Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 15:34:53 -0600
From: Science-Week <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ScienceWeek Shareware Edition - June 30, 2000
-----------------------------------------------
Our biology has made us into creatures who are
constantly recreating our psychic and material
environments, and whose individual lives are the
outcomes of an extraordinary multiplicity of
intersecting causal pathways. Thus, it is
our biology that makes us free.
-- Richard Lewontin
-----------------------------------------------
Contents of this Issue:
1. Science Policy:
A Call for More Opposition to Creationist Activism
--------------------------------------------------
The battle of creationist dogma vs. science is one that
apparently will be with us for some time, and there is a growing
consensus that the science community must accept the
confrontation and resist, with as much vigor as possible, the
corruption of the teaching of science. (Includes related
background material.)
1. SCIENCE POLICY:
A CALL FOR MORE OPPOSITION TO CREATIONIST ACTIVISM
No matter how firm its evidentiary basis, any scientific
conclusion that contradicts strong popular notions may face an
intense public campaign aimed at discrediting that conclusion.
Such was the case with the scientific conclusion that the Earth
is an oblate sphere and not as flat as a pancake, that the Sun
and not the Earth is the focal point of planetary orbits, and
that mental illness is not the result of possession by the Devil.
And such is also the case with the scientific conclusion
concerning the evolutionary origins of life, and in particular,
the evolutionary origins of the human species. Fortunately,
evidence is usually ultimately victorious in the arena of ideas,
but the battle can last for some time and it may also damage the
social fabric.
Recent years have seen an intensification of the battle of
evolution vs. creationism, the latter an idea of divine origins,
the intensification in part due to a resurgence of politicized
fundamentalist religious views in the US. Of particular concern
to many scientists are the current campaigns by various
creationist groups to corrupt the teaching of evolutionary
biology by politically mandated associated teaching of anti-
evolutionism, or to do away with the teaching of evolutionary
biology altogether. Central to all of this is the fact that, in
the US, public education from kindergarten through high school is
controlled by local school boards that are often more interested
in perpetuating dogma than in educating children in a spirit of
enlightenment. This battle of creationist dogma vs. science is
one that apparently will be with us for some time, and there is a
growing consensus that the science community must accept the
confrontation and resist the corruption of the teaching of
science with as much vigor as possible. ... ... Eugenie C. Scott
(National Center for Science Education, US), who is a physical
anthropologist, presents an essay on the current evolution vs.
creationism controversy in the US, the author making the
following points:
1) The US stands out among developed countries in its low
acceptance of one of the major organizing principles of science
-- evolution. The author suggests this reflects the unique
settlement and religious history of the US, in which frontier
communities set up their own school systems largely independent
of state and federal influence, much less control.
2) The author suggests that US religious history reflects an
equally decentralized "frontier" orientation. The US was
initially settled by religious dissidents, who formed
congregations, rather than hierarchical religious systems, in
which decisions largely were made locally. The US also has been
the nursery for a wide variety of spontaneously generated
independent sects, often inspired by charismatic leaders: Seventh
Day Adventists, the Church of Latter Day Saints, Jehovah's
Witnesses, Christian Science, and extinct sects such as Shakers
and Millerites -- all founded reflecting a decentralized
nonhierarchical religious past. But perhaps the most important
reason modern anti-evolutionism developed in the US rather than
in, for example, Europe, was the founding in 1910 to 1915 of
Fundamentalism, a Protestant view that stresses the inerrancy of
the Bible. Fundamentalism was not successfully exported to Europe
or Great Britain, but it formed the basis in the US for the anti-
evolutionism of the 1920s Scopes trial era, as well as for the
anti-evolutionism of the present day.
3) Although the US Supreme Court has ruled that teaching
creationism and creation "science" are unconstitutional,
creationists are using various methods to sidestep this obstacle:
... ... a) Various teachers give equal time to creationism and
evolution, even though their school districts do not (and cannot)
require them to do so.
... ... b) At school assemblies, in the name of "fairness", a
creationist is invited to tell students that the scientifically
well-accepted idea that living things shared common ancestry is a
"theory in crisis" with many "serious flaws", and also that the
world is only 10,000 years old. Given the requirement of the US
Constitution that schools be religiously neutral, such assemblies
provide an unconstitutional forum for a speaker who openly
proselytizes students to reject evolution in favor of a literal
Biblical interpretation of history.
... ... c) Certain school districts are considering leaving out
the teaching of evolution altogether, or limiting or separating
out evolution as somehow different from other scientific fields.
... ... d) Disclaimers that teachers must read to students or
paste into textbooks are becoming more popular. Typically, such
disclaimers declare that evolution is "only a theory" (in other
words, a guess, hunch, or half-baked idea) and therefore by
implication nothing that students should take seriously.
Oklahoma and Alabama textbooks contain a disclaimer which states
that evolution is a theory, not fact, because "no one was present
when life first appeared on Earth." No other subject in the
science curriculum is so disclaimed.
... ... e) Since the US Supreme Court struck down laws requiring
equal time for creation and evolution, the neocreationist
approach is to balance evolution with "evidence against
evolution", but such evidence is revealed as simply a euphemism
for creation science. Currently, a law is in progress in the
Arizona state legislature that would require that "evidence
against evolution" be taught along with evolution. Similar
legislation is in progress in certain other states.
4) The author concludes: "If scientists do not oppose anti-
evolutionism, it will reach more people with the mistaken idea
that evolution is scientifically weak, and further, that
scientists are clinging to it only because of previous commitment
to atheism -- and perhaps a selfish desire to keep the grant
money flowing. The subsequent further reduction of scientific
literacy (to say nothing of a decline of confidence in the
scientific community) is not something we should passively let
happen."
-----------
Eugenie C. Scott: Not (just) in Kansas anymore.
(Science 5 May 00 288:813)
QY: Eugenie C. Scott [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
-------------------
Related Background:
SCIENCE AND SOCIETY: A CALL FOR ACTIVISM AGAINST CREATIONISM
One result of the decision last summer by education authorities
in Kansas (US) to reduce the teaching of Earth science and
evolution in Kansas public schools may be to galvanize the US
scientific community to activism against creationism. Certainly,
as evidenced by letters and editorials in the scientific media
during the past months, this issue has provoked responses among
scientists ranging from concern to outrage.
Now, at a recent meeting (December 1999), the American
Geophysical Union (AGU) has denounced the teaching of creationism
and called for scientists to become politically involved in
promoting the teaching of evolution. The AGU council states as
follows: "The American Geophysical Union affirms the central
importance of scientific theories of Earth history and organic
evolution in science education... Creationism is not science and
does not have a legitimate place in any science curriculum."
In an unsigned editorial commenting on the AGU statement, the
journal _Nature_ states that the resurgence of creationism and
the exploitation of creationism by politicians "pose challenges
to scientists that cannot be ignored. More resolute activism is
required if a decent scientific education is not to be denied to
some young Americans."
The editorial points out that most scientists tend to avoid
public confrontation. "But the key to the battle for the teaching
of good science in the presence of fundamentalism is to be more
resolute in informing the public of the important role of science
and actively oppose the use of distorted perceptions of science
as a political vehicle... Scientists need to reach out, to become
involved in local school-board issues and to seek election to
ensure appropriate scientific curricula." In conclusion, the
editorial states: "It will take coordination, coherence and some
powerful advocacy drawn from the ranks of many independently
minded scientists to carry the day."
-----------
Nature: Scientists rally to defend schools against creationists.
(Nature 23/30 Dec 99 402:847)
-----------
Nature: Combating the exploiters of creationism.
(Nature 23/30 Dec 99 402:843)
QY: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------
Summary by SCIENCE-WEEK http://scienceweek.com 14Jan00
For more information: http://scienceweek.com/swfr.htm
=================================================================
Kadosh, Kadosh, Kadosh, YHVH, TZEVAOT
FROM THE DESK OF: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*Mike Spitzer* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
~~~~~~~~ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Best Way To Destroy Enemies Is To Change Them To Friends
Shalom, A Salaam Aleikum, and to all, A Good Day.
=================================================================
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
