Creationism, Evolution & Intelligent Design Lauryn Langlois Ashley Mooney Debora Tolliver

What is Creationism? Creationism is a theory that states that matter, life, and the world were created by God (or some other supreme being in different religions) out of nothing. Creationists believe the earth and all its life forms were created in the way described in Genesis

Book of Genesis Book of Genesis says: – Day 1: God created Heavens, earth (covered in water), light, and dark – Day 2: God created the “sky” to separate waters of heaven from waters of Earth – Day 3: God created land and seas, vegetation with seeds to create more vegetation on land – Day 4: God created “lights in the sky” to mark days, seasons, years (Sun and moon) – Day 5: God created Fish and birds that could reproduce – Day 6: God created animals (livestock, wild, and small animals) that could reproduce, created humans (both male and female) to govern over everything on Earth – Day 7: day of rest from all his creation

Creationists Creationists do not agree with the theory of evolution Supporters of this theory are called creation scientists, fundamentalists, or biblical literalists Creation science is scientific evidence or arguments that support creationism

Creation Science Theory Mainly believe that record of Earth’s history is preserved in Earth’s crust by rocks and fossils but is a record of natural catastrophes Strong evidence for recent earth/universe creation Earth’s fossiliferous sedimentary rocks were formed from flood of Noah’s ark Creation Scientists have scientific evidence in physical sciences, earth sciences, and life sciences that proves Creation

Evolution

What is Evolution? Cumulative genetic changes that occur in a population over time Changes are passed on to future generations Inherit new characteristics that give them a reproductive advantage Natural selection, mutation, random mating

Scientific Theory of Evolution States that all species of life share common origins Biological evolution is a scientific theory (NOT a law) watch video: First developed by Charles Darwin in the 1800s

What is intelligent design (ID)? “Intelligent design is the belief that the origin and complexities of life can be attributed only to the action of a supernatural intelligence, and that the origin of life cannot be ascribed to natural causes or material mechanisms, such as those described by evolutionary science.” (Johnson, 2006)

How is ID a scientific theory  ID uses the scientific method (four-step process) o Observations o Hypothesis o Experiments Irreducible complexity o Conclusion

What ID is NOT  Creationism/Theology o No biblical chronology o Do not have to believe in God to infer ID in nature o Creationism = religious texts vs. ID = empirical evidence of nature o Supernatural ? o No identity of the designer  No claim that species were created in present forms  No complete history of the universe or of living things  Not an argument for ignorance

ID and Evolution  ID is not anti-evolution o Depends on how “evolution” is defined Change over time Theory of Universal Common Descent Neo-Darwinism o ID challenges Neo-Darwinism

History of Creationism At the end of the middle ages, Europeans believed solely in the theory of Creation Fossil Evidence led to “Progressive Creation” Discovery of fossil clustering led creationists to alter their beliefs again Darwin’s The Origins of Species led to metaphorical translation of Bible instead of a literal one

History of Evolution Theory

History and Theorist of ID  Fred Hoyle: Cosmologist o 1982: First person to use the term “Intelligent Design”  Charles B. Thaxton, Walter L. Bradley & Roger L. Olsen o 1984: The Mystery of Life’s Origin - Information in DNA could not be reduced to physics and chemistry  Percival Davis & Dean H. Kenyon o 1989: Of Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins A favorable case for ID in order to balance curriculum in biology classes

History and Theorists of ID  Stephen C. Meyer & John G. West o 1996: Started the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture (CRSC) as a project of the nonprofit public policy organization Discover Institute in Seattle, Washington o 2000: CRSC changed its name to Center for Science & Culture (CSC)  2000 o Nature of Nature Conference to discuss the pros and cons of ID o Jonathan Wells published Icons of Evolution

Modern Creationists Several Modern Creationists, but they all believe that one species doesn’t evolve into another – Old Earth Creationists – Young Earth Creationists – Day-Age Creationists – Gap Creationists

Modern Evolution Theory Darwin’s initial theory continues to remain accurate and valid after over 100 years of scientific testing and experimentation His theory has been further developed and clarified using : – Increased fossil record – Extensive laboratory experiments – Biophysical observations of proteins – Empirical observations of molecular evolution – Modern technology and equipment – Etc.

Advocates of ID  A policy that we should teach Scientific criticism of Neo- Darwinism o Congress supports policy o U.S. Department of Education supports policy o Various states and school districts have successfully implemented a policy  Matthew Chapman (Great-great grandson of Charles Darwin)  Christian fundamentalists and their conservative political organizations  Senate majority leader Bill Frist  Former Vice President Al Gore  President George Bush

History of Incorporation into School s- Schools were established to service the church 1800s- School reform was changing, less stress was placed on religion and more on job preparation – Religious schools (catholic) became popular for some creationists – Evolution theory incorporated into biology curriculum by late 1800s in most states Charles Darwin’s The Origins of Species started the major debate of what should be taught in schools Scopes trial- TN biology teacher sued for teaching evolution; was found guilty of violating the Butler Act

“Space Race” in 1950 and the 100 year anniversary of Darwin’s publication brought even more attention to the debate Epperson v. Arkansas Trial started the process for removal of Creationism from schools McLean vs. AR BOE: Court rules that creationism is not “science” and thus does not have a place in science curriculum Webster vs. New Lenox School District: Court rules that teachers cannot teach creation science because it violates laws of separation of Church and State

2001: No Child Left Behind Act accompanied by a joint House- Senate report: A quality science education should prepare students to distinguish the data and testable theories of science from religious or philosophical claims that are made in the name of science. Where topics are taught that may generate controversy, the curriculum should help students to understand the full range of scientific view that exist Tammy Kitzmiller et al. vs. Dover Area School District et al.: Court rules that alternative hypotheses to evolution do not need to be included Video: – Texas textbook controversy the latest Texas curriculum requires students to learn “the weaknesses of evolution” (The Daily Texan, 2011) Voting THIS MONTH whether or not this should be abolished

National Study One study from 2006 states: – 28% in strong standard states and 37% in weak standard states reported that they were taught about creationism, but only as a brief mention – 17-19% reported they were taught Creationism as credible scientific theory, about 40% taught as unscientific (overall) – In the northeast, only about 5% claimed to be taught creationism as a credible scientific theory, compared to 8% in the south, 11% say were taught as unscientific in northeast vs. 10% in south (Bowman 2007)

Evolution and Education: USA Fordham Foundation report by Lerner (2000) examined the teaching of evolution in high school biology classes in all 50 states Assigned each state a grade, A through F, based on how well they address evolution – 31 states do an “adequate to excellent” job (A, B, C) – 19 states do a “weak to reprehensible” job (D,F) To be considered “weak to reprehensible”: – Evolution not covered at all in some cases – Evolution theory absent from state curriculum standards – Alternative hypotheses must be presented – Use of anti-evolution textbooks – Textbook disclaimers

Evolution and Education: USA To be considered “adequate to excellent”: – Broad concepts of evolution introduced during early grades, and are built on each subsequent year – Evolution theory is part of high school science curriculum and learning objectives are clearly defined – Proper time is devoted to the teaching of evolution – No textbook disclaimers/alternate theories

Education Teaching of evolution is affected by: – State and local curriculum standards – Teacher willingness – Teacher subject knowledge – Textbook selection – Parent consent/objection – Community opinion – What is/is not included on state standardized tests – Amount of time devoted to the subject

Evolution and Education: CT CT received a perfect score of 100 (A) from the Fordham Foundation report (2002) CT Common Core Standards outline curriculum standards for the teaching of evolution from pre- Kindergarten thru 12 th grade

Education and ID  The Discovery Institute beliefs o Teach objectively about both the scientific strengths and weaknesses of modern evolutionary theory o Whether evolution is compatible with religion is a theological question o You can discuss religious views objectively, but you must not present only one religious position o Any information presented about ID should accurately convey the views of scientist and scholars who support ID o Schools should not mandate ID o Opposes the Dover school district policy

Theological Controversy  Creationism is a religious viewpoint o Clergy wouldn’t want creationism taught in schools by teachers of no faith o Chris Crowe (sound clip)  Evolution has no religion o Evolution must be wrong because the Bible never mentions it o Religion and evolution are mutually exclusive o Accepting evolution undermines religion  ID recognizes a creator but does not specifically name that creator o Critics say that ID is an effort to introduce religion into curriculum

Scientific Controversy  Creationism o Has been proven by the court system that it is not science  Evolution o It is not predictive  ID o Critics object that ID can never be scientifically fruitful

Educational Controversy  Creationism o Unconstitutional in public education because of separation of Church and State  Evolution o Violates the story of Biblical creation  ID o Stems from confusing ID not only with biblical creationism but also with criticism of Darwinian evolution

Conclusion We will let Katie Couric wrap it up: –

(Paolov, 2011)