THE HERALD
Everett, Washington
Sunday, August 12, 2001
 

Darwin debate is still evolving

By Todd C. Frankel
Herald Writer

To understand, talk about the eyes.

Jonathan Wells does not believe humans developed eyes through the natural
selection process of Darwinian evolution. He believes the eyes were
assembled by an intelligent designer to achieve the goal of sight.

It was not a random, meaningless event. It was part of a plan.

"I can't prove it," says Wells, a developmental biologist in Poulsbo, "but I
think it makes more sense than the Darwinian explanation."

This is intelligent design, the newest entry in the timeless debate over the
origins of life. It is an anti-evolution movement, but it isn't creationism.
Design theory is a sophisticated, clever idea that has blurred the lines
between the traditional science-vs.-religion arguments.

Intelligent design proponents believe the complexity and diversity of life
cannot be explained solely by Darwinian natural selection and "survival of
the fittest." Something else is at work, they say. And that something else
-- which is often left undefined -- is what is troubling to many.

"Intelligent design doesn't prove there is a God. But if there is a God, he
may have had a hand in this," said Jay Meadows of the Discovery Institute in
Seattle, a research institute that promotes conservative causes. "You don't
know who designed it. So it's theologically suggestive to some people.

"This," he said, "is the focus of the whole debate."

The debate appears headed for Snohomish County.

The Marysville School District has hired a Skagit Valley teacher who made
national headlines for injecting design theory into his biology classes.
Roger DeHart claims he merely wanted to present students at
Burlington-Edison High School with different views about the origins of
life. He says he never mentioned "God" during the course.

But controversy followed as the community divided over the issue and the
ACLU threatened to sue. This summer, the school district finally decided to
move him from biology to earth sciences, where he wouldn't teach evolution.
As a result, he quit.

DeHart is scheduled to begin teaching in Marysville this fall. Already, he
made news as he and school officials gave conflicting accounts about his new
role. DeHart claimed he was hired to teach high school biology. School
officials said he was hired for an earth sciences position.

Wherever he goes, the debate is sure to follow. When Eugenie Scott,
executive director of the National Center for Science Education in Oakland,
Calif., heard DeHart was headed for Marysville, she was blunt.

"What he's doing is teaching a very subtle form of creationism," Scott said.
"This is old wine in new bottles. The content of the science he's teaching
these kids is really bad."

But intelligent design supporters say they are just putting forth a
competing idea to explain inadequacies in Darwinism.

They are certainly not alone in wanting more from Darwin's theory of natural
selection. Polls show that a majority of Americans believe in some form of
creationism.

One of the intelligent design readings DeHart tried to give to his Skagit
County class was an article written by Wells, the Poulsbo biologist.

Wells is a Discovery Institute fellow with the institute's Center for the
Renewal of Science and Culture. He is one of about 35 scientists paid by the
institute to look for signs of intelligent design. Much of the fellows' work
focuses on the molecular level, looking at the engines of life for hints of
a design.

It is here, looking at the smallest things, that design theory has its
greatest successes. As scientists look deeper and deeper into cell biology,
design theorists argue that the complexity of biological structures points
to a designer.

Design theory is merely "the fine-tuning of physics," explained Richards,
program director at the science center.

He used the analogy of a billiards table to explain design theory, saying
that the balls must first be set into place before putting them in motion.
So it is only once the balls are sliding across the table that the natural
process takes over.

"Most design theorists believe that explains some things, that is, the
survival of the fittest," Richards said. "But does it explain the arrival of
the fittest?"

Wells has worked instead on debunking the tenets of evolution. In his book,
"Icons of Evolution," he attacks biology textbooks for embarrassing mistakes
in some of the examples given as proof of evolution.

One of the better-known examples include the 19th-century drawings of
biologist Ernst Haeckel, which claimed to show the early embryonic stages of
animals such as chicken and fish were virtually identical to humans. This
was used as evidence of common ancestors for all living things.

Haeckel's drawings have since been set aside as perhaps overblown, or
exaggerated, examples of evolution. But evolutionists say that doesn't mean
you get rid of the theory. Wells differs on that point.

"I don't think we have to hold on to a bad theory until we have a
substitute," Wells said.

Wells and other design theorists are more comfortable with a collective
"confession of ignorance" about the origins of life.

But there is not a consensus about much behind intelligent design. The
prominent scientists and scholars who support the theory do not agree on the
force behind it. Some say it is God, others credit an inanimate life force
or an extraterrestrial life force or a meteorite that started the chain
reaction of life.

Many design theorists don't doubt the estimated age of the earth at billions
of years. Others do, approaching the "young earth" belief held by many
creationists.

What makes people most uncomfortable is where design theory veers near and
even overlaps with creationism.

But Wells dismissed that as a legitimate problem.

"Darwinism closes the door to any supernatural, otherworldly agent," says
Wells. "Intelligent design opens that door. I don't think science can deal
with that."

Scott of the National Center for Science Education said she doesn't mind
DeHart teaching in a capacity where he can't get into a discussion on
evolution and intelligent design.

"I think Marysville will find he'll make an excellent earth science
teacher," she said.
 

You can call Herald Writer Todd C. Frankel at 425-339-3429
or send e-mail to frankel@heraldnet.com.
 

This story can be found at:
http://www.heraldnet.com/Stories/01/8/12/14199390.cfm
© 2001 The Daily Herald Co., Everett, Wash.   If you have
questions or comments, please contact us at newmedia@heraldnet.com.

POWRÓT