Some Scientists Support the Textbook Disclaimer
Evolution is not unassailable
A lawsuit filed by the ACLU in Georgia complains that Cobb County's decision to place stickers on textbooks warning students that evolution is "a theory, not a fact," and should be "critically considered." Of course, there are many who do not want to see such stickers on textbooks. Why not? Well, they agree with the National Geographic's November 2004 feature article entitled "Was Darwin Wrong?" (available, in part, here.) The answer? In big letters, the article says "No." It then proceeds to give the usual Darwinian evidence supporting evolution by natural selection, including conversations by the author, David Quammen, with a couple of scientists who are devotees of the present scientific paradigm.
Of course, there is no counter to this article. There is no article by scientists who disagree with the Darwinian paradigm. There is no discussion in the article itself of the views of these scientists or discussions with these scientists allowing them to state the contrary point of view. It seems that National Geographic beleives that Darwinian evolution is so well established that there is no need to present an alternative point of view. After all, such a view is held only by nutcases who don't have a scientific education, right?
The Cobb County lawsuit has shown that, contrary to the viewpoint expressed in National Geographic, the scientific community is not of a single mindset on this issue. According to Scientists Defend School Board's Use of Evolution Disclaimer Sticker:
"Calling evolution 'a theory in crisis,' more than two-dozen scientists have come to the defense of the Cobb County, Ga., Board of Education. The scientists, all Ph.D.'s, portray evolution as 'a live and growing scientific controversy.' Among them are professors of microbiology, biochemistry and biophysics, who have filed a friend-of-the-court brief siding with the school board's 2002 decision to place a disclaimer about evolution in the front of its high-school biology textbooks." (Emphasis added.)
I applaud these scientists who are willing to put their careers on the line in standing up to the Darwinistic monolith of scientific education. They show that there are reasonable, educated individuals who believe that science education is not about indoctrinating students into believing a particular paradigm of life, but is about following the evidence where it leads. They show that there is reasonable doubt from knowledgeable, educated men and women that does not lead them to agree with National Geographic that Darwin was so indisputably right that it does not even warrant an acknowledgement of dissent.