The Evolution Controversy: What's There To Be Afraid Of?

              by Jeremy Alder

              I distinctly remember my professor introducing her introductory
              biology class with the remark that; science is about proposing
              theories and then working as hard as possible to prove them wrong.;
              The point being that science (at least in theory) is a tentative
              enterprise whose propositions are always open to revision as new
              evidence accumulates and that there is no theory immune to criticism.
              I kept this in mind as the semester progressed and was looking forward
              to the lectures on evolution, hoping that my professors idealized
              view of science would be upheld and we would cover at least a few
              of the criticisms of evolution that I knew existed.

              I had recently read critiques of some of the icons of evolution
              (this was before Jonathan Wells fantastic book - Icons of Evolution)
              like the Miller-Urey experiment, the peppered
              moths, and Haeckles fraudulent drawings of vertebrate embryos.
              Each one of these icons was found in my textbook (as well as all
              the others found in Icons of Evolution), and I anticipated them being covered in lecture.
              When the icons were addressed I was prepared with intelligent and
              sincere questions for my professor. While at first she was willing
              to answer my questions, as the lectures progressed she became visibly
              frustrated with my persistence and took to ignoring me when I would
             raise my hand. Even after class and during office hours I was made
              to feel as if my questions were not welcome. I had began school
              with the idea that the university was a place where critical thinking
              about important issues was valued, not discouraged. I quickly learned
              otherwise. Darwinism was off limits.

              This was confirmed a couple of years later when I transferred to
              another university and began writing editorials for the school newspaper.
              Wanting to write a fair and balanced article on intelligent design,
              I emailed some questions to professors at the school who I thought
              might be critical of intelligent design theory. The director of
              our biology department immediately wrote my editor and questioned
              whether or not I really worked for the newspaper and urged her not
              to publish my article on the "pseudoscientific religious movement";
              known as intelligent design theory. He never wrote me back or answered
              my questions.
             This type of attempted speech and thought control is not reserved
              for students. In 1993 Dr. Dean H. Kenyon was removed from his teaching
              position at San Francisco State University after he suggested to
              his introductory biology class that the scientific evidence suggested
              that intelligent design may be the best explanation for the origin
              of life (see the article: Scientific Correctness). The fact that Dr. Kenyon had taught
              the class for 22 years and had written an authoritative book on
              the origin of life did not seem to matter. Dissent from the doctrines
              of evolution could not be allowed.

              I'm sure I am not the only student who has been discouraged
              from thinking critically about evolution, and I also know that Dr.
              Kenyon is not the only college professor who risks losing his job
              if he questions Darwinism in public. This is a shame and a betrayal
              of the central purpose of the university as a place for the free
              and open exchange of ideas.
             Those who think it is their duty to shield students from criticisms
              of evolution would do well to read their Darwin. In the introduction
              to The Origin of Species he writes: I am well aware
              that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which
              facts cannot be, often apparently leading to conclusions directly
              opposite to those at which I have arrived. A fair result can be
              obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments
              on both sides of each question. One wonders if a
              fair result is exactly what some of these people are afraid
              of.
            Comments? Contact Jeremy at jsalder@idurc.org
            Copyright 2001 Jeremy Alder. All rights reserved. International copyright secured.