Scientists Confront Creationism

By Andrew J. Petto

Book Overview

The recent massive attack by fundamentalist Christians on the teaching of evolution in the schools has left scientists indignant and somewhat bewildered. Creationist arguments have seemed to them a compound of ignorance and malevolence, and, indeed, there has been both confusion and dishonesty in the creationist attack. First, there has been a confusion, partly deliberate, of the fact that organism have evolved with theories about the detailed mechanics of the process. The facts of evolution are clear and are not disputed by any serious scientific worker.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0393301540
• ISBN13: 9780393301540
• Release Date: April 1984
• Publisher: W. W. Norton & Company
• Length: 352 Pages
• Weight: 0.68 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.8" x 4.7" x 7.3"

Customer Reviews

A must read for informed public/education policy decision making

Scientists Confront Creationism is a series of academic essays addressing the misinformation posited and obfuscation used by the ID/Creationist/Christian Scientist crowd in its collective mission to overthrow naturalistic evolutionary biology in particular and naturalistic science in general. The essays provide a history, differences and methods of the anti-evolution/anti naturalistic science group. It is also loaded with details about the scientific method, genetics, anthropology and geology. This work is heavily cited and fact based, not an ideological rant.

Scientific report for all

Very easy to understand. An attractive layout which encourages the reader to complete the book. Suited to high school students and to those who need basic information about arguments for and against evolutionary theory.

Scientists Separate Sense From Nonsense

This review was written after reading the hardcover edition - pick up the paperback now that it is available! Fervent fundamentalist religious groups (Jewish, Christian, or Islamic), have exhibited chronic allergies to science ever since Charles Darwin's "The Origin of Species" convincingly presented his theory of evolution by natural selection. Unweaving rainbows could be tolerated - but dismantling cherished creation myths spawned an array of pseudoscientific hives and rashes ranging from 'creation science' to 'Intelligent Design.' Faith-based resistance to evolution - a theory supported by an overwhelming and extraordinary consilience of scientific evidence - has deleteriously impacted everything from separation of church and state to economic competitiveness as science, and science education, became essential prerequisites for information age economies and political systems. "Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism" thoroughly and convincingly deconstructs the all dog, no pony, creationist and ID sideshow with sixteen essays by prominent scientists, historians, and educators. PART ONE focuses on the origins of 'scientific creationism' and 'Intelligent Design.' Ronald L. Numbers unmasks the shell-game strategies employed by creationists attempting to substitute religious dogma for science in American classrooms. Shortly after the Supreme Court rejected 'scientific creationism' in the 1987 Edwards v. Aguillard ruling 'Intelligent Design,' chronicled by Eugenie C. Scott, whelped into view. Sired by an unremarkable claque of born again lawyers, underachieving academics, and a Moonie; 'Intelligent Design' was accompanied by a strident but content-free PR initiative from The Discovery Institute for the Renewal of Science and Culture. John R. Cole closes this section by documenting the conceit that led backers of 'Intelligent Design' to their own Golgotha in Kitzmiller v. Dover in 2005. PART TWO includes essays by Victor J. Stegner, G. Brent Dalrymple, and Antonia Lazcano that roast creationist chestnuts ranging from 'The Second Law of Thermodynamics makes evolution or the natural origin of life impossible' (it doesn't, in fact non-equilibrium thermodynamics underlies a variety of physical and chemical processes that allowed life to develop and evolve on earth); to the age of the earth itself - an incontrovertible 4.54 billion years old. Despite all available scientific evidence, Young Earth Creationists (YECs) continue to insist that earth and the cosmos are only 6,000 to 10,000 years old - only off by factors of 750,000 for the earth and more than 2,000,000 for the universe! Other PART TWO highlights pair Kevin Padian's and Kenneth D. Angielczyk's paper on how creationists duplicitously deny transitional forms with Robert Dorit's insights on biological complexity - flagellating Michael Behe's clumsy implementation of 'irreducible complexity.' Wesley R. Elsberry succinctly reveals the statistical slight-of-hand inherent in

Brass-Tacks Refutations of Creationism Aping Science

"They [the 'scientific' creationists] pretend that biblical literalism is the logical alternative to evolution. They mold the 'facts' of science according to their needs. They distort the meanings of 'fact' and 'theory.' Cloaked in scientific jargon but uninformed by the scientific developments of the past one hundred fifty years, the arguments of the scientific creationists demand a response." --Laurie R. Godfrey, Preface, Scientists Confront CreationismThe editor of this collection of 15 essays, Laurie R. Godfrey, also contributed the essay, "Scientific Creationism: The Art of Distortion," in a similar book, Science and Creationism (New York: Oxford UP, 1984), that was edited by Ashley Montagu. Godfrey is a professor of anthropology at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst. She received her Ph.D. from Harvard University. The relatively successful lobbying of creationists compelled the generation of books of this kind.In Epperson v. Arkansas (1968), for example, the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional Arkansas' 1928 statute making the teaching of evolution unlawful. Thus, the eventual failure of creationists to censor evolution from public schools via legislation resulted in efforts to mandate "equal time" in science curricula for creationism. However, District Court of Arkansas Judge Overton, in a well-written ruling, struck down as unconstitutional an "equal time" law in McLean v. Arkansas (1982). The Supreme Court also struck down a Louisiana "equal-time" law in Edwards v. Aguillard (1987), four years after the publication of this book. In addition to activism via litigation and legislation, creationists specialize in knocking down straw-man versions of science.Dr. Steven D. Schafersman's essay, "Fossils, Stratigraphy, and Evolution: Consideration of a Creationist Argument," refutes a creationist allegation that geologists engage in the fallacy of circular reasoning. Creationists assert "that geologists use fossils to date rocks and rocks to date fossils and that this is circular reasoning because it assumes the truth of evolution (by using a fossil sequence of simple to complex to date rocks) while it purports to provide evidence for the existence of evolution (by using the rock sequence thus constructed to demonstrate an evolutionary sequence of simple to complex organisms through time)." However, the fossil sequences (biostratigraphy) are completely independent of any evolutionary presumption. Biostratigraphy is determined from three laws that are entirely independent of the theory of evolution. These three laws are (1) "sedimentary strata are initially deposited horizontally," (2) "younger undisturbed strata invariably overlie older undisturbed strata," and (3) "fossils in the strata will always occur in the same sequence, regardless of geographic location." Thus, fossil sequences derive from the rocks; not the rock strata from imposed fossil sequences derived from an evolutionary presumption. Geologic thrusting and overturning of

A real eye opener for an ex-creationist

Its great to finally see a direct response to all the creationist stuff I've been hearing for years. Sure its technical at times (if it wasn't, it would be too general). And yes, some of these guys have chips on their shoulders. I'd like to see a real thoughtful creationist rebuttal on a lot of this material. Probably won't happen.