Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

To the extent that there is real substance to the claim that academic freedom is endangered, it comes from the efforts of those like advocates of intelligent design (ID), who want to foist their "theory" on unsuspecting undergraduates who haven't learned enough about science to see through its pretensions of being real science rather than merely being disguised theology.

Documentary has origins in evolution ?'dramatics'
(By Mike Belt, Lawrence Journal-World, May 8, 2006)

A year ago the national spotlight was on Kansas and a hearing in Topeka where one of the most intense debates on the theory of evolution was unfolding since the 1925 Scopes "monkey" trial.

Capturing it all on film was a crew headed by three men from the Kansas City and Lawrence area.

"It was the perfect setup for a documentary," said Jeff Tamblyn, owner of Origin Films of Merriam. "It's an extremely controversial subject. It has a beginning, middle and an ending, and it has a cast of characters."

In May 2005 three members of the Kansas State Board of Education ?- Steve Abrams, Kathy Martin and Connie Morris ?- conducted several days of hearings designed to debate the pros and cons of evolution, intelligent design and state school science standards.

Adding to the cast of characters were John Calvert, an attorney and director of the Shawnee-based Intelligent Design Network, and Pedro Irigonegaray, a Topeka attorney and supporter of pro-evolution science standards.

The filmmakers recently completed their documentary, "Kansas vs. Darwin," and hope to enter it into the Telluride and Toronto film festivals in September as well as Docu-Week, an August event in Los Angeles.

"We introduce the people with the hearings as the centerpiece," said Mark von Schlemmer, of Vinland, editor and co-writer. "We show why they were involved in this and what motivated them."

Tamblyn said that while the hearing was boring much of the time, there were moments of great theatrics.

"I knew that if we could just cover the people and the characters in the right way, we would be able to tell a very dramatic story about what was happening," Tamblyn said.

Tamblyn, von Schlemmer and their third partner, Jeff Peak, of Kansas City, Mo., also had to win over their characters. Several attempts to get on-camera interviews with Morris and Irigonegaray were rebuffed. Irigonegaray initially thought the film crew was working for Calvert, and Calvert thought they were working for Irigonegaray, Tamblyn said. All, however, eventually granted in-depth interviews away from the hearings.

"I had to talk to both sides, so I just had to tell everybody I wasn't working for anybody," Tamblyn said. "We were very polite. That got us pretty far. I enjoyed meeting everyone. These are all very personable and intelligent people."

Tamblyn said he became concerned when the pro-evolution scientists boycotted the hearing and refused to testify.

"I thought it was going to kill the film," he said. "Then Pedro showed up. He livened up everything because he is quite an amazing guy and a very forceful personality. He leant a tremendous air of drama to the proceedings."

The film now has a Web site, www.kansasvdarwin.com, which contains a two-minute trailer as well as background information. A 10-minute clip from the film has been shown privately to investors and potential investors, including some in Lawrence, Tamblyn said.

Two Free State High School girls who saw a showing at a teacher's house were so impressed they tried to donate $132 they came up with and collected from their friends, Tamblyn said. The money wasn't accepted because of the crew's "for profit" status, but the girls were made "honorary investors" and promised good seats at the first showing of the film, he said.

Editing and organizing the film from 135 hours of footage was "a fun challenge," said von Schlemmer, who worked for Sunflower Broadband in the early 1990s before moving on to KCTV5 in Kansas City and then becoming a freelance filmmaker.

"The high points of the hearing come through on the film," said von Schlemmer, who is currently working on his doctorate in film studies at Kansas University. "I think we've pulled the drama out of it."

Intelligent design bill aims to create momentum for '07
(By AMANDA JACOBS, Columbia Missourian, May 8, 2006)

A little-publicized bill that would allow the teaching of intelligent design in Missouri classrooms never made it to the floor of the Missouri General Assembly this year. However, proponents of the Missouri Science Education Act say the issue will likely be back before lawmakers in 2007.

Rep. Jane Cunningham, R-Chesterfield, chairwoman of the House Elementary and Secondary Education Committee, said the bill's sponsors wanted to use this year's committee hearings to generate momentum for the measure. Cunningham's committee approved the bill by a 7-6 vote in March.

The Missouri Science Education Act would require sixth- through 12th-grade science teachers to engage in "critical analysis" of evolution as a theory rather than teaching it as an accepted fact.

Sen. Bill Alter, R-Jefferson City, who introduced a similar bill in the Senate, said it was necessary to continue discussion of the issue. Alter said both evolution and intelligent design are theories and should be handled as such in the classroom.

"If it's taught the same as any other science, I'm all for it," he said.

The science education act also represents a subtle tactical shift by intelligent design proponents, said Jay Wexler, an associate professor of law at Boston University. Since a U.S. district judge in Dover, Pa., ruled in December that a resolution requiring the teaching of intelligent design violates the Constitution, proponents are more aggressively pointing out the gaps in evolutionary theory while attempting to change the definition of science in the classroom.

"Their strategies evolve over time," said Wexler, who thinks the Missouri bill still raises constitutional concerns but says it is more likely to be accepted than the Dover resolution.

Opponents of an intelligent design requirement in Missouri classrooms, such as Rep. Sara Lampe, D-Springfield, say the legislation is more about discrediting evolution than improving standards.

"It's very clever to come at the intelligent design issue from this angle," Lampe said.

Evolution battle may find new venue
(By LISA MICHALS, The South Carolina State, May 9, 2006)

The debate over how evolution is taught in South Carolina schools is poised to flare up again ?- this time in the General Assembly.

Two items working their way through the Legislature call for changes in how school textbooks are adopted. Supporters contend the changes will ensure textbooks that enhance students' development of critical thinking skills are selected.

Those are code words for the introduction of religious theories in evolution lessons, critics assert.

"On one hand, it looks completely innocuous, but if you understand the context from which it comes, it's directed at the high school biology standards on biological evolution," said Rob Dillon, a College of Charleston associate biology professor and president of South Carolinians for Science Education.

The textbook selection issue and evolution issue are not related, said Rep. Bob Walker, R-Spartanburg, and Sen. Mike Fair., R-Greenville.

"They'll tell you this only deals with science and intelligent design, and this is not true," Walker said. "What this is doing is asking that when we look at textbooks, we look at the process a textbook uses in teaching when it comes to critical thinking and analysis."

Critics of the textbook plan point to Walker's and Fair's efforts last fall to revise state biology standards to give teachers leeway in lecturing alternatives to Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection.

The leeway would have opened the door to the theory of intelligent design, which says natural selection cannot explain certain features of the universe and of living things, and the orderliness of the universe implies the hand of a designer.

The debate to revise the standards resulted in a stalemate last fall among two top state education agencies ?- the state Board of Education and the Education Oversight Committee.

Education Oversight Committee executive director Jo Anne Anderson said the EOC academic standards subcommittee plans to revisit the biology standards debate May 22.

The Senate's version of the budget bill includes instructions for purchasing textbooks that promote "development of higher order thinking skills and critical thinking."

"This is not about intelligent design," Fair said.

Fair emphasized that the purchasing instructions address instruction materials for "core curriculum," not specifically biology. His intent is to improve instruction and learning, he said.

"The kids will learn more, and some of them will be stimulated to search more," Fair said.

In the House on Wednesday, the education committee chaired by Walker will consider a bill co-authored by Fair that also revises textbook adoption policy.

"We are kind of perplexed at the language of both pieces of legislation," said Pierce McNair, S.C. Department of Education legislative liaison.

S.C. School Boards Association general counsel Scott Price said his group also is watching the two legislative efforts closely.

"We're probably going to have some concern with language that is intended to sort of push the envelope on a constitutional issue because we believe the entities that are going to be slapped in any potential controversy could be the local districts," Price said.

If they wish to throw away their money that badly, I can suggest some good charities for them; me!

Such a system is irreducibly complex to those who are unaware of it and they live their lives within this bubble of ignorance and their pronouncements from within that bubble can be objectively defined as stupid.

Intense ed board elections expected
(By Tim Vandenack, The Hutchinson News, May 14, 2006)

Betsy Hineman always has prided herself on a certain level of civic involvement - knowing the candidates and the issues in a given race.

Now, the Dighton woman, a leader in a new group called the Kansas Alliance for Education, finds her participation reaching new heights.

"It's just due to the need," she explained. "Someone needs to do something."

In light of many contentious moves by the conservative majority on the Kansas Board of Education, including the decision allowing for increased classroom criticism of evolution, critics promise a tough fight this electoral season.

Three conservative incumbents are up for election, including Ken Willard of Hutchinson and Connie Morris of St. Francis, and their foes, including the Alliance, are pushing hard to oust them.

A fourth conservative, Iris Van Meter of Thayer, is not seeking re-election, though her son-in-law, Brad Patzer of Neodesha, is vying for the post.

"I think it's maybe as intense as we've seen it, because 2000 was pretty intense," said Joe Aistrup, a Kansas State University political scientist.

In a precursor to this year's campaign, strong debate over a board decision to adopt science standards that de-emphasize certain aspects of evolution marked the electoral battle six years ago. Critics of the change won out that year, and the revamped body reversed course, at least for the time being.

Hineman and others, however, suggest the passion this go-around might exceed that of 2000. Aside from last summer's evolution decision, recent contested actions include the selection of Bob Corkins as education commissioner even though he lacked education experience and moves to clamp down on what's taught in sex education classes.

"I'm seeing a lot more energy and a lot more frustration about decisions that have been made," said Sue Gamble, a member of the school board's moderate wing from Shawnee in suburban Kansas City, Kan. She is not up for re-election, but she has campaigned as far west as Dodge City with the Alliance and echoes its call for a more moderate school board.

Similarly, Boo Tyson, executive director of the Prairie Village-based MAINstream coalition, said the controversial moves by school board conservatives are rallying their foes. That organization's top priority is the ouster of the conservatives, she said, while another suburban Kansas City, Kan., group, Kansas Families United for Public Education, plans to send volunteers to Hutchinson and points west as part of the same effort.

"I think the radical nature of the school board and the radical decisions the school board has made have brought us all together," said Tyson, who also traveled to Dodge City last month with the Alliance.

Still, the targeted board members and their backers aren't convinced the tough talk will translate into action as the Aug. 1 primary election and Nov. 7 general election near.

"It's going to be a wait-and-see thing," said Charlotte Esau of the Kansas Republican Assembly, a grouping of socially and fiscally conservative Republicans. The group is endorsing Morris, Willard, Patzer and the other conservative incumbent, John Bacon of Olathe.

For his part, Willard, the school board member from Hutchinson, challenges his critics' view of the campaign. He sees foes like the Alliance as sticklers for the status quo and himself as a seeker of new ways to invigorate public education.

"The choice is going to be between the status quo and progress," Willard said.

The decision last year to permit more criticism of evolution - seen by foes as a backdoor attempt to inject creationist-friendly concepts into science classes - stands out as the most controversial move by the 10-member school board. That change, approved by the 6-4 conservative majority, echoed a similar decision, subsequently reversed, by the body in 1999.