You are here
Congressman George Miller, a member of the joint conference committee that drafted the final version of the recently signed No Child Left Behind education bill, has sent a letter to NCSE clarifying the significance of the “Santorum Amendment.” The amendment, stripped from the bill and placed in the conference committee report in weakened form, has been cited by anti-evolutionists in several states as justification for watering down evolution or inserting intelligent design in science curricula.
by Skip Evans
NCSE Network Project Director
Lawrence Krauss, chair of the Physics Department at Case Western Reserve University, and recent recipient of the American Association for Advancement of Science Award for Public Understanding of Science, appears in the April 30, 2002, New York Times.
In the editorial Krauss takes aim at believers in UFOs, young-earth creationism, and advocates of intelligent design.
See the New York Times.
On January 21, 2002 HB 888 and HB 1101 were introduced in the Mississippi House of Representatives and referred to the Education Committee. Both bills had the same sponsor, and both died in committee on February 5.
The wording of HB 1563 resembles the "Santorum amendment" to last year's federal education bill, which was removed in conference committee. The phrasing matches the common rhetoric of such evolution opponents as intelligent design creationists. The relevant portion HB 1563 reads:
On March 12 the board had voted unanimously to include creationism. Local residents contacted NCSE requesting information about “creation science” and the legal consequences of the board’s proposal.
At the Ohio Board of Education meeting held March 11th, 2002, Center for Renewal of Science and Culture (CRSC) Director Stephen Meyer and CRSC Senior Fellow Jonathan Wells presented the board with a bibliography of forty four papers published in peer reviewed scientific literature.
In a fifteen-page analysis sent earlier this week to every member of the Ohio Board of Education, the National Center for Science Education exposed the Discovery Institute’s “Bibliography of Supplementary Resources for Ohio Science Instruction” as a systematic misrepresentation of the scientific literature that it cites.
Over the objection of the standing room only crowd, the board voted unanimously to adopt the science textbooks, included in a $7.7 million package that also includes books for health and physical education.
At the March 11, 2002, panel discussion on evolution in front of the Ohio Board of Education, the Discovery Institute's Stephen Meyer claimed that encouragement to teach alternatives to evolution was part of the recently signed No Child Left Behind Act. Brown University biologist Kenneth R. Miller responded by using his computer to search the text of the law for the word "evolution" - unsuccessfully. Now anti-evolutionists are claiming that there is such language in the law and that Miller was being intentionally misleading.