Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Intelligent Design Bibliography Misleading
National Center for Science Education ^ | 4/5/2002

Posted on 04/05/2002 1:57:02 PM PST by JediGirl

top spacer top spacer second right spacer
National Center for Science Education National Center for Science Education
Defending the Teaching of Evolution in the Public Schools  
bottom_spacer dk_bl

Intelligent Design Bibliography Misleading
by NCSE Staff

In a fifteen-page analysis sent earlier this week to every member of the Ohio Board of Education, the National Center for Science Education exposed the Discovery Institute’s “Bibliography of Supplementary Resources for Ohio Science Instruction” as a systematic misrepresentation of the scientific literature that it cites.

The Bibliography, given by two representatives of the Discovery Institute — which seeks to promote “intelligent design” — to the Ohio Board of Education on March 11, claims that it lists publications that “represent dissenting viewpoints that challenge one or another aspect of neo-Darwinism (the prevailing theory of evolution taught in biology textbooks), discuss problems that evolutionary theory faces, or suggest important new lines of evidence that biology must consider when explaining origins.”

But the authors of the publications disagree. Twenty-six scientists, representing 34 of the 44 publications listed in the Bibliography, responded to NCSE’s request to evaluate the Discovery Institute’s description of their work. More than half of them regarded it as inaccurate and tendentious. As NCSE asks in its analysis, “Should the state of Ohio be guided in the development of its science standards by people who are apparently incapable of reliably and objectively summarizing the scientific literature?”

NCSE also asked Brian J. Alters, an internationally recognized expert on science education who holds appointments at Harvard University and McGill University, where he is the Director of the Evolution Education Research Centre, to comment on the pedagogical value of the Bibliography. Alters responded, “Not only is this selection of papers inappropriate for the high school level, it will likely engender numerous misconceptions among high school students about the science of evolution — something no science teacher would want.”

“In fact,” said Dr. Alan Gishlick of NCSE, “although the publications in the Bibliography are valuable contributions to the scientific literature, they provide neither evidence for ‘intelligent design’ nor evidence against evolution. The Discovery Institute is simply engaged in ‘quote-mining’ — searching for passages that it can misrepresent as somehow discrediting evolution.” He added, “If the Discovery Institute were really serious about improving science education, it would not be fomenting confusion about evolution.”

The complete analysis is available in both html and PDF formats.

The National Center for Science Education is a nonprofit organization, based in Oakland, California, dedicated to defending the teaching of evolution in the public schools. On the web at www.ncseweb.org.



April 5, 2002



TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Philosophy; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: creationism; crevolist; evolution; intelligentdesign
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 last
To: Admin moderator
I'd like an explanation as to why post number 35 was deleted. Thanks.
41 posted on 04/06/2002 1:42:36 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
From the NCSE analysis:

Perhaps in reaction to NCSE's questionnaire, the Discovery Institute added a disclaimer to its Bibliography when it posted it on its web site:
The publications are not presented either as support for the theory of intelligent design, or as indicating that the authors cited doubt evolution. Discovery Institute has made every effort to ensure that the annotated summaries accurately reflect the central arguments of the publications.[7]
Shouldn't the Discovery Institute have issued such a disclaimer in the first place?

Moreover, in light of Stephen C. Meyer's declaration that the Bibliography contains publications "that raise significant challenges to key tenets of Darwinian evolution" — a declaration that significantly postdates the disclaimer — the sincerity of the disclaimer may be doubted.[8]

42 posted on 04/07/2002 2:13:19 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

Comment #43 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson