A decades-long conversation about the origins of the world has escalated into a roaring debate about how science should be taught in public schools. Should evolution be taught alone in science classes, or should it be accompanied by alternate theories such as “intelligent design,” the belief that the Earth and its life forms were guided in their development by some unidentified higher intelligence? Across the country, school systems are facing an increasing number of contentious lawsuits, textbook battles and votes over science education standards.
UPDATED DEC. 20, 2005
• Judge rules against Pa. biology curriculum
Martha Raffaele/Associated Press (12/20/05: seattlepi.nwsource.com)
• Federal judge: Intelligent design unconstitutional
Amy Worden/ Philadelphia Inquirer (12/20/05)
• Judge bars school from mentioning ‘intelligent design’
Tracie Mauriello/ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (12/20/05)
Debate intensified on Nov. 8, 2005, when proponents of intelligent design and evolution each scored one loss and one victory. The Kansas School Board voted to adopt new science standards that cast doubt on evolution theory. Meanwhile, voters in Dover, Pa., turned out eight of the nine school board members who backed a statement requiring intelligent design to be taught in classrooms. A high-profile trial challenging the requirement ended Friday, and the U.S. District judge says he plans to issue a ruling late this year or January.
Earlier this year President Bush said he favored the teaching of Intelligent Design in public schools and Catholic Cardinal Christoph Schonborn wrote that Darwinism was “an abdication of human intelligence” in a column in The New York Times.
On one side, most scientists and many educators and parents say intelligent design, or ID, is not legitimate science; they say it is creationism in disguise, a way for religious conservatives to sneak God into the classroom. On the other side, ID supporters say there is no consensus on evolution, so alternative theories like theirs should be part of the curricula. Meanwhile, polls show that most Americans believe God was involved in the creation of Earth and the universe. When specific questions are asked about teaching public school children about the origins of life, opinions vary according to how the questions are phrased. (See Polls.)
Why it Matters
The outcome of the tug-of-war between evolution and intelligent design will affect the way science is taught to children through at least the next generation.
Questions for reporters
• How is the debate playing out in your community and state? Is the debate scientific, as ID proponents say, or religious, as many evolutionists believe?
• Is evolution “controversial,” as many ID supporters state, or is it a tried-and-true scientific theory?
• How do people – scientists, educators, parents, students, clergy and theologians – balance belief in evolution and belief in God as the creator of all living things?
• If, as many evolutionists say, there is little or no evidence to support intelligent design, why has it not simply gone away?
Skip to national sources
Skip to background
Definitions
CREATIONISM: In the United States, creationism usually refers to the belief that the Bible’s account of creation is literally true and accurate. That generally means Genesis 1:1-2:4a, where God creates the Earth and all its life forms in six consecutive 24-hour days less than 10,000 years ago. (Genesis also tells a second creation story, in 2:4b-24, in which man is created before the Earth’s vegetation, and specific days are not described.)
Creationism is sometimes called “Young Earth” or “Creation Science.” Similarly, “Old Earth Creationism” is the belief that the Earth and all its life forms were created by God, but that the “days” may have been longer than 24 hours and there may have been gaps between days. However, there are as many creation stories as there are religions. The Talk.Origins Archive includes a page that describes the variety of Christian and non-Christian views of creationism.
EVOLUTION: The theory that all living things share a common ancestry. Evolutionists hold that the complex life forms we know today evolved from single-celled organisms over millions of years. There is also “theistic evolution,” which is the belief that God guided evolution, causing both the first life forms to appear as well as the eventual development of higher forms of life.
DARWINISM: A theory of evolution developed by Charles Darwin in the 19th century. Darwinism is the theory that natural selection drives evolution: Life forms that most successfully adapt are those that survive. Darwinism is not the equivalent of evolution, but a theory for explaining how evolution occurred.
INTELLIGENT DESIGN: The belief that some aspects of life forms are so complex that they must reflect the design of a conscious, rational intelligence. ID proponents do not identify the designer. Many Intelligent Design supporters do not believe that life forms share a common ancestor, although some do.
National sources
INTELLIGENT-DESIGN PROPONENTS
• Phillip Johnson is a professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley. After converting to Christianity, he wrote Darwin on Trial (InterVarsity Press, 1993), which is largely credited as founding the idea of intelligent design. Contact 510-642-5370, johnsonp@law.berkeley.edu.
• William Dembski is an associate research professor in the conceptual foundations of science at Baylor University, a Southern Baptist school in Waco, Texas, and a senior fellow at the Discovery Center for Science and Culture. He is author and/or editor of numerous books supporting the theory of intelligent design, including No Free Lunch: Why Specified Complexity Cannot Be Purchased Without Intelligence (Rowman and Littlefield, 2001) and Signs of Intelligence: Understanding Intelligent Design (Brazos Press, 2001). Contact 254-710-4928, william_dembski@baylor.edu.
• Richard Thompson is president and chief counsel of The Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Mich., which is defending the Dover, Pa., district in a lawsuit challenging its rules requiring the teaching of intelligent design in public schools. It is believed to be the only district in the country which requires the teaching of intelligent design. Contact 734-827-2001.
• Michael J. Behe is a professor of biological sciences at Lehigh University in West Bethlehem, Pa., and author of Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution (Free Press, 1998). He says he believes that life forms share a common ancestor. He is a senior fellow at the Discovery Center for Science and Culture. Contact through Kurt Pfitzer, 610-758-3017, kap4@lehigh.edu or via Robert Crowther, director of communications, Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, 206-292-0401 ext.107, rob@discovery.org.
• John Calvert is managing director of Intelligent Design Network. He is a lawyer whose legal practice has focused on constitutional requirements for teaching origins science in public schools. He has been actively involved in the science education debate in his home state of Kansas, as well as in Ohio, Georgia, California, Missouri, Minnesota, North Carolina, West Virginia, Montana and New Mexico. He is the co-author of “Intelligent Design: The Scientific Alternative to Evolution” (National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, autumn 2003). Contact 913-268-0852.
• Stephen Meyer is an associate professor of philosophy at Whitworth College in Spokane, Wash. He is co-author of Intelligent Design in Public School Science Curricula: A Legal Guidebook (Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 1999) and director and senior fellow of the Center for the Renewal Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle. Contact via Robert Crowther, director of communications, Discovery Center for Science and Culture, 206-292-0401 ext.107, rob@discovery.org.
• David DeWolf is a professor of law at Gonzaga University School of Law in Spokane, Wash. He is a fellow of the Discovery Institute and co-author of its Intelligent Design in Public School Science Curricula: A Legal Guidebook (Foundation for Thought and Ethics, 1999). Contact 509-323-3767, ddewolf@lawschool.gonzaga.edu.
• Denyse O’Leary is the faith and science columnist for ChristianWeek magazine and author of By Design or By Chance? The Growing Controversy On the Origins of Life in the Universe (Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2004). She lives in Toronto, Canada. Contact via Bob Todd, senior publicist, Augsburg Fortress Publishers, toddb@augsburgfortressorg, 612-330,3234.
INTELLIGENT-DESIGN OPPONENTS
• Eugenie Scott is the executive director of the National Center for Science Education in Oakland, Calif. She is a longtime supporter of the teaching of evolution in the public schools and a frequent critic of intelligent design. Contact 510-601-7203.
• Lawrence Lerner is a professor emeritus of physics and astronomy at California State University-Long Beach. He is the author of the Fordham Foundation’s report on science education in the United States, “Good Science, Bad Science: Teaching Evolution in the States,” and has served as a consultant on science education standards. Contact lslerner@csulb.edu.
• Ronald Numbers is a professor of the history of science and medicine at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. He is author of several works on Darwinism, creationism and the conflict between science and Christianity, including The Creationists: The Evolution of Scientific Creationism (University of California Press, 1993). Contact 608-262-3701, rnumbers@med.wisc.edu.
• Anne Tweed is president of the National Science Teachers Association. She is based in Aurora, Colo. Contact 303-632-5528.
• Michael Shermer is the founding publisher of Skeptic magazine, director of the Skeptics Society and host of the Skeptics Lecture Series at Caltech. He has written several books, including How We Believe: Science, Skepticism and the Search for God (Owl Books, 2003). He is based in Altadena, Calif., and can discuss the tenacity of creationism. Contact 626-794-3119, drmichaelshermer@aol.com.
• Kenneth Miller is a biology professor at Brown University and author of Finding Darwin’s God: A Scientist’s Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution (Perennial, 2000). He says the debate over intelligent design and evolution is both religious and political in that ID proponents want to enlist the government to ensure their ideas are taught in public schools under the banner of First Amendment protection. Contact 401-863-3410, kenneth_miller@brown.edu.
EXPERTS ON THE SIDELINES
• William Grassie is executive director of the Metanexus Institute, an organization that seeks to promote dialogue between the fields of religion and science. He says that within the current debate there is a need to distinguish between the “what” and “when” of evolution, which he says is well supported by scientific evidence, as opposed to the “how” and “why”, which is another, open matter. He also says the ID camp includes many Young Earth creationists, and that hurts the chance of ID being taken seriously by unconvinced scientists. Contact 215-789-2200, grassie@metanexus.net.
• Planetary scientist Charles Harper is senior vice president and executive director of the John Templeton Foundation. He is co-editor of Science & Ultimate Reality: Quantum Theory, Cosmology and Complexity (Cambridge University Press, 2004). Contact charper@templeton.org or jwankmiller@templeton.org, or through Pamela Thompson, 610-941-5194, pthompson@templeton.org.
• The American Scientific Affiliation is an organization of scientists who are also Christian. The group maintains no official position on the intelligent design-evolution debate but tries to strike a balance between the two. It maintains a page of papers, articles, definitions and positions on the debate.
• Francisco J. Ayala is professor of biological sciences and of philosophy at the University of California, Irvine. His research focuses on population and evolutionary genetics and the interface between religion and science. He was part of a roundtable discussion on religion and evolution as part of the PBS series Evolution in which he stated there was no conflict between Catholicism and Darwinism. Contact 949-824-6006, fjayala@uci.edu.
Background
On the Internet
INTELLIGENT DESIGN ORGANIZATIONS
• The Discovery Institute describes its mission as “to make a positive vision of the future practical.” It is one of the main proponents of intelligent-design theory in education.
• The Intelligent Design Network is a nonprofit organization that seeks to promote objectivity in origins education in public schools.
• The Institute for Creation Research is a Christian-based creation ministry.
• Access Research Network is a nonprofit that provides information on science, technology and social issues and includes descriptions and discussions of intelligent design.
• The Alpha Omega Institute promotes the teaching of creationism.
• Reasons to Believe is a Christian ministry that supports people who want to find scientific proof of biblical events.
• Answers in Genesis is a Christian group that promotes creationism.
• The International Society for Complexity, Information and Design is a nonprofit that proposes to “retrain the scientific imagination to see purpose in nature.”
EVOLUTION ORGANIZATIONS
• The National Association of Biology Teachers promotes biology and life science education. Its members have made a statement in favor of the teaching of evolution theory.
• The National Science Teachers Association has made an organizational statement that recommends “emphasizing” the theory of evolution in the classroom.
• The National Center for Science Education defends the teaching of evolution.
• The National Academy of Sciences is an organization of scientists and engineers who advise the U.S. government on scientific matters. In 2002, it issued a statement asking members to battle intelligent design education in the public school science classroom.
• The American Association for the Advancement of Science is a nonprofit organization that publishes the journal Science. It has issued a resolution on intelligent design, which it calls a challenge to science education.
• The Talk.Origins Archive explores the creationism/evolution controversy in support of mainstream scientific thought, but it includes many links to creationist and intelligent design networks and articles.
NEWS ARTICLES
• Read “State school board won’t reopen evolution debate, by narrow vote,” a Jan. 11, 2006, Associated Press story posted online by the Cincinnati Enquirer, about a decision by the Ohio state school board.
• Read a Nov. 8, 2005, Washington Post story about the Kansas School Board’s vote that doubts about evolution theory must be taught in the classroom.
• Read a Nov. 9, 2005, USA Today story about the school board election in Dover, Pa.
• Read an Aug. 8, 2005, Boston Globe story about a Catholic cardinal’s recent comments on evolution and President Bush’s comments on intelligent design.
• Read an Aug. 1, 2005, Associated Press story about President Bush’s comments about Intelligent Design. It’s posted by MSNBC.
• Read a July 29, 2005, National Catholic Reporter story, “Catholic experts urge caution in evolution debate.”
• Read Catholic Cardinal Christoph Schonborn’s July 7, 2005, column in The New York Times.
• Read a March 7, 2005, Agence France Press article about evolution and intelligent design in U.S. public schools, posted by Aljazeera.net.
• Read a Feb. 2, 2005, New York Times story about teachers shying away from teaching evolution in public school classrooms because of controversy over science teachings. The story is posted by the Common Dreams News Center.
• On Feb. 21, 2005, the Charlotte Observer published pro (by Jay Sekulow) and con (by Barry Lynn) commentaries about whether intelligent design should be taught in public schools along with evolution.
• Read a Jan. 30, 2005, Newsweek article about the current debate over intelligent design and evolution as reprinted on the Discovery Institute’s web site.
• Read an October 2004 article by Evan Ratliff of Wired magazine about the intelligent design movement.
• Read a special report from the April 2002 issue of Natural History magazine, reprinted on the ActionBioscience.org web site, in which three intelligent design proponents and three evolutionists debate.
• Reasons to Believe maintains a list of articles that support the biblical timeline of creation and another on the debate between creationism and evolution.
• Read an article by Donald Yerxa in Science & Spirit magazine on how the intelligent design/evolution debate has played out in books.
• A 2000 Thomas B. Fordham Foundation report gave science education in one-third of the states ratings of “unsatisfactory” to “disgraceful” based on their handling of the origins of life.
• A November 2004 Gallup poll found that 35 percent of Americans say Darwin’s theory of evolution is supported by evidence, 35 percent say it is not, and 29 percent say they don’t know enough to have an opinion. The poll is found at the bottom of a Nov. 30, 2004, San Francisco Chronicle article about the anti-evolution theories being taught in public schools.
• Read a Nov. 22, 2004, CBS News story about its poll, which found that most Americans do not think humans evolved, and that if they did, God guided the process.
• A Sept. 21, 2001, Zogby International poll found that 71 percent of respondents said that Darwin’s theory of evolution should be taught along with scientific evidence against the theory. The poll is posted by the Discovery Institute.
• A July 26, 2004, poll by the Barna Group found that almost six of every 10 adults favor teaching creationism in the public school, while less than four of 10 do not.
• A 2000 poll from People for the American Way found that 66 percent of respondents say the issue of whether to teach evolution in public schools is too important to leave to individual localities to decide and say they favor a national approach.
OTHER BACKGROUND
• See the Intelligent Design resource page from the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.
• Read the American Civil Liberties Union’s lawsuit filed on behalf of parents in Dover, Pa.
• The web site Religious Tolerance maintains a list of the beliefs of 17 religions regarding the origins of life.
• Read the Fordham Foundation’s 2000 report “Good Science, Bad Science: Teaching Evolution in the States,” which includes a state-by-state grading of science education in the public schools.
• A 2000 Thomas B. Fordham Foundation report gave science education in one-third of the states ratings of “unsatisfactory” to “disgraceful” based on their handling of the origins of life.
• Feb. 11, 2005, is celebrated as Darwin Day, an international observance of Charles Darwin’s work on evolution. Visit Duquesne University’s Darwin Day web site. Darwin Day.org maintains a list of celebrations of the naturalist’s birthday around the world, including the United States.
Regional sources
STATE BY STATE
• The National Science Teachers Association maintains a list of 59 state and local chapters of science teachers.
• The Discovery Center for Science and Culture maintains a list of state-specific intelligent design policies.
• Karl Giberson directs the Forum on Faith & Science at Gordon College in Wenham, Mass., and is a professor at Eastern Nazarene College in Quincy, Mass. He has published over a hundred articles, reviews, and essays and written or co-written four books: Worlds Apart: The Unholy War Between Science and Religion, Species of Origins: America’s Search for a Creation Story, Oracles of Science: Celebrity Scientists Versus God and Religion, and Saving Darwin: How to Be a Christian and Believe in Evolution (2008). His 5th book, The Anointed: America’s Evangelical Experts (with Randall Stephens) is forthcoming from Harvard University Press. He was the editor-in-chief of both Science & Theology News and Science & Spirit until 2006. He is critical of intelligent design theory, charging that it is a religious belief because the “intelligence” referred to is always God. Giberson has lectured on science and religion at Oxford University, the Vatican, as well as many American universities and colleges. Contact 617-847-5702, gibersok@gmail.com.
• John Jefferson Davis is a professor of Christian thought at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Mass. Contact via Anne Doll, director of communications, 978-646-4141, adoll@gcts.edu.
• Ron Sala is a Unitarian Universalist minister at the Unitarian Universalist Society in Stamford, Conn. On the Sunday before Darwin Day 2005 he preached a sermon titled “The Case For and Against ‘Intelligent Design.’” Contact 203-348-0708, ron.sala@uusis.org.
• Anne Clifford is a Catholic nun and associate professor of theology at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, Penn. She says what is needed in the current debate is not the replacement of natural science with theistic science, but a dialogue between scientists and theologians. Contact 412-396-6530, clifford@duq.edu.
• Galen Guengerich is a co-minister at All Souls Unitarian Church in New York City, where he preached a November 2004 sermon that outlined several concerns, including the teaching of creationism.He ended with a call for parishioners to pick an issue that mattered most to them, including science education, and encouraged them to fight back fundamentalism by fighting for that cause. Contact 212-535-5530, galen@allsoulsnyc.org.
• Bertha Spahr is head of the science department at Dover Area High School in Dover, Pa. She and seven other science educators sent the local board of education a letter stating they would not abide by the district’s ruling to include intelligent design in the science classroom. Others who signed were Jennifer Miller, Robert Linker, Robert Eshbach, Leslie Prall, Brian Bahn, David Taylor and Vickie Davis. Contact 717-292-3671.
• Michael Ruse is a professor of philosophy at Florida State University in Tallahassee and author of Can a Darwinian be a Christian? The Relationship Between Science and Religion (Cambridge University Press, 2004). He says evolution belongs in the science classroom while intelligent design can be taken up in the context of current affairs or history. In his forthcoming book, The Evolution-Creation Struggle (Harvard University Press, May 2005), he writes that while intelligent design is infused with religion, some Darwinians have made evolution their religion by pushing it as a kind of secular humanism. Contact 850-224-6811, mruse@mailer.fsu.edu.
• Ben Bridges Sr. is a Republican in the Georgia House of Representatives who introduced HB 179 in January 2005; it would require the teaching of critiques of and alternatives to evolution wherever evolution is taught. Contact 404-656-0152, bbridges@legis.state.ga.us.
• Scott Flamand is a biology teacher at Buchholz High School in Gainesville, Fla., where he led his classes in a two-day Darwin Day celebration that included student artwork, poetry and viewing of the film Inherit the Wind and the PBS series Evolution. Contact 352-331-0035, flamans@sbac.edu.
• Sara Harding and Nancy Morvillo are professors of religion and biology, respectively, at Florida Southern College in Lakeland. Together, they are co-directors of the Florida Center for Science and Religion, which hosts events designed to engage the central Florida community in discussions of science and religion. Previous events have focused on evolution. Contact Harding at 863-680-4185, sharding@flsouthern.edu, and Morvillo at nmorvillo@flsouthern.edu.
• The University of Tennessee in Knoxville held its annual Darwin Day celebration on Feb. 9 and 10, 2005. Contact Mark Cadotte, mcadotte@utk.edu.
• Barbara Forrest is a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University in Hammond, La., and co-author of Creationism’s Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design (Oxford University Press, 2004). (Read the first chapter, posted at TalkReason.org.) She says the debate over intelligent design and evolution is necessarily a religious, and not a scientific, one because intelligent design is a religious, not a scientific, belief. She continues that because intelligent design is an essentially religious viewpoint, it therefore draws in constitutional questions relating to the separation of church and state, making it a legal debate as well. Contact 985-549-2109, bforrest@selu.edu.
• John Angus Campbell is a professor and director of graduate studies in the Department of Communication at the University of Memphis and a fellow at the Discovery Institute. He is co-editor of Darwinism, Design and Public Education (Michigan State University Press, 2003). Contact via Robert Crowther, director of communications, Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, 206-292-0401 ext.107, rob@discovery.org.
• Niall Shanks is the author of God, the Devil and Darwin: A Critique of Intelligent Design Theory (Oxford University Press, 2004) and a professor of philosophy at East Tennessee State University. Contact 423-929-6622, niallshanks@earthlink.net.
• Gayle Woloschak is a molecular biologist and a professor of radiology at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill. She is director of “The Epic of Creation,” a lecture series that approaches the origins of the Earth through both scientific and religious perspectives at the Zygon Center for Religion and Science at the Lutheran School of Theology in Chicago. Contact 773-256-0670, g-woloschak@northwestern.edu.
• Taner Edis is an assistant professor of physics at Truman State University in Kirksville, Mo., and co-author of Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism (Rutgers University Press, 2004). Contact 660-785-4583, edis@truman.edu.
• Michael Zimmerman is dean of the College of Letters and Science at the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh. In 2004, he organized a letter-writing effort among Wisconsin clergy to ask Grantsburg, Wis., school officials to keep evolution at the center of the district’s science education. The district had earlier agreed to include alternative theories to be taught, but then reversed itself. About 200 clergy from Baptist, Catholic, Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist and other churches wrote letters to school administrators asking them not to single out evolution for “special scrutiny.” Contact 920-424-1210, mz@uwosh.edu.
• Wayne Cooper, a Missouri state Republican representative, and six co-sponsors have filed a bill that would compel science teachers to spend equal time on intelligent design and evolution. Contact 573-751-1119, wayne.cooper@house.mo.gov.
• Douglas Rudy is director of Science Excellence for All Ohioans, a group that supports the teaching of alternatives to evolution. He says there is no religious content in intelligent design and believes that both theories can and should be taught in the same classroom. Contact drudy@sciohio.org.
• Raymond Arthur Eve is a professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Arlington. He classifies the current debate as more political than religious, and has data to show that people’s attitudes towards intelligent design and other manifestations of creationism are strongly predicted by other social attitudes they hold, such as attitudes toward homosexuals, prayer in school, pornography, abortion, etc. He is also the co-editor of Chaos, Complexity and Sociology: Myths, Models, and Theories (Sage Publications, 1997), which examines the new science of chaos and complexity mathematics that shows how complex systems, such as the human eye, can evolve from simple mathematical rules without direct intervention by an intelligent agent. Contact 817-272-2661, eve@uta.edu.
• J. Budziszewski is a professor of government and philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin and a fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture. Contact via Robert Crowther, director of communications, Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, 206-292-0401 ext.107, rob@discovery.org.
• Matt Young is the co-author of Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism (Rutgers University Press, 2004). He teaches physics at the Colorado School of Mines in Golden, Colo. Contact 303-273-3862, mmyoung@mines.edu.
• Walt Brown is director of the Center for Scientific Creation, based in Phoenix, Ariz., and was part of a 1998 panel that advised the local board of education on science standards and evolution. He has said he does not endorse the teaching of religion in public schools but is critical of the state’s science standards because, he says, they are one-sided in favor of evolution. Contact 602-955-7663.
• Paul Chien is a professor of biology at the University of San Francisco, a Jesuit university, and a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture. Contact via Robert Crowther, director of communications, Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, 206-292-0401 ext.107, rob@discovery.org.
• John Mark Reynolds is an associate professor of philosophy at Biola University, a Christian university, in La Mirada, Calif., where he is also the founder and director of the Torrey Honors Institute. He is also a fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture. Contact john@johnmarkreynolds.com.
• Richard Weikart is an associate professor of history at California State University, Stanislaus in Stanislaus, Calif., and a fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture. He has lectured on the subject “Does Darwinism Devalue Human Life?” Contact via Robert Crowther, director of communications, Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture, 206-292-0401 ext.107, rob@discovery.org.
• John Schneeberger is with the Bitterroot Human Alliance in Hamilton, Mont., and has advocated against the inclusion of intelligent design in Darby public schools. Contact 406-370-3230, schnee@montana.com.
• Mark Perakh is a professor emeritus of physics at California State University, Fullerton. He is author of Unintelligent Design (Prometheus Books, 2004). Contact 760-751-9932, marperak@cox.net.
