Intelligent Design: Same Old Wine in New Bottles

In the 16th century, Copernicus published his paper On the Revolution of the Heavenly Spheres, in which he described the motions of the moon and planets in terms of early algebraic equations. To his surprise and everyone else's consternation, his results indicated that the very best equations, the ones that provided the best prediction for where Mercury, or Mars, or the Moon, would be in six month, or six centuries, were ones that assumed the Sun at the center of the solar system and the Earth as one of many objects in orbit around the Sun, moving in roughly circular motion.

This was in contradiction to the Church's teaching at the time, in which the Prophet Isaiah made the sun stop in the Heavens. If the sun stopped, then it had to be just another body moving around the Earth.

Copernicus was forced to write a preface in his book in which he said that while his equations were interesting and useful tools for predicting the apparent motion of the planets and stars, it would be a mistake to assume they were the Truth, because only the Church had authority over the Truth.

Later, Copernicus' theories of a solar system with the Sun as its center was adopted and expanded by Galileo who was treated more harshly by the Church. He was convicted of grave suspicion of heresy for "following the position of Copernicus, which is contrary to the true sense and authority of Holy Scripture", and was placed under house arrest for the rest of his life. Copernicus and Galileo finally received formal acceptance by the Catholic Church in the twentieth century.

Notwithstanding this bit of history, there has been in this country a long time effort on the part of some religious fundamentalists to believe, and teach in the public schools, that the Darwinian theory of evolution is inconsistent with the Bible's account in Genesis - and, therefore, invalid.

It has become popular in some circles to avoid the term "Creationism" because of the accepted view that this is a religious concept. So, the new term is "Intelligent Design". In essence, this is the assertion that the universe is so complex that it can be explained only by an Intelligent Cause. i.e., God, and not as a result of natural selection. Advocates deny that this is but a retelling of the Biblical passages of Creation; they assert that it is a scientific theory as valid as the Darwinian Theory and that, at the very least, it should be taught in the public schools as a valid alternative to the theory of evolution.

In the 1987 Supreme Court case of Louisiana v Aguillard, a Louisiana statute that required the teaching of Creationism whenever Evolution was taught was stricken on the ground that the law required the teaching of religious doctrine. Years later, in 2005, the Dover (Pennsylvania) School District mandated the teaching of Intelligent Design. The U.S. District Court ruled that this was just another name for Creationism and enjoined the introduction of Intelligent Design in the curriculum. The School District members all were thrown out by the voters and the new Board announced there would be no appeal. The decision in Kitzmiller v Dover Area School District should be must reading for anyone interested in the field; it is a classic.

The State of Florida, in 1996, adopted a set of principles for the scientific curriculum in public schools.

Two years ago, an influential national think tank concluded in a scathing report that Florida's science standards -- which outline what students need to know to be well grounded in the subject -- were sprawling, superficial and deserving of a big, fat F.

Amazingly, the Fordham Institute noted, the standards adopted in 1996 didn't even mention the word "evolution." Because some education officials were concerned that direct mention of Darwin's theory of evolution --the keystone of modern biology -- would spark a cultural firestorm.

It is now 2007, eleven years later, and the Florida Department of Education has taken a large leap into reality! The Benchmarks and principles are clear:

"Recognize and describe that fossil evidence is consistent with the idea that human beings evolved from earlier species.

"Recognize and explain that small genetic differences between parents and offspring can accumulate in successive generations so that descendants are very different from their ancestors, and that environmental conditions affect the survival of individual organisms.

"Relate the extinction of species to an inability to adapt to a changing environment.

"Explain and give examples of how physical evidence supports theories that Earth has evolved over geologic time due to natural processes and human impact. Evolution is the fundamental concept underlying all of biology and is supported by multiple forms of scientific evidence.

"Organisms are classified based on their evolutionary history. Natural selection is the primary mechanism leading to evolutionary change.

"Explain how evolution is demonstrated by the fossil record, extinction, comparative anatomy, comparative embryology, biogeography, molecular biology (crosscuts with earth/space), and observed evolutionary change."

The changes are not without some criticism. Two comments on the state's website are brief, but representative. "We kids shouldn't be taught about monkeys" and "No such thing as evolution."

The new standards are not being universally accepted in Florida. . Donna Callaway, who was appointed to the state Board of Education by former Governor Jeb Bush, said she'll oppose the new standards because of it.

More disturbing are the remarks of the next Speaker of the state House of Representatives, Will Weatherford. Asked if he supported the evolution-only approach, Weatherford said, ""I'm not a big fan of that."

"I'm not a scientist, but I will tell you in general evolution is one of the theories. To show it from just one perspective and say this is more important or more accurate than the rest, I'm not so sure I'm in favor of that," Weatherford said.

He continued on to state he believes students should learn about all the major theories and be allowed to decide for themselves.

"Intelligent design is something I'm personally a fan of, and something I personally believe in," he said. "But I don't want to see that jammed down their throats, either. It shouldn't be slanted one way or the other."

Florida isn't alone. Christine Comer was forced to resign her position as director of science at the Texas Education Agency because she forwarded an e-mail about a lecture on the fallacy of "intelligent design" and creationism as a scientifically grounded alternative to evolution. Comer, who spent 27 years as a science teacher and had been in her post at the agency for nine years, was told that the agency must remain "neutral" on the subject.

On the one hand you have a theory that has been successfully tested using the scientific method for more than 100 years and whose accuracy has been repeatedly affirmed by the vast fields of biology and genetics. On the other hand you have a hypothesis that relies on supernatural intervention for which there has been no legitimate scientific testing or objective proof.

Not surprisingly, a former adviser to George Bush as Texas governor who also worked in his federal Department of Education provoked the Comer witch hunt. Lizzette Reynolds, deputy commissioner for statewide policy and programs, complained about Comer's e-mail and called for her termination.

This is not the place to point out how President Bush's religious philosophy has resulted in wacky public policy; some examples are the suspension of most federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research, the spending of hundreds of millions of dollars on demonstrably useless abstinence-only sex education (Why Johnny has herpes and Sally gets pregnant), the effort to prevent emergency contraception from being sold over-the-counter (How to guarantee increased abortions) and the retraction of appropriated international family planning money.

By the way, one of the G.O.P. frontrunners feels the same way.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is gaining as a GOP presidential contender. He may be a friendly face, but the ordained Baptist minister is no friend to reason. In the Republican primary debate last May he was one of three in the field to raise his hand to proclaim that he does not believe in evolution.

In a later debate, Huckabee rejected for himself the belief that we are "descendants of a primate," although he allowed others to choose monkey-relatives.

Pretty much all the presidential candidates, both Democrats and Republicans, are freely spouting off about the centrality of faith in their lives, but it is only Huckabee who is the dogma-driven real deal - a man who as president would follow in Bush's anti-science, anti-intellectual footsteps, a man who would feel "chosen" for the job and licensed by a power higher than the will of the voters.

Here is something scary. Last week, the Web site ChristiaNet.com, which bills itself as "the world's largest Christian portal," cheered the results of a survey it took finding that half of its 1,400 Christian respondents said that dinosaurs and man roamed the Earth at the same time.

Putting aside that the schoolteachers of these people should be slapped silly, these are Huckabee followers. We can't afford to put this kind of backward thinking and scientific illiteracy in the driver's seat again.