In the News

In ENV, Casey Luskin writes on the landmark Epperson v. Arkansas, the first case regarding the teaching of evolution to reach the U.S. Supreme Court. The decision was handed down in 1968, where the Court effectively declared it illegal to ban the teaching of evolution.

An informative summary and commentary can be viewed by clicking HERE.

ENV reports that an article in the San Antonio Express misstates some facts in its coverage of this week's upcoming Texas Board of Education vote on evolution. The article isn't all bad: It allows Discovery Institute's Casey Luskin to offer an opposing view, and Luskin's views are described accurately.

The article also erroneously claims that in 2005 the Kansas Board of Education "approved new science standards allowing the teaching of intelligent design, which posits that a supernatural creator is required to explain life's complexity."

More...

Lori Yount, of the Wichita Eagle, reports that five seats on the State Board of Education are up for grabs this year. Education advocates say how children learn about evolution hangs in the balance - and who voters choose could affect Kansas' national reputation.

A frequent flip-flop between moderate and conservative majorities on the 10-member board has resulted in the state changing its science standards four times in the past eight years.

Conservatives have pushed for standards casting doubt on evolution, and moderates have said intelligent design does not belong in the science classroom.

In 2007, a new 6-4 moderate majority removed standards that called evolution into question.

This year, none of the three moderates whose seats are up for election are running again. Only one of the two conservative incumbents is running for re-election.

More...

May, 2005: The Kansas state school board again captures the world's attention with its evolution controversy - this time by holding scientific hearings that put Darwin's long-held theory on trial. Get face-to-face with the people behind this historic event, and see for yourself what really happened - and why.

For more information...go to the Web site.

Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas recently had an op-ed piece in the New York Times. Reaction has obviously been widespread and mixed. Below are some weigh-ins from Christianity Today's blog.

More...

Sarah Kessinger, of the Hutchinson (KS) News, reports that science advocates are urging write-in candidates to contest Kansas state school board member Ken Willard in this summer's election for president of the National Association of State Boards of Education.

Opponents express concern for Willard's push for the teaching of intelligent design...

More...

ARN now has the "Teaching Origins Objectively" (Kansas Science Hearings) DVD in stock. There is a 2 hour version and a 5 hour version (which includes transcripts of the entire 20 hour hearing). It contains testimony from some familiar names as well as some you may not have heard before:

William S. Harris, Ph.D.: Biochemist and developer of Omega-3 Index for which he has gained international standing
Charles Thaxton, Ph.D.: Chemist, co-author of "The Mystery of Life’s Origins"
Jonathan Wells, Ph.D.: Molecular biologist, author of "Icons of Evolution"
Bruce Simat, Ph.D.: Professor at Northwestern College, Biochemistry and Human Physiology
Ralph Seelke, Ph.D.: Professor of Biology, University of Wisconsin
Edward Peltzer, Ph.D.: Research specialist in oceanography and chemical evolution
Russell Carlson, Ph.D.: Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology and University of Georgia
John Sanford, Ph.D.: Geneticist and Associate Professor, Cornell University
Robert DiSilvestro, Ph.D.: Biochemist, Professor of Nutrition, Ohio State University
Bryan Leonard, High school biology teacher, Ph.D. candidate in Science Education
Daniel Ely, Ph.D.: Professor of Biology, University of Akron in Ohio
Roger DeHart, B.S.: High school biology teacher, Westlake Village, CA
Jill Gonzalez-Bravo, M.A.: Middle school teacher, Rose Hill, KS
John Milliam, Ph.D.: Theoretical chemist, developer of computational chemistry software
Nancy Bryson, Ph.D.: Assistant Professor of Chemistry, Kennesaw State University
James Barham, M.A.: Scholar and author specializing in evolutionary epistemology
Stephen Meyer, Ph.D.: Director and Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute, Seattle, WA.
Angus Menuge, Ph.D.: Professor of Philosophy with expertise in the philosophy of science
Warren Nord, Ph.D.: Professor of Philosophy and Religion, University of North Carolina
Mustafa Akyol, Freelance writer for Turkish and U.S. media
Michael Behe, Ph.D.: Professor of Biochemistry at Lehigh University and author of "Darwin’s Black Box"
John H. Calvert, J.D.: Lawyer specializing in constitutionally appropriate ways to teach origins science in public schools

This documentary reveals the problems with how origins is taught in our public school and shows that the other side refused to take the witness stand. Thanks to John Calvert for staging the event and documenting it for the world to see.

February 13, 2007

Today the Kansas State Board of Education threw out a model for teaching origins science objectively. In the place of objective standards the Board inserted a new model which allows only material or natural causes to explain the origin of natural phenomena.

According to the new standards all of scientific knowledge can be reduced to the "physical" " in terms of matter, energy and the forces." Even human consciousness, which science studies, is reduced to the physical. Only one answer is allowed to the question: Where do we come from? The answer: material causes - the random interactions of matter, energy and the forces.

Along with this materialistic doctrine that allows no alternatives, the new standards sweep aside objective standards that would introduce students to legitimate scientific controversies regarding chemical evolution (origin of life) and macro-evolution (origins of new body plans and sophisticated bio-chemical systems). Given the doctrine that only material causes are allowed to explain where we come from, criticisms of evolutionary theory become irrelevant.

The placard on the wall of the Kansas State Board of Education proclaims:

"Our students come first in every Board decision."

Today the State Board made a decision designed to withhold from students important relevant information about the most important question they may have to answer in their lives: Where do we come from? What is the origin of life and its diversity." Today the State sent a message to its school districts to withhold information relevant to that question and to teach impressionable young children that life derives from only material causes. Many Kansans who signed over 3,000 petitions to the Board believe that decision does not put the student first. Instead it puts first those who seek only a material cause to explain life - Materialists.

"Materialism is a very controversial idea that lacks a sound evidentiary basis," said Dr. William S. Harris, a biochemist. "It is the foundation for non-theistic religions and belief systems. State promotion of materialism effectively puts the state in the posture of discriminating between religions. Materialism favors the non-theist over the theist."

"The public has not been properly educated on this issue,"said John Calvert, the managing director of IDnet. "Eventually the truth will emerge as the public becomes better educated. A new documentary that follows the testimony of the science hearings held two years ago does that."

"The decision of the Board, not only disregards the needs of the students, it also undermines the home by discrediting parents who reject materialism and the ethics and morals it fosters," said Greg Lassey, a former biology teacher and an author of the objective model that was removed from the standards.

If you view the proposed changes to the Kansas Science Standards
you will see two models for teaching origins. A model that teaches the materialistic theories of chemical and biological origins objectively and a model that teaches those theories dogmatically. The present standards incorporate the objective model. Next week the Kansas State Board will consider throwing out the objective model and replacing it with the materialistic model.

In many's opinion, the effect of the change would be is to cause the state to promote Materialism in public education. The question is whether it is fine for the State to promote materialism?

A news Release from Intelligent Design network:

February 2, 2007
NEWS RELEASE:
John Calvert, 913-268-0852
Exposing the Evolution Controversy Now showing at local theaters in Kansas!

Is there a genuine scientific controversy over evolution? A new documentary movie about Kansas Science Hearings held two years ago answer that question with a resounding "Yes." The film also shows why the controversy needs to be addressed in public schools.

Kansas Science Hearings: Exposing the Evolution Controversy will open with a special showing at the Glenwood Arts theater in Kansas City on February 12, 2007. The film begins at 7 PM, but arrive early to get a seat. The movie will also be shown between Feb 7 and 13 in other locations around the state, including Topeka, Leavenworth, Wichita, Independence, Dodge City/Meade, and Garden City. Go to www.KansasScience2005.com for specific times and locations.

Where did humans come from? What is the origin of life and its diversity? Any answer to these questions have a major impact on what we believe about religion, ethics, morals and even government. The US was founded on the idea that we derive unalienable rights from a Creator. However, materialistic cultures claim that because life is not a creation it has no inherent rights. Human rights exist only to the extent provided by government.

Twenty three expert witnesses testified about two distinctly different models for teaching about the ultimate question to children in Kansas schools. They included 5 PhD biologists, 4 PhD biochemists, 3 PhD Chemists, 1 PhD Geneticist (the inventor of the Gene Gun), 1 PhD Quantum Physicist, 3 Philosophers of Science, 1 PhD Professor of Education, 3 biology teachers, a Muslim science writer and an attorney.

The documentary is fast-paced and filled with drama as witnesses testify about systematic suppression of the controversy, fear in the class room and loss of jobs for teaching Darwin objectively. All of the witnesses were cross examined by an ACLU attorney. The hearings end with fireworks -a shocking refusal of the Materialists to submit to questions from the
other side.

"The materialistic model seeks to teach children that the universe is self existing and that life is the product of unguided evolutionary change. Because unguided material causation is assumed, the student is offered no information critical of that explanation," said William S. Harris, PhD, a biochemist who led the team that developed the competing objective model.

"The objective model we developed teaches only the materialistic explanation, but also informs students of genuine scientific
controversies about that view. There are two major controversies - one deals with the origin of life itself (chemical evolution), and the other deals with macro-evolution, the idea that random variation and natural selection have generated complex new bio-systems like cellular motors, factories and processing plants," said Greg Lassey, another team member.
"The presentations show undeniable controversies and the need to teach them."

"We have produced two versions of the documentary," said Brian Barkley, the producer of the movie. "A two hour version for the public, and a five hour version that covers the testimony of each witness in depth and includes all of the hearing exhibits and transcripts. This is an archival set for journalists and serious students of the debate."

Exposing the Evolution Controversy comes at the right time. The Kansas Board will consider proposals to throw out the objective model and replace it with the Materialistic one on February 13 and 14.
*******
Intelligent Design network, inc. is a nonprofit national organization that seeks institutional objectivity in origins science.