Welcome to Evolutionary Biology (840:142) http://faculty.cns.uni.edu/~spradlin/evolution/home.html

So. You thought it sounded like a good idea to take an “evolution” class.

you are wasting your time… A pretty significant portion of the public thinks you are wasting your time… Public Acceptance of Evolution, Miller, Scott, Okamoto, Science 11 August 2006

Acceptance of Evolutionary Theory by Country 3 Statistically important reasons for differences in views of Americans and Europeans: Religion Frontier history (not university based) for churches Education Fewer than half of American adults can provide a minimal definition of DNA. Politics "I have no chimpanzees in my family”, Ronald Reagan Adults were asked to respond to the statement: "Human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals." The percentage of respondents who believed this to be true is marked in blue; those who believed it to be false, in red; and those who were not sure, in yellow. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060810-evolution.html

1980’s Arkansas and Louisiana “Balanced Treatment” laws Teach neither or Teach both—Other states local action (e.g., Jen in KS)

= “YEC” Fig. 2-1 in Freeman and Herron 2005 Gallup poll: 53% of Americans agree: “God created human beings in their present form exactly the way the Bible describes it”

Creationism is not one point of view, it is many Different cultures have different creation stories There are many “degrees” of creationism (i.e., levels of acceptance of science) even within Christianity Geological evidence (pre-Darwinian) Good references: Eugenie Scott, National Center for Science Education Ronald Numbers, The Creationists, UW-Madison

“Balanced Treatment” Struck down by Supreme Court in 1987 Whose creation story do you teach?

1990’s -- 2000’s Balanced Treatment “Teach the controversy” Cobb County, Georgia Textbook Disclaimer, 2002

Another Suggested Textbook Disclaimer 

Teach the “Controversy” in Evolution? No controversy among biologists on big picture: Genetic change occurs over time in populations Genetic change can lead to speciation Genetic change can lead to adaptation Organisms alive today are related to each other and to organisms alive previously Controversy lies in the details…

“Teaching the Controversy” Intelligent design—The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. (http://www.intelligentdesign.org/) In other words, looking for signs of a creator in nature. (Paley, Natural Theology, Watchmaker, 1802). Federal court ruled unlawful to promote ID in public classroom (Kitzmiller v. Dover School District, 2005). (Teach science in the science classroom).

The Separation of Church and State Science Science  deals with the natural Religion  deals with the supernatural Gould described science and religion as “Nonoverlapping Magisteria”

Scala Naturae Middle Ages no separation between “natural and supernatural”

Today, scientists don’t get to invoke God in our explanations of nature…

Naturalism (2 flavors): Methodological vs. Philosophical Naturalism

Naturalism e.g., AIDS 1981, HIV 1984 Non-scientific point of view (can invoke supernatural) Philosophical Naturalists’ view Methodological Naturalist’s view "AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals, it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals." Jerry Falwell, 1933-2007

Naturalism Assignment Grad students’ assignments

Summary “Balanced Treatment” is unconstitutional: Whose creation story do you teach? = religion “Teach the Controversy” is nonsense: There isn’t a controversy ID involves supernaturalism, so isn’t science Naturalism is important in science: Can be methodological naturalism Can be philosophical naturalism