Creationism:
The growing threat 

By Eugenie C. Scott

The teacher from Florida had a sense of urgency in his voice. A group of state
legislators had proposed a resolution that would encourage
school districts to include creation science in their curricula. The measure
looked like it would be appended to a bill promoting prayer in school
a shoo-in, in the teacher's opinion. What could he do?

Earlier that month a parent had called from Colorado, upset because the teachers
in her son's high school had decided not to teach evolution
"because it went against religion." Did I know what she could do to see that her
kid got a decent education? 

>From Vermont came a call from another teacher, worried because her school board
had passed a resolution directing teachers that, "Whenever
origin of life is presented at Blue Mountain Union School that creation be
presented as a viable theory on an equal status with the various
theories of evolution." 

What's going on? Creationism in public schools in 1994? Wasn't all this settled
with the Scopes trial in 1925? Certainly, it must have been
settled with the Supreme Court Edwards v. Aguillard decision in 1987, striking
down a Louisiana law requiring the teaching of creationism
whenever evolution was taught. Wasn't it? 

No, it was not. And, yes, evolution is a controversial issue in 1994, right up
there with sex education, AIDS education, and supposedly satanic
elementary school reading texts. Evolution is taught less frequently in 1994
than in 1984 because of parental pressure on teachers, occasionally
because of official or unofficial policy, and most frequently because teachers
anticipate problems from the community. 

The National Center for Science Education is a clearing-house for information
about the creation/evolution controversy. I get calls like those
mentioned above every week. It is my job to try to help people keep evolution in
the curriculum and keep creation science out. I do this by
providing information on the scientific, legal, and religious issues involved,
and by galvanizing opposition to those who attack the integrity of
science. 

Scientific creationism was born when the Supreme Court declared in 1968's
Epperson v. Arkansas that it was unconstitutional to ban the
teaching of evolution. The notion developed that by calling biblical literalism
science, it might validly have a place in the public schools.
Creation science was declared religious advocacy in Edwards v. Aguillard, but
this has not noticeably slowed down the movement. 

In response to such legal decisions, creationism has evolved by avoiding the
word creationism. A current euphemism is intelligent design
theory, promoted in the creationist textbook Of Pandas and People. It comes as
no surprise to someone familiar with the arguments of the
now-discredited scientific creationists that intelligent design and abrupt
appearance proofs are identical with those of scientific creationism. 

The most sophisticated anti-evolutionists have shifted to arguing for a
teacher's academic freedom to teach arguments against evolution, which
upon analysis prove to be (surprise!) identical to the positions held by the now
legally discredited scientific creationists. In Vista, California, a
Religious Right-dominated school board attempted to pass a resolution calling
not for creation science, but for teachers to teach "weaknesses
that substantially challenge theories in evolution." 

It is a tactically excellent argument. The Establishment Clause of the First
Amendment protects us against proselytizing in the public schools; it
does not protect us against bad science. 

To the scientific community, evidence against evolution and in fact, the entire
anti-evolution movement, is incomprehensible. Evolution is
fundamental to biology and geology, and of primary importance to many other
sciences. The famous geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky said it
best: "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution." Biology
without evolution, he observed, is "a pile of sundry facts 
some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a
whole." 

In the world of science, arguments occur over how evolution occurred, or how
fast, or what creature is descended from what. Whether
evolution occurs is just not an issue at the university level. Noteworthy is the
fact that in every prominent university or college in the country,
including Brigham Young, Notre Dame, Southern Methodist, and Baylor, evolution
is part of the curriculum. 

Nevertheless, anti-evolutionism remains widespread in popular culture. In 1992,
CBS aired a two-hour program purporting to prove scientifically
that there was an actual, literal Great Flood and that human and dinosaur
footprints are found together in a Texas river. 

In promotional literature sent in late 1993 to PBS stations nationwide, a
creationist videotape, "Voices for Creation," produced by a Marquette,
Michigan public television station, was offered to PBS stations because "a
growing number of scientists are forsaking evolutionary theory for
creation science." The promo also noted that the documentary was produced "in
response to increasing criticism of public television for its
perceived pro-evolution stance." To practicing scientists, this is akin to
criticizing PBS astronomy shows for their pro-spherical earth stance. 

Work with pro-evolution clergy. The best-kept secret in the creation controversy
is that Catholic and mainline Protestant theology has no
problem incorporating evolution or other scientific ideas. The creation
controversy is not one between science and religion, but between
biblical literalist theology and everyone else. The plaintiffs (opponents of
creationism in the schools) in the famous McLean v. Arkansas federal
court decision were bishops and other high officials of the Methodist, A.M.E.,
Episcopal, Roman Catholic, Presbyterian and Southern Baptist
churches.

It is clear that Christian theology can accommodate evolution. In a statement
opposing scientific creationists who were attempting to influence
the Lexington, Kentucky, school board, the Lexington Alliance of Religious
Leaders, composed of mainline clergy, wrote: "As religious leaders
we share a deep faith in the God who created heaven and earth and all that is in
them, and take with utmost seriousness the Biblical witness to
this God who is our Creator. However, we find no incompatibility between the God
of creation and a theory of evolution which uses universally
verifiable data to explain the probable process by which life developed into its
present form." 

Expose the equal time argument. The concept of equal time may be a praiseworthy
cultural value, but it is irrelevant in the world of science.
Science is not a democratic process and scientists do not decide which theory is
correct by taking a vote. The key to the acceptance of a
scientific theory is if it explains facts and observations better than others.
Evolution explains observations in paleontology, biochemistry,
comparative anatomy, embryology, biogeography and many other fields. Creationism
explains nothing. 

To the average American, it seems reasonable that if one teaches evolution, one
should also teach creationism because it's only fair. The
answer is that it is only fair to give our students the best possible education,
and to teach them state-of-the-art scholarship. It is not fair to
teach that the world goes around the sun, and then give equal time to the
geocentrists. It is not reasonable to teach students that six million
Jews were killed by the Nazis, and also, in fairness, to teach that the
Holocaust is actually just a propaganda ploy of Zionists even though
there is a constituency for this point of view. We shouldn't be teaching
crackpot history to our students just because someone thinks it is fair,
and we shouldn't be teaching crackpot science i.e. creationism either. 

We must teach Americans how science works, and why it is the best method human
beings have developed to understand how the natural
world works though it has nothing to say about ultimate cause. 

Eugenie Scott is with the National Center for Science Education in Berkeley,
California. Reprinted with permission from the How to Win
Handbook published by the Radical Right Task Force.

© 1998 Institute for First Amendment Studies, Inc. 
Oryginal: http://www.ifas.org/fw/9409/creationism.html