Difference between revisions of "Project Steve"
Conservative (talk | contribs) |
Conservative (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
*[http://www.custance.org/Library/Volume4/Part_I/chapter6.html Nilsson, Heribert, Synthetische Artbildung, Verlag CWK Gleerup, Lund, Sweden, 1953, page 1185 | *[http://www.custance.org/Library/Volume4/Part_I/chapter6.html Nilsson, Heribert, Synthetische Artbildung, Verlag CWK Gleerup, Lund, Sweden, 1953, page 1185 | ||
*[http://creation.com/gould-and-heribert-nilsson Quotes to note]</ref> | *[http://creation.com/gould-and-heribert-nilsson Quotes to note]</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | In 1988, the prominent [[Harvard University]] biologist [[Ernst Mayr]] wrote in his essay ''Does Microevolution Explain Macroevolution''?: | ||
| + | {{cquote|Among all the claims made during the [[Modern evolutionary synthesis|evolutionary synthesis]], perhaps the one that found least acceptance was the assertion that all phenomena of macroevolution can be ‘reduced to,' that is, explained by, microevolutionary genetic processes. Not surprisingly, this claim was usually supported by geneticists but was widely rejected by the very biologists who dealt with macroevolution, the morphologists and paleontologists. Many of them insisted that there is more or less complete discontinuity between the processes at the two levels—that what happens at the species level is entirely different from what happens at the level of the higher categories. Now, 50 years later the controversy remains undecided. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ...In this respect, indeed, macroevolution as a field of study is completely decoupled from microevolution.<ref>http://bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca/Evolution_by_Accident/Macroevolution.html</ref>}} | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
Revision as of 16:43, June 30, 2017
Project Steve is a propaganda campaign started in 2003[1] by the anti-creationist, and pro-evolution/climate change, group the National Center for Science Education (NCSE).
Project Steve describes itself as "a tongue-in-cheek parody of a long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of 'scientists who doubt evolution' or 'scientists who dissent from Darwinism.'"[2] (see "Proof by numbers" fallacy). Project Steve is named after the late Stephen Jay Gould, and is a list of over 1400 scientists named Steve or variations thereof (including Stephanie) who agree with a statement supporting evolution.[3] Approximately 1% of U.S. residents have first names that qualify.[1] The New York Times reported in 2006 that 54 percent of the then 700+ Steves work in biology.[4]
As of March 25, 2017, 1,417 Steves have signed the statement. [5]
Significant problems with Project Steve
Project Steve is illegitimate for two reasons. First, the documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed and the book Slaughter of the Dissidents have shown that evolutionists have used illegitimate means to bully opponents.[6] Secondly, legitimate science is not dependent on consensus/voting but by empirical evidence and replication of experiments. Adaption/microevolution occurs in nature, but there is no experimental evidence supporting macroevolution.
Dr. Nils Heribert-Nilsson, Professor of Botany at the University of Lund in Sweden and a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, stated: "My attempts to demonstrate Evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed. At least, I should hardly be accused of having started from a preconceived antievolutionary standpoint."[7]
In 1988, the prominent Harvard University biologist Ernst Mayr wrote in his essay Does Microevolution Explain Macroevolution?:
| “ | Among all the claims made during the evolutionary synthesis, perhaps the one that found least acceptance was the assertion that all phenomena of macroevolution can be ‘reduced to,' that is, explained by, microevolutionary genetic processes. Not surprisingly, this claim was usually supported by geneticists but was widely rejected by the very biologists who dealt with macroevolution, the morphologists and paleontologists. Many of them insisted that there is more or less complete discontinuity between the processes at the two levels—that what happens at the species level is entirely different from what happens at the level of the higher categories. Now, 50 years later the controversy remains undecided.
...In this respect, indeed, macroevolution as a field of study is completely decoupled from microevolution.[8] |
” |
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 National Center for Science Education (NCSE), Project Steve FAQ
- ↑ http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve
- ↑ National Center for Science Education (NCSE), Project Steve [1] The statement says: "Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to "intelligent design," to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools."
- ↑ New York Times, Ask Science, Few Biologists but Many Evangelicals Sign Anti-Evolution Petition, by Kenneth Chang, Published February 21, 2006 [2]
- ↑ https://ncse.com/list-of-steves
- ↑ [http://www.icr.org/article/book-review-slaughter-dissidents/ Book Review: Slaughter of the Dissidents by Brian Thomas, M.S. *
- ↑
- [http://www.custance.org/Library/Volume4/Part_I/chapter6.html Nilsson, Heribert, Synthetische Artbildung, Verlag CWK Gleerup, Lund, Sweden, 1953, page 1185
- Quotes to note
- ↑ http://bioinfo.med.utoronto.ca/Evolution_by_Accident/Macroevolution.html