Darwin returns to Dover

Charles Darwin came back to haunt Dover, Pennsylvania, in the form of a billboard proclaiming "Praise Darwin: Evolve Beyond Belief." The billboard was prepared in time for the bicentennial anniversary of his birth, February 12, at a site of significance in the history of ideas. The Freedom from Religion Foundation paid for this billboard and a second one in Dayton, Tennessee. Both sites are known for trials arising from anti-evolutionists wishing to teach Creationism in public schools as the explanation for biodiversity. In Dayton, John Scopes was found guilty of teaching evolution, a prohibited act. In Kitzmiller &al. v. Dover &al. (the trial was actually held in Harrisburg) the Dover Area School District was found in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as well as in violation of the Pennsylvania Constitution (Article 1 section 3).

Some reactions to the billboard were reported by one of the local papers that followed the story leading up to the 2005 judgement. Steven Neubauer, an outspoken local atheist, said the billboard celebrates science and is not an attack on religious beliefs. Tammy Kitzmiller, the lead plaintiff in the case, said she likes the billboard but figures it will stir up matters that ought to rest. William "Deer-in-the-Headlights" Buckingham, a former school board member who was one of the perpetrators of the Dover Affair, feels the billboard is an expression of free speech, which is allowed to everyone except Christians. Apparently, he is one of many who remains confused about what is meant by "free speech." Similarly, local pastor Sterling Walsh Jr. said the billboard merely reflects one of many viewpoints about the beginning of the world, not realizing that Darwin's theory of evolution did not address the origin of the world, or even the origin of life.

Larry Hicks' column in the paper the next day took the point of view that the billboard represented the gloating of winners in a clash of atheists versus Christians, blaming extremists on both sides for perpetuating the Creationism controversy. He claims "the Christians" who lost Kitzmiller v. Dover have "begrudgingly accepted thair loss," have "been mostly quiet since," and have "licked their wounds and moved on." Mr. Hicks is unaware of the extent and depth of the issue, as was clearly pointed out by Dan Gilbert in an Op-Ed piece two days later. Mr. Gilbert gets it. Judging by the comments posted in response to these articles in the York Dispatch, many people still do not. Our society still fails to educate very well. Can we make a special effort this year, Darwin's 200th birthday, the 150th anniversary of the publication of his The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, and the International Year of Planet Earth, to promote a rational, scientific understanding of the world around us?

Show the good stuff

Apparently, PBS is doing more begging fund-raising now, showing those old dead people playing music that wasn't all that good forty years ago. If they want to impress me enough to send them more money, they need to run more shows like they just did. Tonight they reran
Nova's Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial, interviews and re-enactment of the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, presided over by Judge John E. Jones III. That's a damn sight better than bringing on the woomeisters and the experts on the obvious that make up the bulk of fund -raising programming.

My only criticism of the show is that although they interviewed Pastor Ray Mummert, they did not get him to repeat , We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture.

I expect letters

Nova's Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial airs tomorrow (Tuesday, 13 November) on PBS. The show has already received excellent reviews, including one in Nature (in the 8 November issue, subscription required for online version). The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) offers a few quotes from the review here.

I predict that, for some weeks following the show, the two York (Pennsylvania) newspapers will carry another load of letters to the editors. Other than possibly noting what the outcome of the trial was, I strongly suspect that most of the letters will be virtually identical to ones printed before the trial was over.

The buffoons at the Discovery Institute have posted a complaint about the show.It's the same old tired sour grapes whining. I wonder why they did not bother to complain when PBS broadcast the anti-science show, The Privileged Planet: The Search for Purpose in the Universe a while back.

UPDATE: I missed it when it appeared, but Mike Argento, York Daily Record columnist, had a related note in his blog. The news of perjury and obstruction of justice charges against Barry Bonds after four years of investigation reminded Argento of actions by certain Dover board members. One (of two) comments referred to the Nova presentation.

Don't miss this--Kitzmiller v. Dover on PBS

Okay, Earth Science Week came and went with little notice. But please notice this episode of Nova on PBS--it's a reenactment of the case that the Discovery Institute was eager to see come to trial...then awfully anxious to see not come to trial...then dismissive of the case as not important.

The show airs 8:00 PM Tuesday, 13 November (check your local listings). If you can't wait, check out the promo on the PBS Web site, where, besides the preview, you can find related information and discussions.

As former Dover Area School Board member and one of the chief Creationists involved in the shenanigans, Bill Buckingham, said, "This is never gonna go away." That's right, Bill; the trial exposed Intelligent Design for what it is--anti-science Creationist claptrap with the primary purpose of bringing proselytizing religion into the classroom.

Dover HS introduces mandatory ID badges

After weeks of discussion, the Dover (Penna.) Area School Board voted 8-1 to approve the high school student handbook, which includes a policy mandating ID badges for students, according to the York Dispatch.

Okay, the policy does not call for students to wear buttons that say "I'm a Creationist!" or "Intelligent Design is for me!" Dover High School has had some interruptions in the past year and there is very real concern for the safety of students. It's no laughing matter.

Thankfully, the Dispatch article did not quote anyone declaring (Pat Robertson-like) that, by embracing the teaching of evolution in science class, the township had rejected God and will be bringing indiscriminate divine wrath upon its children just like Columbine and Waco (well, maybe not like Waco).

But there is an evolution connection.

The lone dissenting vote came from Heather (I-Don't-Know-
What-Intelligent-Design-Is,-But-If-It-Means-Getting-Jesus-
Back-Into-The-Classroom,-I'm-All-For-It) Geesey. Geesey is the only one of the pro-ID board members who was not voted out of office in the November 2005 election (her position was not up for re-election).

Geesey had to remind folks why she is considered a dimwit:

Geesey said that some "religious" people in the community will also take issue with their children wearing a badge that contains a barcode, due to the Biblical reference of "the mark of the beast."

This won't affect her, she said, because she sends her children to cyber school when they reach high school age.

So it comes as no surprise that Geesey did not win enough votes in the primary election in May to appear on the ballot in the November election. Hey, maybe she can run as Sam Brownback's running mate in '08.

They didn’t know? Because they did not want to

A little while back some folks were questioning the wisdom of several members of the Dover Area School Board for insisting on adopting a statement to be read to biology students that promoted intelligent design, when they understood neither evolution nor intelligent design (nor even science, for that matter). Apparently, some people thought these ignoramuses should be excused for their lack of knowledge. I disagree. There was opportunity to learn (for crying out loud, there were teachers in the schools); some information was available in the media (although at that time too many reports seemed to attempt more balance than was justified); and some folks tried to tell them intelligent design was bogus.

In early September I sent the following letter to the three Board members who had email addresses listed on the School Board Web page. Those three were Noel Wenrich (who later left the Board for a position elsewhere), Alan Bonsell (I did not realize he was the creationist ringleader), and Heather Geesey. I asked the recipients to share the letter with their colleagues who did not have email addresses posted. Needless to say, my letters had no effect on these people.

Dear (Mr. Wenrich, Mr. Bonsell, and Ms Geesey),

I understand that the Dover Area School Board is considering whether to require “Of Pandas and People” as a supplemental text in the high school biology curriculum. I believe members of the Board should be made aware of the nature of this book and why adopting it would do a grievous disservice to the students. I have attached two critiques of this book written by qualified practitioners in the field of evolutionary biology (more critiques have been written, but they cover much of the same ground). Please share this information with those Board members who do not have email addresses lested on the Board Web page.

In a nutshell, “Intelligent Design Creationism” is a movement having as part of its overall goal, bringing Biblical Creation into the classroom. Although some may deny a religious motivation, when one examines what they say, in their own words, there is no room for doubt. “Pandas” is clearly and undeniably a sectarian religious text, despite its attempts not to refer to “God” or cite passages from the Bible. The U.S. Supreme Court has determined such efforts to introduce religion under stealth violate the Constitution. (I’ll just mention here that, despite Creationists’ execrations to the contrary, many evolutionary scientists are religious people.)

“Pandas” presents many of the standard Creationist arguments and strategies—arguments based on misunderstanding of the science, quotations out of context, distorted explanations, misrepresentations, and even outright falsehoods. If the authors are to be believed, not only is evolutionary science in error, but many aspects of geology and the basic sciences are also wrong. When one considers how well the scientific method has helped us learn about the world around us, it is extreme hubris to say that science has got it all wrong.

I’ll leave specific criticisms of “Pandas” to the attached articles. They contain additional references, and many, many more can be found at www.talkorigins.org, www.talkdesign.org, and other Web sites. Detailed criticisms of Intelligent Design Creationism (and hundreds more references cited) have been presented in

Forrest and Gross, 2004, Creationism’s Trojan horse: Oxford, Oxford Univ. Press, 401 p.

Pennock, 1999, Tower of Babel: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 429 p.

Pennock (editor), 2001, Intelligent design creationism and its critics: Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 805 p. [includes contributions by a number of leading ID Creationists, and critiques]

Shanks, 2004, God, the devil, and Darwin: Oxford, Oxford Univ. Press, 273 p.

My greatest concern in matters such as this is that we are at a point where America needs to have as well-informed, knowledgeable, critically-thinking citizenry as possible in order to compete in an increasingly technological world. We severely hamper our ability to compete if we impose a seventeenth-century mode of thinking on our new generations.

I thank you for your patience, and I will gladly provide such additional materials as I can that you may find helpful.

Respectfully yours,

Oh--Happy Darwin Day!