Intervention Magazine
Religion Instead Of Science
May 30, 2005
Antievolution ideologues once again infiltrate the Kansas
school board to censor science and impose religious
creationism on public schools.
By Frederick Sweet
"Kansas Begins Hearings on Diluting Teaching of Evolution,"
announces the May 5, 2005, New York Times headline. The
antievolution hearings were in Topeka, Kansas.
"In the first of three daylong hearings characterized here
as the direct descendant of the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, a
parade of Ph.D.s testified today about the flaws they find
in Darwin's theory of evolution, transforming a small
auditorium into a forum on one of the most controversial
questions in education and politics: How to teach about the
origin of life?
"For Kansas, the debate is déjà vu: the last time the state
standards were under review, in 1999, conservatives on the
school board ignored their expert panel and deleted
virtually any reference to evolution. But they were ousted
in the next election and their changes were undone.
"Antievolution forces quietly regained the seats over the
next few years, attacking fellow Republicans as atheists."
The eight proponents of intelligent design (a.k.a.
creationism) were outnumbered on the 26-member committee
that is writing new standards for science education in its
public schools. Because in 1997 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled
in Edwards v. Aguillard that teaching creationism in public
school classrooms is prohibited, today's creationists
substitute the more scientific sounding "intelligent
design." They also use scientific words to camouflage this
version of creationism. Thus the Kansas state board's 6-to-4
conservative majority set up the showcase hearings in Topeka
to highlight their own suggestions for using "intelligent
design" to teach science in public schools.
The Times article concludes, "'These people are going to
obfuscate about these definitions,' complained Jack Krebs,
vice president of the pro-evolution Kansas Citizens for
Science, whose members, wearing 'I sup****t strong science
education' buttons, filled many of the 180 auditorium seats
not taken by journalists from as far away as France. 'They
have created a straw man. They are trying to make science
stand for atheism, so they can fight atheism'."
Ideologues Aim To Censor Science
The American Heritage Dictionary defines creationism as a
theological position for which: "the account of the creation
of the universe given at the beginning of the Bible is
literally true." The Dictionary defines evolution as a
scientific: ". . . theory that groups of organisms change
with passage of time, mainly as a result of natural
selection, so that descendants differ morphologically and
physiologically from their ancestors." Clearly, creationism
is a religious belief while evolution is a scientific theory.
Although the school officials in Kansas had been elected to
provide its state's children with high quality public
education, the radical conservatives among them are trying
to force creationism into the science curriculum. They also
aim to remove evolution from science education. These crimes
against science education in public schools are part and
parcel of today's "conservative" political agenda for America.
The hypocritical irony is that the truly conservative thing
to do would be to leave public schools alone. Who can forget
that icon of political conservatism, president Ronald Reagan
who had promised to "get the government off the backs of the
people?" And yet today’s radical ideologues, calling
themselves "true" conservatives, aim to pass laws that
forbid teaching the science of evolution in public schools
and insist on teaching religious creationism instead.
Indeed, these radicals charge any Republican with atheism
who refuses to go along with their censor****p of science.
"Tripping" Over Evolution
Several months ago, after my commentaries on evolution
versus creationism were posted by Intervention Magazine, I
had received scores of emails thanking me. But a few email
writers pleaded with me to give creationism a chance. Their
argument was that to be fair and balanced all opposing
theories needed to be considered in an academic debate on
the origin of life on earth. However, as a practicing
scientist, my answer had to be "no."
I can't waste my time on creationism. That's because it's
simply religious dogma having nothing to do with science.
Mine is neither a contrary nor an opposing position, but
rather it is based on practical reality. In my scientific
research, our laboratory experiments often "trip" over
evolution. But the only place where I ever naturally
encounter creationism is in Genesis from the Old Testament.
By "tripping over evolution" I mean that our recent
scientific experiments had once again shown that man is
closely related to monkeys genetically (but not to rodents
and herbivores). [See, Homology of primate DNA fragments for
estrous-associated oviductal glycoprotein] Based on our
findings, man and monkeys must have had a common ancestor at
some point in their evolutionary development. Creationists
don't want to know this. However, in today's science, our
experimental results are no more startling than
gravitational force in physics or planetary motion in
astronomy. Like gravity and planetary motion, modern science
takes evolution for granted. That's why evolution must be
taught as science in public schools and not be replaced by
or compared with religious creationism -- or creationism
dressed in intelligent design clothing.
Ideological demagogues mislead the public when they
proclaim, "evolution is merely a theory and not a fact."
What is a theory? No doubt they know that based on the germ
theory penicillin is given for pneumonia. This theory
describes bacteria called pneumococci that produce lung
infections (another theoretical word). The bacteria are
killed by penicillin. Each day, physicians save the lives of
people infected with bacterial pneumonia by applying the
germ theory. In this sense, the theory of evolution is every
bit as real and factual as is the germ theory. Evolution is
about biological reality. By contrast, creationism is a
religious belief that has nothing at all to do with science
-- as recognized and accurately defined in the American
Heritage Dictionary.
The antievolution zealotry of religious conservatives on the
Kansas public school board neither serves God nor science.
By savaging public education, these ideologues serve a very
narrow political agenda driven by a fanaticism that rivals
that of the Taliban or Al Qaeda. Just like their violent
Muslim brethren, the antievolution fanatics in Kansas don't
care who their radical actions hurt.
In a perfect world, creationists would be cloister in
monasteries and spend their days praying to God for making
Darwin and evolution go away. Instead, they get themselves
elected to school boards and then subvert America's public
education system. If there is justice in our universe, then
surely God will punish them for the harm that they do.
To join a discussion on this article, please go to our
forum. Register, click General Discussion, and find the
desired discussion.
Frederick Sweet is Professor of Reproductive Biology in
Obstetrics and Gynecology at Wa****ngton University School of
Medicine in St. Louis. You can email your comments to
mailto:Fred@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
June 1, 2005
http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/
http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1091
--
Dan Clore
My collected fiction, _The Unspeakable and Others_:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1587154838/thedanclorenecro/
Lord Weÿrdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/9879/
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
Strange pleasures are known to him who flaunts the
immarcescible purple of poetry before the color-blind.
-- Clark Ashton Smith, "Epigrams and Apothegms"
|
