the board, "we'd need a crane to carry the books to the schools." In the end, all of the textbooks were adopted without substantial changes, but it was clear that the "strengths and weaknesses" language would be a matter of contention when the standards were next revised. As Kathy Miller of the Texas Freedom Network told The New York Times (June 4, 2008), "'Strengths and weaknesses' are regular words that have now been drafted into the rhetorical arsenal of creationists."

Groups supporting the integrity of science education therefore applauded the changes. In a September 23, 2008, press release, the Texas Freedom Network's Kathy Miller was quoted as saying, "These work groups have crafted solid standards that provide a clear road map to a 21st-century science education for Texas students ... These common-sense standards respect the right of families to pass on their own religious beliefs to their children while ensuring that public schools give students a sound science education that prepares them to succeed in college and the jobs of the future." "It's time for state board members to listen to classroom teachers and true experts instead of promoting their own personal agendas," she added. "Our students can't succeed with a 19th-century science education in their 21st-century classrooms. We applaud the science work groups for recognizing that fact."

In a September 23, 2008, blog post for the Houston Chronicle, Texas Citizens for Science's Steven Schafersman also welcomed the the addition of the description of the limits of science and the removal of the "strengths and weaknesses" language, which he described as "the primary weapon that Creationists have to attempt to damage and corrupt science textbooks." He expressed regret, however, that those revisions were not emulated in all of the standards. Schafersman also lamented the omission from the biology standards of any requirement to learn about human evolution in particular, commenting, "I'm sure the competent teachers on the biology panel discussed a requirement for human evolution, but they ultimately decided against it. They should have included it and forced the [state board of education] members to remove it by majority vote rather than by giving their prior permission to continue censorship."

The chair of the state board of education, avowed creationist Don McLeroy, defended the "strengths and weaknesses" language, telling the Austin American-Statesman (September 23, 2008), "I'd argue it doesn't make sense scientifically to take it out ... Evolution shouldn't have anything to worry about -- if there's no weaknesses, there's no weaknesses. But if there's scientifically testable explanations out there to refute it, shouldn't those be included too?" The newspaper added, "he prefers the 'strengths and weaknesses' language because it allows the board to reject a textbook that doesn't cover the weaknesses of evolution." But Kevin Fisher, who helped to write the draft biology standards, told the American-Statesman, "Something doesn't become a theory if it's got weaknesses. There may be some questions that may yet to be answered, but nothing that's to the level of a weakness."

What's next? The Texas Education Agency is expected shortly to solicit public comment on and expert review of the draft standards. The draft standards will then be revised in light of that input, and submitted to the state board of education for its approval. Their fate is uncertain, since, as the American-Statesman reported, "In previous public discussions, seven of 15 board members appeared to support, on some level, the teaching of the weaknesses of evolution in science classrooms. Six have been opposed, and two -- Geraldine Miller, R-Dallas, and Rick Agosto, D-San Antonio -- are considered swing votes." And, as Schafersman commented, "Since there are no scientists on the SBOE and since seven members are Young Earth Creationists -- most of whom have publicly stated their intention to distort evolution standards and damage science instruction -- it is likely that the public debate and approval will be contentious."

For the drafts of the standards, visit: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/teks/scienceTEKS.html
For the story in the Dallas Morning News, visit: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/092408dntexevolution.13ec04c.html
For information about Science, Evolution, and Creationism, visit: http://www.nap.edu/sec
For the story in The New York Times, visit: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/04/us/04evolution.html
For the Texas Freedom Network's press release, visit: http://www.tfn.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5453
For information about the Texas Freedom Network, visit: http://www.tfn.org/
For Steven Schafersman's blog at the Houston Chronicle, visit: http://www.chron.com/commons/readerblogs/evosphere.html
For information about Texas Citizens for Science, visit: http://www.texscience.org/
For the story in the Austin American-Statesman, visit: http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/09/24/0924science.html
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Texas, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=TX

RABBIS IN SUPPORT OF TEACHING EVOLUTION

The Clergy Letter Project's "Open Letter Concerning Religion and Science From American Rabbis" was the topic of a story in the Chicago Tribune (September 19, 2008), beginning, "For Rabbi Gary Gerson of the Oak Park Temple B'nai Abraham Zion, evolution does not oppose religious belief but strengthens it. ... Seeing evidence of the divine in the theories of Charles Darwin meant that Gerson did not hesitate to sign an open letter drafted by a suburban Chicago rabbi this summer supporting the teaching of evolution in public schools."

The letter, which urges public school boards to affirm their commitment to teaching evolution, was written by Rabbi David Oler of Congregation Beth Or in Deerfield, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago. It follows in the footsteps of the Clergy Letter Project's similar open letter for Christian clergy, formulated in 2004 and currently endorsed by over 11,000 members of the clergy across the country and around the world. The Clergy Letter Project also sponsors Evolution Weekend, on or about Darwin's birthday, in which religious leaders are encouraged to discuss the compatibility of faith and science.

Rabbi Oler told the Tribune, "I would say that as Jews, being a minority, we're particularly sensitive to not having the views of others imposed on us ... Creationism and intelligent design are particularly religious matters that don't belong in [the] public school system." Michael Zimmerman, the founder of the Clergy Letter Project, added, "the goal of both letters is to say that religious leaders, both Jewish and Christian, can come together and be secure in their faith without having their faith impact and pervert modern science."

For the story in the Chicago Tribune, visit: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-relig-evolution-19-sep19,0,4695850.story
For the rabbis' letter, visit: http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/JewishClergy/RabbiLetter.htm
For further information about the Clergy Letter Project and Evolution Weekend, visit:
http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/religion_science_collaboration.htm
http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/rel_evolution_weekend_2009.htm

APOLOGIES TO DARWIN?

Anticipating the bicentennial of Darwin's birth and the sesquicentennial of the publication of On the Origin of Species, the Church of England unveiled a new section of its website entitled "On the origin of Darwin," discussing Darwin's relationship to the church and the development of his own views on faith, and including a brief historical sketch, bibliography, and listing of celebrations of the Darwin anniversaries. Attracting the most attention, however, was "Good religion needs good science" -- a short essay by the Church's director of mission and public affairs, the Rev. Malcolm Brown -- owing to its call for the Church of England to apologize to Darwin.

Addressing Darwin, Brown wrote, "200 years from your birth, the Church of England owes you an apology for misunderstanding you and, by getting our first reaction wrong, encouraging others to misunderstand you still. We try to practice the old virtues of 'faith seeking understanding' and hope that makes some amends. But the struggle for your reputation is not over yet, and the problem is not just your religious opponents but those who falsely claim you in support of their own interests." As the Associated Press (September 15, 2008) reported, however, Brown's statement was not an official apology on behalf of the church.

Reaction to Brown's call for the church to apologize for misunderstanding Darwin was mixed among his descendants. Andrew Darwin, a great-great-grandson of Darwin, told the Daily Mail (September 13, 2008) that the apology was pointless: "'Why bother?' he said. 'When an apology is made after 200 years, it's not so much to right a wrong, but to make the person or organisation making the apology feel better.'" But Horace Barlow, a great-grandson of Darwin, thought that Darwin would have been pleased to hear the church's apology; he noted also, "They buried him in Westminster Abbey, which I suppose was an apology of sorts."

Reaction was also mixed in the Episcopal Church in the United States of America, the Church of England's sister church. Episcopal News Service (September 17, 2008) quoted the Rev. Norman Faramelli of Episcopal Divinity School and Boston University as concurring with Brown's apology, with the caveat that "it's not just the Church of England that owes him an apology." The Rev. Canon Ed Rodman, a member of the Episcopal Church's Executive Council and the council's Committee on Science, Faith and Technology, however, felt that it didn't go far enough, saying that it was time for the church to "fully acknowledge its culpability in discrediting Darwin's work."

The question of apologizing to Darwin arose in the Catholic Church as well, according to Reuters (September 16, 2008). In discussing "Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories" -- a conference of scientists, theologians, and philosophers addressing the Origin, to take place in Rome in March 2009 -- Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, the Vatican's culture minister, indicated that the church was not planning to issue a posthumous apology to Darwin. "Maybe we should abandon the idea of issuing apologies as if history was a court eternally in session," he said, while adding that Darwin's theories were "never condemned by the Catholic Church nor was his book ever banned."

For the "On the origin of Darwin" website, visit: http://www.cofe.anglican.org/darwin
For the Associated Press story (via the International Herald-Tribune), visit: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/09/15/europe/EU-REL-Britain-Church-Darwin.php
For the Daily Mail story, visit: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1055597/Church-makes--8216-ludicrous-8217-apology-Charles-Darwin--126-years-death.html
For the Episcopal News Service story, visit: http://www.episcopal-life.org/79901_100750_ENG_HTM.htm
For the Reuters story, visit: http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSLG62672220080916
For information about the "Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories" conference, visit: http://www.evolution-rome2009.net/

CANADIAN GEOLOGISTS ADD THEIR VOICE FOR EVOLUTION

The Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences recently issued a statement on creationism, beginning, "Canadian media report growing public pressure to introduce Creationism and its equivalent Intelligent Design (ID) in school curricula, hinting that Creationism/ID is a 'theory', thus suggesting that it shares common ground with science-based theories. Such reporting ignores the fundamental difference between faith and measurable facts. CFES-FCST is extremely concerned about this trend, and not only because of the demonstrated importance of science to Canadian society."

"Creationism and ID do not qualify as science, because the scientific method is not deployed and these ideas are therefore not theories or hypotheses in universally accepted scientific sense," the statement continues. "Hence, Creationism and ID do not belong in any K-12 science curriculum." The Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences describes itself as "the unified voice of more than 15 Canadian learned and professional earth science societies"; it represents more than 15,000 practicing earth scientists in Canada.

For the CFES statement, visit: http://www.geoscience.ca/creationism.html
For information about CFES, visit: http://www.geoscience.ca
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Canada, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=CN

Evolution education update: September 12, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology is the latest organization to denounce the antievolution law in Louisiana. Meanwhile, the United Church Observer reviews the state of the creationism/evolution controversy in Canada, and NCSE's Project Steve attains its 900th signatory -- and by now its 930th.

PALEONTOLOGISTS DECRY LOUISIANA'S ANTIEVOLUTION LAW

In a September 4, 2008, press release, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology urged Louisiana citizens and legislators to repeal the recently enacted "Science Education Act" in their state, writing, "The Act was drafted under the guise of 'academic freedom' and appeals to cherished values of fairness and free speech. However, SVP says the Act intends to garner support and legal protection for the introduction of religious, creationist concepts, including intelligent design, in public school science curricula. By permitting instructional materials that are not reviewed by the state's science standards committees, the Louisiana Act and those like it encourage teachers and administrators to work outside these standards. This makes it possible for local school boards to define science and science education to suit their own agendas, thereby compromising the quality of science education for students, and allowing religious discrimination in America's public school science classrooms."

Founded in 1940, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology is the leading North American scientific and educational organization concerned with vertebrate paleontology. According to its position statement on evolution education, "Evolution is fundamental to the teaching of good biology and geology ... The record of vertebrate evolution is exciting, inspirational, instructive, and enjoyable, and it is our view that everyone should have the opportunity and the privilege to understand it as paleontologists do." In decrying the Louisiana law, the Society joins a host of scientific organizations, including the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute of Biological Sciences and seven of its member societies, and (together) the Society for the Study of Evolution and the Society of Systematic Biologists.

For the SVP's press release, visit: http://www.vertpaleo.org/news/permalinks/2008/09/04/
For the SVP's position statement on evolution education, visit: http://www.vertpaleo.org/education/index.cfm
For the protests from the ASBMB, AAAS (PDF), AIBS, and SSE and SSB (PDF), visit:
http://www.asbmb.org/News.aspx?id=1054
http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2008/media/0620-la-gov-jindal-veto.pdf
http://www.aibs.org/position-statements/20080620_joint_statement.html
http://www.evolutionsociety.org/download/SSElettertoJindal.pdf
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Louisiana, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=LA

UPDATE FROM CANADA

Writing in the September 2008 issue of the United Church Observer, Drew Halfnight discusses the public understanding of evolution in Canada. With the evolution wars constantly raging to the south, "Canadians see themselves as spectators to someone else's battle," he writes, adding, "Though it may not have the profile or scope here that it has in the U.S., the tension between a Bible-based understanding of the origins of creation and the science of evolution evidently does not stop at the border."

As NCSE previously reported, according to the latest poll of Canadian public opinion, 58 percent accept evolution, while 22 percent think that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years, and 20 percent are unsure. (In the United States, 50% of respondents preferred the pro-evolution responses, with 44 percent preferring "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so," and with only 5 percent volunteering a different response or declining to answer.)

The article devotes several paragraphs to the episode in which Brian Alters's project to study the effects of the popularization of "intelligent design" on Canadian students, teachers, parents, administrators, and policymakers was denied funding by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, in part on the grounds that the proposal lacked adequate "justification for the assumption in the proposal that the theory of evolution, and not intelligent-design theory, was correct."

Halfnight writes, "The problem, of course, is that evolution is a scientific theory, while ID theory is not. Evolutionary biology is based on mountains of observable evidence, while ID cannot be tested at all. In short, ID has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with belief." Jason Wiles, who manages the Evolution Education Research Centre at McGill University, commented that the SSHRC "put evolution and ID on the same footing, then said, 'Our position is to have no position.'"

Evolution is neglected in Canada's public school curricula, too: "In all but one provincial science curriculum, evolution is relegated to a single unit in a Grade 11 or 12 elective course taken by a sliver of each graduating class. It would not be a stretch to say the majority of Canadian high school students graduate without ever encountering Darwin's theory of natural selection." Additionally, private religious schools are allowed to teach creationism alongside evolution.

As in the United States, there is plenty of opposition to the teaching of evolution in Canadian schools. Leesa Blake, vice-president of the Science Teachers' Association of Ontario, told Halfnight that teachers often experience pressure from parents or students to teach creationism. And as with their counterparts in the United States, Canadian teachers often feel unprepared to teach evolution: "A lot of the people who are teaching biology don't actually have the training" to teach evolution, Blake told Halfnight.

The article ends with a plea for keeping religious views out of science classes, quoting Denis Lamoureux, described as "a devout evangelical Christian and confirmed evolutionist who teaches science and religion at St. Joseph's College in the University of Alberta." (He is also the author of Evolutionary Creationism [Wipf & Stock, 2008].) "'So how are we going to teach biology?' he asks. 'Teach the science as metaphysically free as possible. In other words, keep God out of it, keep the atheistic world view out of it.'"

For the story in the United Church Observer, visit: http://www.ucobserver.org/ethics/2008/09/wheres_darwin/
To buy Evolutionary Creationism from Amazon.com (and benefit NCSE in the process), visit: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/1556355815/nationalcenter02
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Canada, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=CN

PROJECT STEVE: N = 900

With the addition of Steven K. Nordeen on September 5, 2008, NCSE's Project Steve attained its 900th signatory -- and the Steveometer is now at 930. 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," Project Steve mocks such lists by restricting its signatories to scientists whose first name is Steve (or a cognate, such as Stephanie, Esteban, Istvan, Stefano, or even Tapani -- the Finnish equivalent). About 1% of the United States population possesses such a first name, so each signatory represents about 100 potential signatories. ("Steve" was selected in honor of the late Stephen Jay Gould, a Supporter of NCSE and a dauntless defender of evolution education.)

Highlights from the history of Project Steve include the original press release, Glenn Branch and Skip Evans's description of the project for Geotimes, the announcement that Steven W. Hawking was Steve #300, the announcement (on St. Stephen's Day!) of Steve #400, the publication of a front-page story on Project Steve in a leading Canadian newspaper, and the announcements of Steves #600, #700, and #800. And, of course, Project Steve proved to be scientifically fruitful in its own right. "The Morphology of Steve," by Eugenie C. Scott, Glenn Branch, Nick Matzke, and several hundred Steves, appeared in the prestigious Annals of Improbable Research; the paper provided "the first scientific analysis of the sex, geographic location, and body size of scientists named Steve."

Additionally, Project Steve appeared in Steven Pinker's recent book, The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature (Viking 2007). Pinker, himself a single-digit Steve, described it as "the most formidable weapon in the fight against neo-creationism today," adding, "Part satire, part memorial to Stephen Jay Gould, the project maintains a Steve-O-Meter (now pointing past 800) and has spun off a T-shirt, a song, a mascot (Professor Steve Steve, a panda puppet), and a paper in the respected scientific journal Annals of Improbable Research called 'The Morphology of Steve' (based on the T-shirt sizes ordered by the signatories)."

For information about Project Steve, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/3541_project_steve_2_16_2003.asp
For "The Morphology of Steve" (PDF), visit: http://improbable.com/pages/airchives/paperair/volume10/v10i4/morph-steve-10-4.pdf

Evolution education update: August 29, 2008

Dear Friends of NCSE,

A brave teacher in Florida is featured on the front page of The New York Times, while Church and State examines the latest antievolution law from Louisiana.

"A TEACHER ON THE FRONT LINE"

"A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash" -- a story on the front page of The New York Times (August 24, 2008) -- examines the creationism/evolution controversy as it plays out in the classroom of David Campbell, a biology teacher in Orange Park, Florida. The Times's reporter Amy Harmon writes, "in a nation where evangelical Protestantism and other religious traditions stress a literal reading of the biblical description of God's individually creating each species, students often arrive at school fearing that evolution, and perhaps science itself, is hostile to their faith." Campbell's students are a case in point, and "their abiding mistrust in evolution, he feared, jeopardized their belief in the basic power of science to explain the natural world -- and their ability to make sense of it themselves."

In addition to helping his own students, Campbell also helped to improve the treatment of evolution throughout Florida by co-founding the grassroots organization Florida Citizens for Science and by serving on the committee that revised Florida's state science standards in 2007. The new standards describe evolution as a "fundamental concept underlying all of biology" -- a far cry from their predecessors, which sedulously avoided even using the e-word. Harmon writes, "Campbell defended his fellow writers against complaints that they had not included alternative explanations for life's diversity, like intelligent design. His attempt at humor came with an edge: 'We also failed to include astrology, alchemy and the concept of the moon being made of green cheese,' he said. 'Because those aren't science, either.'"

As well as explaining the scientific evidence for common descent and natural selection, Campbell discusses the limits of science, telling his students, "Faith is not based on science ... And science is not based on faith. I don't expect you to 'believe' the scientific explanation of evolution that we're going to talk about over the next few weeks. But I do ... expect you to understand it." The approach seems to be helpful, to judge from a case recounted in the article. One student who earlier refused to answer a test question that asked for two forms of evidence supporting evolutionary change and natural selection, writing, "I refuse to answer ... I don't believe in this," later relented. Grading the student's retest, Campbell found that "the question that asked for evidence of evolutionary change had been answered."

Accompanying the article is a sidebar discussing the treatment of evolution in state science standards, comparing the ratings assigned by Lawrence S. Lerner in his 2000 study Good Science, Bad Science with NCSE's assessment, using Lerner's criteria, of the standards currently used. The standards "have improved in many states since 2000 ... [b]ut most states' standards do not explicity require teachers to explain that humans evolved from earlier life forms." There is also a historical timeline illustrating "A Fading Resistance to Evolution Education," furnished by NCSE, and, apparently only on the newspaper's website, a version of NCSE's answers to Jonathan Wells's "Ten questions to ask your biology teacher about evolution." For a more extensive rebuttal of Wells's claims about evolution, see Alan D. Gishlick's "Icons of Evolution?"

For the article in the Times, visit: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/education/24evolution.html
For Florida Citizens for Science's website and blog, visit:
http://www.flascience.org/
http://www.flascience.org/wp
For the sidebar and timeline in the Times, visit:
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/08/24/education/24evolutiongr1.ready.html
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/08/24/education/24evolutionGR2.ready.html
For Good Science, Bad Science, visit: http://www.edexcellence.net/detail/news.cfm?news_id=42
For NCSE's answers to Jonathan Wells, visit:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/us/WEB-tenquestions.html
http://www.ncseweb.org/icons/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Florida, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=FL

"ERODING EVOLUTION" IN LOUISIANA

"Eroding Evolution," a new article in the July/August 2008 issue of Church and State, addresses the recently enacted "Science Education Act" in Louisiana, which threatens to open the door for creationism and scientifically unwarranted critiques of evolution to be taught in public school science classes. Veteran science teacher Patsye Peebles told Church and State that she worries about the scientific literacy of Louisiana's students: "Now this muddies the waters and keeps students from having a really good education," she said. "When they go to college, they will be at a disadvantage because they will not have a good understanding of science."

As New Scientist (July 9, 2008) reported, "Supporters of the new law clearly hope that teachers and administrators who wish to raise alternatives to evolution in science classes will feel protected if they do so. The law expressly permits the use of 'supplemental' classroom materials in addition to state-approved textbooks." Creationists have historically often tried to undermine evolution education by proposing supplementary materials: Of Pandas and People is a notorious example. NCSE's Joshua Rosenau told Church and State, "They may not be saying 'Noah's flood' or 'Adam and Eve' anymore, but it is the same creationist argument they are making."

Barbara Forrest, a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University, a member of NCSE's board of directors, co-author of Creationism's Trojan Horse (Oxford University Press, 2007), and a leader in the pro-science grassroots group Louisiana Coalition for Science, put the law in historical context. Referring to the radical religious right organization that engineered the bill, the Louisiana Family Forum, she explained, "The LFF has been lobbying the legislature for nine years laying this groundwork. They have been waiting for a number of factors to come together -- now the legislature as a whole is conservative and we have a governor who favors creationism."

After observing that a previous antievolution law in Louisiana occasioned the Supreme Court's decision in Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) that it is unconstitutional to teach creationism in the public schools, the article observes, "It looks like Louisiana is repeating history, despite concerns from teachers, scientists and legal scholars." And, returning to the perspective of the science teacher, it concludes by quoting Peebles again: "They just aren't even paying attention to what teachers are telling them ... We don't need this, we don't want it." Church and State is a publication of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a non-profit organization that protects separation of church and state.

For "Eroding Evolution," visit: http://www.au.org/site/News2?abbr=cs_&page=NewsArticle&id=9947
For New Scientist's report, visit: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19926643.300-new-legal-threat-to-school-science-in-the-us.html
For information about Of Pandas and People, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/article.asp?category=21
For information about Creationism's Trojan Horse, visit: http://www.creationismstrojanhorse.com/
For Louisiana Coalition for Science's website, visit: http://lasciencecoalition.org/
For American United's website, visit: http://www.au.org/
And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Louisiana, visit: http://www.ncseweb.org/pressroom.asp?state=LA