You are here
The reputation of the University of Kansas and of the state in general is in jeopardy due to the expected adoption of a set of deeply flawed science standards, according to the provost of the University of Kansas.
In the spring 2005 issue of California Wild, the magazine of the California Academy of Sciences, NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott, a Fellow of the Academy, discussed creationism in California, in a piece entitled "In My Backyard." A section of the article briefly described controversies over evolution education in the Roseville, California, schools over the last few years.
The cover story of the August 15, 2005, issue of Time magazine is Claudia Wallis's "The evolution wars" -- the first cover story on the creationism/evolution controversy in a major national newsweekly in recent memory. With "When Bush joined the fray last week, the question grew hotter: Is 'intelligent design' a real science?
Appearing shortly after President Bush's August 1, 2005, remarks that seemed to endorse the teaching of "intelligent design" in the public schools, a pair of important recent articles -- Chris Mooney's "Inferior design" in the September 2005 issue of The American Prospect and Jerry Coyne's extensive "The faith that dare not speak its name" in the August 22, 2005, issue of The New Republic -- offer different but complementary examination
As expected, on August 9, 2005, the Kansas State Board of Education voted 6-4 to send the latest draft of state science standards for external review. The latest draft, based on the so-called minority report composed with the aid of a local "intelligent design" group, the Intelligent Design Network, systematically deprecates the scientific status of evolution.
In a ruling issued on July 27, 2005, the judge presiding over Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School Board ruled that the Foundation for Thought and Ethics (FTE) was not entitled to, and would not be allowed, to intervene in the case.
The committee originally charged with revising Kansas's state science standards has resoundingly denounced the changes imposed by the antievolutionist majority on the state board of education. On August 2, 2005, the committee voted 16-3 to submit a lengthy critique of the board's revisions to the draft standards, which closely followed those proposed by a local "intelligent design" organization.
The case of Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School Board took a twist during a hearing on July 14, 2005, when lawyers for the Foundation for Thought and Ethics (FTE) sought to intervene in the case. A successful intervention would make FTE a co-defendant with the Dover Area School Board, able to bring in its own lawyers and expert witnesses.