• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Stick to Science in School

Posted on: Monday, 22 November 2004, 21:00 CST

Stick to science in school

The November issue of National Geographic magazine asks on its cover: "Was Darwin wrong?" It's just a teaser, though, because inside, the emphatic answer in big letters is "No." The accompanying article shows just how much corroborating evidence science has compiled and continues to compile to support the basics of evolutionary theory.

Yes, evolution is a theory, but, as the article points out, it's a theory on the order of the proposition that the Earth moves around the sun and the theory of relativity and the idea that the movement of electrons little bits of matter that no one has ever seen can light up a room.

All of those ideas are supported by hard evidence, as is evolution, which is why the vast majority of scientists, who are supposed to follow where the facts lead them, still think that Charles Darwin was right. It's also why they think science classes should teach evolution and not, say, divine intervention, as the basic explanation of how life developed on Earth.

The scientists are right, of course, and school boards of public school districts do their students a disservice when they order that theories based on religious concepts should have equal standing with theories that rely on science.

There are those who disagree. Among them apparently are members of the Grantsburg School Board, which last month approved a measure that reads: "When theories of origin are taught, students will study various scientific models/theories of origins and identify the scientific data supporting each." That sounds reasonable until one realizes that "various scientific models/theories" is simply a euphemism for allowing the teaching of something called intelligent design theory, which has not evolved much from its ancestors, various religion-based creationist theories. More than 300 scientists signed a letter opposing the Grantsburg action.

Simply put, the argument behind intelligent design is that a divine hand caused and shaped life on Earth. In its raw early forms, creationism argued that the Bible myth of a seven-day creation was quite literally true and that humans had been on the planet not much more than a few thousand years. Intelligent design theory is far more sophisticated than that, arguing that perceived flaws in the theory of evolution point to some kind of plan or blueprint for life created by a master mind or spirit.

And that may well be the case. But if it is, it's a matter of belief, not evidence. The evidence in support of evolution is silent about God. Evolution itself could well be a product of an intelligent design, and the theory may simply explain how God does things. There is certainly nothing in evolutionary theory that shuts out God, something the Catholic Church and other mainstream denominations freely acknowledge. But whether God is involved in evolution is a matter for churches or religion classes, not public school science classes.

Which is why the appearance of tolerance in the Grantsburg edict is so disingenuous. There are no credible alternative scientific models or theories that can reasonably account for the evidence that has surfaced and that continues to surface in support of evolution. There is evolution and there is religious belief. Requiring the teaching of alternative theories on the origins of life is thus a requirement that students be instructed in religious belief. And while such instruction is to be lauded at church or at home, there's no place for it in a public school.

Copyright 2004, Journal Sentinel Inc. All rights reserved. (Note: This notice does not apply to those news items already copyrighted and received through wire services or other media.)

Source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

More News in this Category