Both evolution and global warming are “controversial issues” in education, but are not controversial in the world of science. There is some overlap in personnel between the two issues, but far more people are climate change deniers than evolution deniers. What is interesting to skeptics, however, is the similarity in the techniques that are used by both camps to promote their views. The scientific issues are presented as “not being settled”, or that there is considerable debate among scientists over the validity of claims. Evolution and global warming opponents also demonize the opposition by accusing them of fraud or other wrong-doing. Denialists in both camps practice “anomaly mongering”, in which a small detail seemingly incompatible with either evolution or global warming is held up as dispositive of either evolution or climate science. Although in both cases, reputable, established science is under attack for ideological reasons, the underlying ideology differs: for creationism, the ideology of course is religious; for global warming, the ideology is predominantly political and/or economic.

Why is the inclusion of creationism and "intelligent design" still a viable proposal for American biology curricula? What other secular policies are at risk of religious intrusion?

Dr. Forrest is participating in this all-day Institute sponsored by the Center for Inquiry.

Other participants are:

• Chip Berlet - Senior Analyst at Political Research Associates
• Jamila Bey - Journalist with Voice of Russia and formerly with NPR
• Ronald Lindsay - Center For Inquiry CEO and President
• Barry Lynn - Executive Director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State
• Chris Mooney - Host of Point of Inquiry and author of Storm World and Unscientific America
• Jeff Sharlet - Author of The Family and C Street
• John Shook Center For Inquiry Director of Education

Creatio continua et imago Dei: A Catholic Theological Approach to the Evolving Universe

Both evolution and global warming are “controversial issues” in education, but are not controversial in the world of science. There is remarkable similarity in the techniques that are used by both camps to promote their views. The scientific issues are presented as “not being settled”, or that there is considerable debate among scientists over the validity of claims. Denialists in both camps practice “anomaly mongering”, in which a small detail seemingly incompatible with either evolution or global warming is held up as dispositive of either evolution or of climate science. Although in both cases, reputable, established science is under attack for ideological reasons, the underlying ideology differs: for denying evolution, the ideology of course is religious; for denying global warming, the ideology is political and/or economic.