NCSE Past Events
Georg Sverdrups Building
University of Oslo
In the United States, evolution and climate change are socially – though not scientifically—controversial. What is the origin of these movements, and what are scientists doing to counter them?
Kristine Bonnevie Lectures in Evolutionary Biology
hosted by the
Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis
1200 New York Avenue NW
Danger lurks when scientists talk about policy. When scientists endorse a particular policy to address the climate change-related problems they study, audiences can question the integrity of their science (as discussed here: www.eenews.net/stories/1059966968). But laying out the dangers of climate change without presenting a solution can leave audiences feeling powerless, and makes the science seem powerless, too. How can scientists and science communicators ethically bring their expertise to bear on policy questions, without compromising the integrity or independence of the science they publish and present? Are scientists ethically obliged to share what their research says about policy, or are they ethically bound to steer clear of policy debates when they talk science?
Suggested reading: Nisbet, M.C. (2009). The Ethics of Framing Science. In B. Nerlich, B. Larson, & R. Elliott (Eds.). Communicating Biological Sciences: Ethical and Metaphorical Dimensions (pp 51-74). London: Ashgate.
Visit the ScienceOnline Climate web site
715 East Main Street
Buena Vista, Colorado
How can we reinterpret the doctrine that humans are created in the image of God to reflect what we know from science? Are humans “stardust become conscious of itself 13.7 billion years after the Big Bang?” The assumption that humans are made in the image of God is fundamental to the scriptural teaching about the nature of human existence and makes human kind capable of comprehending and responding to God’s invitation. How have these leftovers from the Big Bang evolved into beings with moral understanding and judgment, with spiritual awareness and responsiveness and who are able to assume the responsibility for creation.
Collegiate Peaks Forum Series
715 East Main Street
Buena Vista, Colorado
Can I believe in a good, omnipotent and omniscient God in the face of evolutionary evil? Why did the dinosaurs and other animals suffer so much pain? The evidence for evolution is so overwhelming that we should at least consider it to be a truth about the natural world. The belief that God created the world makes it easier to understand the workings of the natural world through the senses that were given to us by God. Denying science is a profoundly unsound theological position. Science and faith are but two ways of searching for the same truths. Some questions that will be discussed: If humans were the desired end result of evolutionary history, then why would a good God have initiated a process involving 3.5 billion years of suffering on the part of pre-human animals?; and If the metaphysical premise is of a God that is all-knowing, all powerful and benevolent, then why does suffering exist? These are burning questions that are being debated in both scientific and religious circles and are of interest to many people in today’s society. When science and religion work together, answers can be found and understanding can be achieved.
Collegiate Peaks Forum Series
1900 Belmont Blvd
This paper explores theological dimensions at the intersection of biological evolution and the Christian doctrine of the “image of God.” How can we reinterpret the doctrine of the imago Dei to reflect what we know from science, that humans are “stardust become conscious of itself” 13.7 billion years after the Big Bang?
The Bible does not contain a well-developed doctrine of the “image of God.” However, the moral and spiritual response of humans to the Word of God is intelligible only in light of the imago Dei.
The imago Dei is a foundational teaching of Christian theology, for only if humans reflect God’s image are we able to comprehend and respond to God’s invitation.
This paper will argue in light of contemporary science that the primary criteria for reflecting the image of God are moral understanding, spiritual responsiveness, the capability of sustaining authentic relationships, and a sense of responsibility for God’s creation. This is a theology in which God works in, with, and through creation to transmit the soul integrally through the evolution of human physical nature and its increasing neural endowment. This theology is consistent with a Hebraic understanding of the person as a psychosomatic unity, and addresses a number of important theological problems: (1) it argues against a dualism in which all and only human souls are “saved”; (2) it dissolves the genetically unintelligible disjunction between prehuman hominids and Homo sapiens; (3) it renders ecological theology more coherent; and (4) it maintains the integrity of both scientific and theological perspectives on reality.
American Scientific Affiliation Annual Meeting
Rossmoor Hillside Clubouse
3400 Lower Golden Rain Road
Walnut Creek, California
Dr. Berbeco will discuss how climate change will impact California communities and the science behind these predictions. Learn how this information is being presented to students across the county for 21st century challenges.
Note: Rossmoor is a gated community off Tice Valley Blvd. in Walnut Creek. Tell the gate man you are attending a club meeting. Directions: After the gate - turn first right onto Golden Rain Road and Go 0.5 mile (up a hill and down). At the bottom turn left onto LOWER Golden Rain Road. Go 0.4 mile. Entrance for parking is on the left. We will be in the Las Trampas Room near far end of the long building alongside the lawn bowling rinks.
San José, California
- Joshua Rosenau, NCSE
- Robert Proctor, Stanford
- Michael Mann, Pennsylvania State University
- Elizabeth Nash, Guttmacher Institute
- Robyn Thomas, Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence
Attempts to suppress and obscure science are increasingly common features of many public policy battles, especially around tobacco, evolution, climate change, guns, and abortion. Eighty-five years after the Scopes Monkey Trial, Tennessee just passed another law attacking evolution education—and lumped in climate change and stem cell research to boot. Other legislators have forced doctors to tell patients falsehoods about their pregnancies and abortion and compelled teachers to mislead students about sex and sexuality. At the NRA’s behest, federal funds for gun violence research were eliminated, and basic data on gun violence cannot be gathered. Meanwhile, Big Tobacco and fossil fuel producers are the most prominent - but hardly the only - industries which have conspired to obscure research and attack researchers who reveal their products’ dangers. We’ll learn more about how science is being hidden and attacked, and how we can fight back.
Perhaps because of its existential implications, the science of evolution has been particularly fraught with accusations of fraud and misbehavior. Far more people have heard about the famous Piltdown Man hoax than, say, the Midwife Toad hoax. We have no evidence that paleoanthropologists are any more likely to play games with the truth than herpetologists – although they certainly get more publicity! But there is a difference between actual fraud in a science and accusations of fraud, and certainly for evolutionary science, creationist accusations overwhelm reality. In this presentation I will talk about actual scientific fraud, such as Piltdown and “Archaeoraptor”, and also erroneous claims of fraud made by creationists, such as the peppered moth “fraud.”