-- Six Significant Court Decisions Regarding Evolution and Creationism Issues
-- Official Statements of the National Science Teachers Association, and the National Association of Biology Teachers, regarding Evolution
-- many more comments from religious and science individuals, including long list of science groups and many clergy who have publicly endorsed Evolution and its teaching in the public schools...
The following are excerpts from important court decisions regarding evolution and creationism issues. In most cases the full court decision can be found online...
2005 - Judge Rejects Teaching Intelligent Design (NY Times Dec 21, 2005) HARRISBURG, Pa., A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that it was unconstitutional for a Pennsylvania school district to present intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in high school biology courses because it is a religious viewpoint that advances "a particular version of Christianity." In the nation's first case to test the legal merits of intelligent design, the judge, John E. Jones III, issued a broad, stinging rebuke to its advocates and provided strong support for scientists who have fought to bar intelligent design from the science curriculum.
Judge Jones also excoriated members of the Dover, Pa., school board, who he said lied to cover up their religious motives, made a decision of "breathtaking inanity" and "dragged" their community into "this legal maelstrom with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources." ...
Judge Jones, a conservative Republican appointed by President Bush, concluded that intelligent design was not science, and... said that teaching intelligent design as science in public school violated the First Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits public officials from using their positions to impose or establish a particular religion.
"To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect," Judge Jones wrote. "However, the fact that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific propositions." ... Judge Jones said the evidence in the trial proved that intelligent design was "creationism relabeled." The Supreme Court has already ruled that creationism, which relies on the biblical account of the creation of life, cannot be taught as science in a public school.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs said at a news conference in Harrisburg that the judge's decision should serve as a deterrent to other school boards and teachers considering teaching intelligent design. "It's a carefully reasoned, highly detailed opinion," said Richard Katskee, assistant legal director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, "that goes through all of the issues that would be raised in any other school district."
--------------------
Older Cases...
In 1968, in Epperson v. Arkansas, the United States Supreme Court invalidated an Arkansas statute that prohibited the teaching of evolution. The Court held the statute unconstitutional on grounds that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not permit a state to require that teaching and learning must be tailored to the principles or prohibitions of any particular religious sect or doctrine. (Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97. (1968))
In 1981, in Segraves v. State of California, the Court found that the California State Board of Education's Science Framework, as written and as qualified by its anti-dogmatism policy, gave sufficient accommodation to the views of Segraves, contrary to his contention that class discussion of evolution prohibited his and his children's free exercise of religion. The anti-dogmatism policy provided that class distinctions of origins should emphasize that scientific explanations focus on "how," not "ultimate cause," and that any speculative statements concerning origins, both in texts and in classes, should be presented conditionally, not dogmatically. The court's ruling also directed the Board of Education to widely disseminate the policy, which in 1989 was expanded to cover all areas of science, not just those concerning issues of origins. (Segraves v. California, No. 278978 Sacramento Superior Court (1981))
In 1982, in McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, a federal court held that a "balanced treatment" statute violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The Arkansas statute required public schools to give balanced treatment to "creation-science" and "evolution-science." In a decision that gave a detailed definition of the term "science," the court declared that "creation science" is not in fact a science. The court also found that the statute did not have a secular purpose, noting that the statute used language peculiar to creationist literature in emphasizing origins of life as an aspect of the theory of evolution. While the subject of life's origins is within the province of biology, the scientific community does not consider the subject as part of evolutionary theory, which assumes the existence of life and is directed to an explanation of how life evolved after it originated. The theory of evolution does not presuppose either the absence or the presence of a creator. (McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, 529 F. Supp. 1255, 50 (1982) U.S. Law Week 2412)
In 1987, in Edwards v. Aguillard, the U.S. Supreme Court held unconstitutional Louisiana's "Creationism Act." This statute prohibited the teaching of evolution in public schools, except when it was accompanied by instruction in "creation science." The Court found that, by advancing the religious belief that a supernatural being created humankind, which is embraced by the term creation science, the act impermissibly endorses religion. In addition, the Court found that the provision of a comprehensive science education is undermined when it is forbidden to teach evolution except when creation science is also taught. (Edwards v. Aguillard, 482, U.S. 578, 55 (1987) U.S. Law Week 4860, S. CT. 2573, 96 L. Ed. 2d510)
In 1990, in Webster v. New Lennox School District, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals found that a school district may prohibit a teacher from teaching creation science in fulfilling its responsibility to ensure that the First Amendment's establishment clause is not violated, and religious beliefs are not injected into the public school curriculum. The court upheld a district court finding that the school district had not violated Webster's free speech rights when it prohibited him from teaching "creation science," since it is a form of religious advocacy. (Webster v. New Lennox School District #122, 917 F.2d 1004 (7th. Cir., 1990))
In 1994, in Peloza v. Capistrano Unified School District, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court finding that a teacher's First Amendment right to free exercise of religion is not violated by a school district's requirement that evolution be taught in biology classes. Rejecting plaintiff Peloza's definition of a "religion" of "evolutionism," the Court found that the district had simply and appropriately required a science teacher to teach a scientific theory in biology class. (Peloza v. Capistrano Unified School District, 37 F.3d 517 (9th Cir., 1994)) Note Matsumura, M., ed. 1995. Pp. 2-3 in Voices for Evolution. 2nd ed. Berkeley, CA: National Center for Science Education.
National Science Teachers Association (55,000 American science teachers)
National Science Teachers Association: "The National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) strongly supports the position that evolution is a major unifying concept in science and should be included in the K-12 science education frameworks and curricula. Furthermore, if evolution is not taught, students will not achieve the level of scientific literacy they need.
This position is consistent with that of the National Academies, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), and many other scientific and educational organizations.
NSTA also recognizes that evolution has not been emphasized in science curricula in a manner commensurate to its importance because of official policies, intimidation of science teachers, the general public's misunderstanding of evolutionary theory, and a century of controversy. In addition, teachers are being pressured to introduce creationism, "creation science," and other nonscientific views, which are intended to weaken or eliminate the teaching of evolution."
-------------------------
National Association of Biology Teachers -Official Statement about Evolution
"As stated in The American Biology Teacher by the eminent scientist Theodosius Dobzhansky (1973), "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution." This often-quoted assertion accurately illuminates the central, unifying role of evolution in nature, and therefore in biology. Teaching biology in an effective and scientifically-honest manner requires classroom discussions and laboratory experiences on evolution.
Modern biologists constantly study, ponder and deliberate the patterns, mechanisms and pace of evolution, but they do not debate evolution's occurrence. The fossil record and the diversity of extant organisms, combined with modern techniques of molecular biology, taxonomy and geology, provide exhaustive examples and powerful evidence for genetic variation, natural selection, speciation, extinction and other well-established components of current evolutionary theory. Scientific deliberations and modifications of these components clearly demonstrate the vitality and scientific integrity of evolution and the theory that explains it.
This same examination, pondering and possible revision have firmly established evolution as an important natural process explained by valid scientific principles, and clearly differentiate and separate science from various kinds of nonscientific ways of knowing, including those with a supernatural basis such as creationism. Whether called "creation science," "scientific creationism," "intelligent-design theory," "young-earth theory" or some other synonym, creation beliefs have no place in the science classroom. Explanations employing nonnaturalistic or supernatural events, whether or not explicit reference is made to a supernatural being, are outside the realm of science and not part of a valid science curriculum.
Evolutionary theory, indeed all of science, is necessarily silent on religion and neither refutes nor supports the existence of a deity or deities. Accordingly, the National Association of Biology Teachers, an organization of science teachers, endorses the following tenets of science, evolution and biology education:
The diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an unpredictable and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and changing environments. Biological evolution refers to changes in populations, not individuals. Changes must be successfully passed on to the next generation. This means evolution results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations. In fact, evolution can be defined as any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next.
Evolutionary theory is significant in biology, among other reasons, for its unifying properties and predictive features, the clear empirical testability of its integral models and the richness of new scientific research it fosters. The fossil record, which includes abundant transitional forms in diverse taxonomic groups, establishes extensive and comprehensive evidence for organic evolution. Natural selection, the primary mechanism for evolutionary changes, can be demonstrated with numerous, convincing examples, both extant and extinct.
Natural selection-a differential, greater survival and reproduction of some genetic variants within a population under an existing environmental state-has no specific direction or goal, including survival of a species. Adaptations do not always provide an obvious selective advantage. Furthermore, there is no indication that adaptations-molecular to organismal-must be perfect: adaptations providing a selective advantage must simply be good enough for survival and increased reproductive fitness.
The model of punctuated equilibrium provides another account of the tempo of speciation in the fossil record of many lineages: it does not refute or overturn evolutionary theory, but instead adds to its scientific richness. Evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics: producing order from disorder is possible with the addition of energy, such as from the sun.
Although comprehending deep time is difficult, the earth is about 4.5 billion years old. Homo sapiens has occupied only a minuscule moment of that immense duration of time. When compared with earlier periods, the Cambrian explosion evident in the fossil record reflects at least three phenomena: the evolution of animals with readily-fossilized hard body parts; Cambrian environment (sedimentary rock) more conducive to preserving fossils; and the evolution from pre-Cambrian forms of an increased diversity of body patterns in animals. Radiometric and other dating techniques, when used properly, are highly accurate means of establishing dates in the history of the planet and in the history of life.
Recent findings from the advancing field of molecular genetics, combined with the large body of evidence from other disciplines, collectively provide indisputable demonstration of the theory of evolution.
In science, a theory is not a guess or an approximation but an extensive explanation developed from well-documented, reproducible sets of experimentally-derived data from repeated observations of natural processes. The models and the subsequent outcomes of a scientific theory are not decided in advance, but can be, and often are, modified and improved as new empirical evidence is uncovered. Thus, science is a constantly self-correcting endeavor to understand nature and natural phenomena.
Science is not teleological: the accepted processes do not start with a conclusion, then refuse to change it, or acknowledge as valid only those data that support an unyielding conclusion. Science does not base theories on an untestable collection of dogmatic proposals. Instead, the processes of science are characterized by asking questions, proposing hypotheses, and designing empirical models and conceptual frameworks for research about natural events.
Providing a rational, coherent and scientific account of the taxonomic history and diversity of organisms requires inclusion of the mechanisms and principles of evolution. Similarly, effective teaching of cellular and molecular biology requires inclusion of evolution.
Specific textbook chapters on evolution should be included in biology curricula, and evolution should be a recurrent theme throughout biology textbooks and courses. Students can maintain their religious beliefs and learn the scientific foundations of evolution. Teachers should respect diverse beliefs, but contrasting science with religion, such as belief in creationism, is not a role of science.
Science teachers can, and often do, hold devout religious beliefs, accept evolution as a valid scientific theory, and teach the theory's mechanisms and principles. Science and religion differ in significant ways that make it inappropriate to teach any of the different religious beliefs in the science classroom.
Opposition to teaching evolution reflects confusion about the nature and processes of science. Teachers can, and should, stand firm and teach good science with the acknowledged support of the courts. In Epperson v. Arkansas (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a 1928 Arkansas law prohibiting the teaching of evolution in state schools. In McLean v. Arkansas (1982), the federal district court invalidated a state statute requiring equal classroom time for evolution and creationism.
Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) led to another Supreme Court ruling against so-called "balanced treatment" of creation science and evolution in public schools. In this landmark case, the Court called the Louisiana equal-time statute "facially invalid as violative of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, because it lacks a clear secular purpose." This decision-"the Edwards restriction"-is now the controlling legal position on attempts to mandate the teaching of creationism: the nation's highest court has said that such mandates are unconstitutional. Subsequent district court decisions in Illinois and California have applied "the Edwards restriction" to teachers who advocate creation science, and to the right of a district to prohibit an individual teacher from promoting creation science, in the classroom.
Courts have thus restricted school districts from requiring creation science in the science curriculum and have restricted individual instructors from teaching it. All teachers and administrators should be mindful of these court cases, remembering that the law, science and NABT support them as they appropriately include the teaching of evolution in the science curriculum.
References and Suggested Reading Aguillard, D. (1999). Evolution education in Louisiana public schools: a decade following Edwards V. Aguillard. The American Biology Teacher, 61, pp. 182-188. Brack, A. (Ed.).(1999). The Molecular Origins of Life: Assembling Pieces of the Puzzle. Cambridge: Camnbridge University Press. Futuyma, D. (1986). Evolutionary biology, 2nd ed. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc. Futuyma, D. (1995). Science on Trial. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc. Gillis, A. (1994). Keeping creationism out of the classroom. Bioscience, 44, pp. 650-656. Gould, S. (1994, October). The evolution of life on earth. Scientific American, 271, pp. 85-91. Gould, S. (1995). Dinosaur in a Haystack. Reflections in Natural History. New York: Harmony Books. Kiklas, K. (1997). The Evolutionary Biology of Plants. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Matsumura, M. (Ed.). (1995). Voices for Evolution. Berkeley, CA: The National Center for Science Education. Mayr, E. (1991). One Long Argument: Charles Darwin and the Genesis of Modern Evolutionary Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Moore, J. (1993). Science as a Way of Knowing-The Foundations of Modern Biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Moore, R. (1999). Creationism in the United States: VII. The Lingering Threat. The American Biology Teacher, 61, pp.330-340. See also references therein to earlier articles in the series. National Academy of Sciences. (1998). Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Academy of Sciences. (1999). Science and creationism—A View from the National Academy of Sciences. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Center for Science Education. P.O. Box 9477, Berkeley, CA 94709. Numerous publications such as Bartelt, K. (1999), A Scientist Responds to Behe's Black Box. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Pennock, R.T. (1999). Tower of Babel: The Evidence Against the New Creationism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Weiner, J. (1994). Beak of the Finch-A Story of Evolution in our Time. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Wilson, E. (1992). The Diversity of Life. New York: W.W. Norton & Co. Adopted by the Board of Directors March 15, 1995.Revised October 1997 and August 2000.Endorsed by: The Society for the Study of Evolution, June 1998. The American Association of Physical Anthropologists,July 1998.
from the Roman Catholic Church
" … While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5-4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution. While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens. With the development of the human brain, the nature and rate of evolution were permanently altered: with the introduction of the uniquely human factors of consciousness, intentionality, freedom and creativity, biological evolution was recast as social and cultural evolution." - paragraph 63 from the Report of the Church’s International Theological Commission, which was directed by then Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict)
"... I would like to remind you that the Magisterium of the Church has already made pronouncements on these matters within the framework of her own competence... In his Encyclical Humani generis (given in the year 1950), my predecessor Pius XII had already stated that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith..." Pope John Paul II, October 22, 1996
"Sure it's possible to believe in both God and Evolution. I'm a Roman Catholic and Catholics have always understood that God could make life any way He wanted to... We were taught in Parochial School that Darwin's theory was the best guess at how God could have made life." Prof Michael Behe, Lehigh University
Multiple Views: Creationist vs Believers in God and Evolution vs Atheist
"Personally I am a young-Earth Creationist. I believe that the Bible is adequately clear about how God created the world, and that its most natural reading points to a six-day creation that included not just the animal and plant species but the earth itself." Albert Mohler, President, Southern Baptist Seminary (Time 8/25/2005)
-------------
Interesting comments on faith and science from a lecture by Fundamentalist Baptist Dr Bruce Prescott to biology students at Univ of Oklahoma
--------------
"...We the undersigned, Christian clergy from many different traditions, believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist. We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests. To reject this truth or to treat it as “one theory among others” is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children. We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of critical thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection of the will of our Creator..." Clergy Letter Project - over 10,000 active clergy have signed a letter endorsing the teaching of Evolution for believing Christians.
----------
"That the earth is many millions of years old is now well established. Measured dates of individual geological layers, even when taken from samples on opposite sides of the earth, agree. Many thousands of these measurements have been made, using a number of different techniques. Can they all simultaneously be in error? One modern dating technique is known as "fission track" dating. This is based on the spontaneous fission of uranium atoms, which occurs at a well-established rate not influenced by temperature, pressure, or chemical combination. Such fissions leave a distinctive track in specimens of a certain type of crystal. Thus by counting the number of tracks in a given specimen, and by measuring its uranium content, a very reliable date can be determined.
"With regards to evolution, every year or so it seems we hear of some new discovery of early hominid fossils -- not just isolated teeth or bones, but nearly complete skeletons in some cases. A number of other convincing "missing link" fossils have recently been discovered. Natural evolution has been exhibited in ways obvious to anyone, including changes observed in the resistance of certain diseases to medicines, and in changes in the AIDS virus since it was first discovered. The recent advancements in molecular biology, including the discovery of the structure of DNA and the role of mutations, has provided a clear mechanism for heredity and evolution. Computer simulations of these processes not only verify the theory of evolution but have also been applied to completely different fields. The resulting schemes, which are known as "genetic algorithms", are for some computational problems the most efficient solution schemes known.
"Further, countless comparisons of DNA sequences between species have now been published. Hemoglobin molecule sequences have also been catalogued for many species. These results provide virtually incontestable evidence of evolution, since scientists no longer have to rely on vague similarities in appearance between different species -- the evolutionary distance between species can now be objectively and quantitatively measured. For example, the 141-long alpha chain of the hemoglobin molecule is identical in chimpanzees, differs in only one location in gorillas, yet differs in 25 locations in rabbits and in over 100 locations in fish. Even more dramatic are the recent announcements of recovering DNA from ancient organisms. Ironically, one of the most dramatic of these discoveries, namely dinosaur DNA, was made by an LDS scientist (Scott Woodward at BYU). These developments herald the advent of what Charles Darwin, in his wildest fantasies, might not have imagined possible: the direct analysis of the course of evolution, including human evolution, at the DNA level, through the eons.
"All of these results are supported by reams of meticulous research, and there is more than enough dissent in the field to insure that any weakly supported or imprecisely argued claims are ripped apart. Too bad the religious world doesn't subject itself to such rigorous analysis! David H. Bailey ("LDS Scientist Speaks")
--------------------
"I see no conflict between what the Bible tells me about God and what science tells me about Nature... while noone could claim to have ferreted out every detail of how evolution works, I do not see any significant "gaps" in the progressive development of life's complex structures that would require divine intervention." Francis Collins, Director, National Human Genome Research Institute
-----------------
"It's natural to think that living things must be the handwork of a designer, but it was also natural to think that the sun went around the earth... the moral design of nature is as bungled as its engineering design, What twisted sadist would have invented a parasite that blinds millions of people or a gene that covers babies with excruciating blisters? To adapt a Yiddish expression about God, if an intelligent designer lived on Earth, people would break his windows...the theory of natural selection explains life as we find it, with all its quirks and tragedies. We can prove mathematically that is is capable of producing adaptive life forms and track it in computer simulations, lab experiments, and real eco-systems." Prof Steven Pinker, Harvard University
|
