Statements on Teaching Evolution
From Scienticity
JNShaumeyer (Talk | contribs) (→Notes) |
JNShaumeyer (Talk | contribs) (→Education Professionals) |
||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
== Education Professionals == | == Education Professionals == | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Australian Scientists and Science Teachers === | ||
| + | |||
| + | On 20 October 2005, the open letter [http://www.science.unsw.edu.au/news/2005/intelligent.html "Intelligent design is not science"] was published in major Australian newspapers. The letter was the "unanimous initiative of the executive of the Faculty of Science at the University of New South Wales, led by its Dean, Professor Mike Archer"; the signatories, leads of nine Australian Professional Societies and Teaching Associations{{ref|aus}}, represent over 70,000 Australian scientists and science teachers. In part, the letter read: | ||
| + | <blockquote> | ||
| + | As Australian scientists and science educators, we are gravely concerned that so-called "intelligent design" (ID) might be taught in any school as a valid scientific alternative to evolution. While science is a work in progress, a vast and growing body of factual knowledge supports the hypothesis that biological complexity is the result of natural processes of evolution. [... Because ID does not meet any of the criteria that would mark it as a science,] We therefore urge all Australian governments and educators not to permit the teaching or promulgation of ID as science. To do so would make a mockery of Australian science teaching and throw open the door of science classes to similarly unscientific world views - be they astrology, spoon-bending, flat-earth cosmology or alien abductions - and crowd out the teaching of real science. | ||
| + | </blockquote> | ||
=== Robert E. Hemenway === | === Robert E. Hemenway === | ||
