Changes

There exists widespread suppression of [[creationism]] and [[Intelligent Design]], ideas which offer alternative explanations of origins than does the [[theory of evolution]].

There exists widespread suppression of [[creationism]] and [[intelligent design]], ideas which offer alternative explanations of origins than does the [[theory of evolution]].

== History ==

== History ==

Over the next 50 to 100 years, however, evolution came to be the ruling paradigm in the biological sciences in particular, and science in general.

Over the next 50 to 100 years, however, evolution came to be the ruling paradigm in the biological sciences in particular, and science in general.

In the early 1960s, creationism began a resurgence, followed a few decades later by Intelligent Design.

In the early 1960s, creationism began a resurgence, followed a few decades later by intelligent design.

Once these ideas had started to gain a degree of popularity, however, many people, committed to evolutionary thought, began to oppose these competing views of the history of life.

Once these ideas had started to gain a degree of popularity, however, many people, committed to evolutionary thought, began to oppose these competing views of the history of life.

(These people generally consider Intelligent Design to be creationism in disguise, although there are significant differences between the two ideas.)

(These people generally consider Intelligent design to be creationism in disguise, although there are significant differences between the two ideas.)

However, this opposition has not been merely academic debate of the merits of the competing ideas, but a concerted effort to suppress creationism and Intelligent Design.

However, this opposition has not been merely academic debate of the merits of the competing ideas, but a concerted effort to suppress creationism and intelligent design.

This opposition has included keeping the ideas out of the education system and marginalising or ridiculing the ideas in the mass media.

This opposition has included keeping the ideas out of the education system and marginalising or ridiculing the ideas in the mass media.

Gonzalez exceeded this by 350%, with 68 such papers, including papers that had surprisingly high numbers of citations.

Gonzalez exceeded this by 350%, with 68 such papers, including papers that had surprisingly high numbers of citations.

But Gonzales co-authored a book in 2004 which revealed his support for Intelligent Design, and two of his colleagues have admitted that his views on intelligent design were a factor in denying Gonzalez tenure.<ref>Grigg, 2007</ref><ref>Klinghoffer, 2007</ref>

But Gonzales co-authored a book in 2004 which revealed his support for intelligent design, and two of his colleagues have admitted that his views on intelligent design were a factor in denying Gonzalez tenure.<ref>Grigg, 2007</ref><ref>Klinghoffer, 2007</ref>

==== Robert Gentry ====

==== Robert Gentry ====

Roger Paull was a substitute [[teacher]] in Arizona.  One assignment saw him showing to his class a video left by the regular teacher.

Roger Paull was a substitute [[teacher]] in Arizona.  One assignment saw him showing to his class a video left by the regular teacher.

The video disparaged [[Christianity]] and glorified [[naturalism]].

The video disparaged [[Christianity]] and glorified [[naturalism]].

After the third video, on [[theory of evolution|evolution]], he briefly mentioned [[Intelligent Design]] to the class.

After the third video, on [[theory of evolution|evolution]], he briefly mentioned [[intelligent design]] to the class.

The next day he was suspended and has not been able to teach since, having been effectively "blackballed".

The next day he was suspended and has not been able to teach since, having been effectively "blackballed".

He says that he was viewed "almost the same way a potential pedophile would be".

He says that he was viewed "almost the same way a potential pedophile would be".

{{main|Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District}}

{{main|Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District}}

In 2004, the Dover County School Board in Pennsylvania, U.S.A., approved a curriculum which included that teachers should read to their class a statement pointing out that evolution is an explanation of observations, not a fact, that Intelligent Design is an alternative explanation, that the book ''Of Pandas and People'' is available if students want to know more about Intelligent Design, and that the students are to keep an open mind.

In 2004, the Dover County School Board in Pennsylvania, U.S.A., approved a curriculum which included that teachers should read to their class a statement pointing out that evolution is an explanation of observations, not a fact, that intelligent design is an alternative explanation, that the book ''Of Pandas and People'' is available if students want to know more about Intelligent design, and that the students are to keep an open mind.

But even this was too much for the committed evolutionists, and a court challenge, backed by the [[American Civil Liberties Union]], saw the requirement removed, on the grounds that the proponents of the requirement had religious motives.

But even this was too much for the committed evolutionists, and a court challenge, backed by the [[American Civil Liberties Union]], saw the requirement removed, on the grounds that the proponents of the requirement had religious motives.

==== Philip Bishop ====

==== Philip Bishop ====

Associate professor of physiology, Dr. Philip Bishop, was taken to court by his employer, the [[University of Alabama]], to stop him briefly expressing his views favouring [[Intelligent design]], on the grounds that they were religious.

Associate professor of physiology, Dr. Philip Bishop, was taken to court by his employer, the [[University of Alabama]], to stop him briefly expressing his views favouring [[intelligent design]], on the grounds that they were religious.

Yet views ''opposing'' religion are routinely expressed in classes with no attempts made to stop them.<ref>Bergman, 2004</ref>

Yet views ''opposing'' religion are routinely expressed in classes with no attempts made to stop them.<ref>Bergman, 2004</ref>

=== Peer review publications ===

=== Peer review publications ===

A frequent criticism of creationism and Intelligent Design is that they fail to pass [[peer review]], and cannot therefore be considered scientific.

A frequent criticism of creationism and intelligent design is that they fail to pass [[peer review]], and cannot therefore be considered scientific.

Creationists and Intelligent Design proponents counter that they fail to pass peer review on the grounds of ideology, not scientific merit.

Creationists and intelligent design proponents counter that they fail to pass peer review on the grounds of ideology, not scientific merit.

One columnist wrote:{{QuoteBox|Note the circularity: Critics of ID have long argued that the theory was unscientific because it had not been put forward in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Now that it has, they argue that it shouldn't have been because it's unscientific.<ref>Klinghoffer, 2005</ref>}}

One columnist wrote:{{QuoteBox|Note the circularity: Critics of ID have long argued that the theory was unscientific because it had not been put forward in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Now that it has, they argue that it shouldn't have been because it's unscientific.<ref>Klinghoffer, 2005</ref>}}

==== ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington'' ====

==== ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington'' ====

In August 2004<ref>Meyer, 2004.  The on-line archives of the magazine list it as June 2004 [http://apt.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-toc&issn=0006-324X&volume=117&issue=2], but this is not considered reliable, as the same source lists both of the following two issues as being December 2004.</ref> the ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington'' published a paper by [[Stephen Meyer]]<ref>Meyer, 2004</ref> which gave an overview of Intelligent Design arguments. (See also [[#Richard Sternberg|Richard Sternberg]], above.)

In August 2004<ref>Meyer, 2004.  The on-line archives of the magazine list it as June 2004 [http://apt.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-toc&issn=0006-324X&volume=117&issue=2], but this is not considered reliable, as the same source lists both of the following two issues as being December 2004.</ref> the ''Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington'' published a paper by [[Stephen Meyer]]<ref>Meyer, 2004</ref> which gave an overview of intelligent design arguments.

The ensuing outcry, including from people who had not even read the paper, resulted in the [[Biological Society of Washington]] undertaking to never again publish anything about Intelligent Design.

The ensuing outcry, including from people who had not even read the paper, resulted in the [[Biological Society of Washington]] undertaking to never again publish anything about intelligent design.

There were claims that the paper had bypassed the peer review process, but these were shown to be false.<ref>McVay, 2005</ref>

There were claims that the paper had bypassed the peer review process, but these were shown to be false.<ref>McVay, 2005</ref>

The refusal to ever publish on the topic again was not on the grounds of not passing peer review, but in line with the [[American Association for the Advancement of Science]]'s position that Intelligent Design is not science.<ref>Sternberg; Walker, 2007; Klinghoffer, 1995a</ref><ref>[http://www.biolsocwash.org/id_statement.html Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington]</ref>

The refusal to ever publish on the topic again was not on the grounds of not passing peer review, but in line with the [[American Association for the Advancement of Science]]'s position that intelligent design is not science.<ref>Sternberg; Walker, 2007; Klinghoffer, 1995a</ref><ref>[http://www.biolsocwash.org/id_statement.html Statement from the Council of the Biological Society of Washington]</ref>

==== ''Science'' letters to the editor ====

==== ''Science'' letters to the editor ====