DOCSLIB.ORG

Intelligent Design in Public Schools 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Intelligent Design in Public Schools 1 Intelligent Design in Public Schools 1 Intelligent Design in Public Schools Over the past decade, controversy regarding the scientific and philosophical foundation of evolution has risen. In response to this growing debate, a movement has emerged among those exploring defensible alternatives to Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. This movement especially embraces an idea known as Intelligent Design. The founders of Intelligent Design want their arguments opposing evolution heard and believe that students in public schools should be exposed to these ideas (Milner & Maestro, 2002). Most recently, attempts have been made to add evolution disclaimers to science textbooks. This paper will define Intelligent Design and introduce its founders, show how the teaching of evolution is currently implemented in today’s school systems, and discuss different views of this topic, including United States Supreme Court rulings. Although there are many supporters of Intelligent Design, three men stand out from the crowd as leaders and founders. Phillip E. Johnson has been noted as a strong leader of the Intelligent Design Movement, and he has made many successful efforts to make this movement known to many people across the country. An Illinois native, Johnson graduated from Harvard and the University of Chicago Law School, and then he became a professor at the Boalt School of Law at the University of California at Berkeley in 1967 (Phillip E. Johnson). Johnson published his first of many books on evolution in 1991 called Darwin on Trial (Phillip E. Johnson). He is now one of the primary critics of Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution, and he has done much to help the Intelligent Design Movement and its ideas gain popularity and acceptance. Another well-known supporter in the Intelligent Design Movement is Michael Behe. Behe is the Associate Professor of the Biochemistry Department of Biological Sciences at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania (Irreducible Complexity). Behe is most widely known for Intelligent Design in Public Schools 2 two accomplishments. First, he is the author of Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution written in 1996 (Irreducible Complexity). The other significance of Behe’s work related to the Intelligent Design Movement is his concept of irreducible complexity, noting that organismal systems display this said characteristic at the molecular level (Irreducible Complexity). The third founder of Intelligent Design is William Dembski. Dembski is a philosopher, mathematician, and associate research professor in the Conceptual Foundations of Science at Baylor University (Skeptical Inquirer, 2002). He has taught at many institutions including Northwestern University, the University of Notre Dame, and the University of Dallas (Skeptical Inquirer, 2002). Dembski has done postdoctoral work in mathematics at MIT, in physics at the University of Chicago, and in computer science at Princeton University. Dembski is obviously a well-educated man that holds a B.A. in psychology, an M.S. in statistics, a Ph.D. in philosophy, a doctorate in mathematics, and a master of divinity degree from the Princeton Theological Seminary (Skeptical Inquirer, 2002). He is also currently the Director of the Michael Polanyi Center at Baylor University (Skeptical Inquirer, 2002). These founders want “Intelligent Design” to become “the dominant perspective in science” and to “permeate our religious, cultural, moral, and political life” (Skeptical Inquirer, 2002). Intelligent Design is a fairly new concept that opposes the theory of evolution. The actual topic, “Intelligent Design,” may be a relatively new term, but many argue that the idea that a cosmic designer exists started many years ago in 1802. English theologian William Paley is known for his watchmaker analogy from the early 1800’s (Milner & Maestro, 2002). Paley’s theory suggests: if you venture into a field and stumble upon a rock, you generally assume that it came to be in that place because it was a production of a natural process that occurred and that this said rock had probably been there for a significant amount of time. But do you likewise Intelligent Design in Public Schools 3 stumble upon a pocket watch lying in that same field and assume that it came to exist because it too is a product of a natural process? No. The complexity of the item suggests that there was a creator such as one of designing human intellect that must have constructed the watch. Supporters of Paley’s theory are known as “fundamentalist creationists” (Milner & Maestro, 2002). Not all Intelligent Design supporters are fundamental creationists; others are simply anti- evolutionists. The main two ideas of the anti-evolutionists are that they do agree that certain organisms have changed over time and they feel that our planet is much older than 6,000 years old. Anti-evolutionists completely disagree that evolution is the sole explanation of all species’ existence and complexity. Now that the basics of Intelligent Design have been established, the question is, “Is there a place for Intelligent Design in the classroom alongside evolution?” According to the Anti- Defamation League, only evolution should be taught because it is a proven scientific fact. Teaching anything other than evolution is viewed as teaching creationism, which may not be taught as science under any circumstances (Anti-Defamation League, 2004). In addition to teaching evolution, the United States Supreme Court has deemed it unconstitutional for any public school to restrict a science teacher’s right to teach evolution or to require a science teacher to include creationism in his or her curriculum (Anti-Defamation League, 2004). To date, at least 31 states are initiating steps to include teaching alternatives to evolution into their school’s curriculum (Reuters, 2005). As stated before, some activists have urged schools to require their science teachers to read a disclaimer to their students explaining that evolution is only a theory and that the students should consider other alternatives to humankind’s existence (Anti- Defamation League, 2004). In the year 2000, a Board of Education in the parish of Tangipahoa implemented a rule that required their teachers to read such a disclaimer. The court ruled against Intelligent Design in Public Schools 4 this particular case, Feller vs. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education, and found that teaching evolution is “not intended to influence or dissuade the Biblical version of Creation or any other concept” (Anti-Defamation League, 2004). The United States Supreme Court has also stated that schools may not refuse to teach the theory of evolution to avoid offending those who embrace religious beliefs. The court says that evolution is a scientific and proven fact and that is the only type of information that has a place in a science class (Anti-Defamation League, 2004). Furthermore, the United States Supreme Court states that Creationism can still be discussed in the school systems, but only in classes on comparative religion or as an idea of how life began, and never as a scientific fact. Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education (OESE) have posted ten reasons to support teaching evolution in Oklahoma Schools on their website. According to the Oklahoma Biological Survey, a research unit of the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Oklahoma, the three reasons that have sparked the most interest and response from others are as follows: First of all, the OESE states that there is no controversy over whether or not evolution has occurred. The scientific proof has been documented and can be reviewed. The National Academy of Sciences USA and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) have both issued official statements explicitly supporting the teaching of evolution (Teaching Evolution, 2005). Secondly, the OESE states that these “so-called alternatives to evolution” are not scientific. None of these alternatives, including Intelligent Design, have any scientific proof or testable data. Without scientific evidence, such ideas cannot be portrayed as science (Teaching Evolution, 2005). And finally, the third reason that OESE states schools should keep evolution in the school systems is that of the importance of evolutionary principles increasingly important in human health. These principles include development of antibiotic Intelligent Design in Public Schools 5 resistance, emerging diseases, and the human genome. Students in an agricultural area should be exposed to the facts that can improve crops and livestock growth. These are just a few of the reasons that the OESE believes that we should keep our science curriculum consistent with proven facts. California’s State Superintendent of Public Instruction is Jack O’Connell. He addressed the Los Angeles Natural History Museum on September 28, 2005, with the following statements: The goal of public education is for students to gain the knowledge and skills necessary for California's work force to be competitive in the global, information-based economy of the 21st Century. ... We also want to give students the tools to become critical thinkers and to be able to discuss and reflect on philosophical questions. But, the domain of the natural sciences is the natural world. Science is limited by its tools -- observable facts and testable hypothesis. Because religious beliefs are based on faith, and are not subject to scientific test and refutation, these beliefs should not be taught in the realm of natural sciences. (National
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Beginner's Guide to 'Holistic' Wellness
    BOOK REVIEWS in the progression of the disease when The Beginner’s Guide to prayer was used” (p. 98). For such a bold statement, the evidence is pretty weak, ‘Holistic’ Wellness however. There are very few studies on DIMITRY ROTSTEIN personal prayer (none are double-blind, of course), and their results are mixed Mayo Clinic Book of Alternative Medicine. By The Mayo even for treating purely psychological Clinic. Time Inc. Home Entertainment Books, New York, symptoms. More disturbing is the fact 2007. ISBN: 1-933405-92-9. 192 pp. Hardcover, $24.95. that the book doesn’t make a distinc- tion between personal and intercessory prayer, even though the latter is known to have no effect according to well-de- he Mayo Clinic Book of mean that perhaps we skeptics have signed studies (including one by the Alterna tive Medicine is the been unfair to “alternative medicine” Mayo Clinic itself). None of these facts most significant publication of and that there is more to it than just T is ever mentioned. In summary, the evi- the Mayo Clinic Complementary and placebo, self-delusion, quackery, or, at dence of the effectiveness of these “ther- Integrative Medicine Program’s team, best, some outdated healing techniques? apies” against any real disease is either which has been studying various forms Perhaps not. dubious or non-existent. Of course, of complementary and alternative medi- True, of the twenty-five CAM ther- controlling such factors as stress and cine (CAM, for short) since 2001. Here apies, fourteen are recommended as depression is important for your health, you will find nothing but reliable and safe and effective for “treating” various but there is no indication that any of the easy-to-understand information from diseases.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Seeing and Believing the Never-Ending Attempt to Reconcile
    1 Seeing and Believing The never-ending attempt to reconcile science and religion, and why it is doomed to fail. Jerry A. Coyne, The New Republic Published: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 Saving Darwin: How to be a Christian and Believe in Evolution By Karl W. Giberson (HarperOne, 248 pp., $24.95) Only A Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul By Kenneth R. Miller (Viking, 244 pp., $25.95) I. Charles Darwin was born on February 12, 1809--the same day as Abraham Lincoln--and published his magnum opus, On the Origin of Species, fifty years later. Every half century, then, a Darwin Year comes around: an occasion to honor his theory of evolution by natural selection, which is surely the most important concept in biology, and perhaps the most revolutionary scientific idea in history. 2009 is such a year, and we biologists are preparing to fan out across the land, giving talks and attending a multitude of DarwinFests. The melancholy part is that we will be speaking more to other scientists than to the American public. For in this country, Darwin is a man of low repute. The ideas that made Darwin's theory so revolutionary are precisely the ones that repel much of religious America, for they imply that, far from having a divinely scripted role in the drama of life, our species is the accidental and contingent result of a purely natural process. And so the culture wars continue between science and religion. On one side we have a scientific establishment and a court system determined to let children learn evolution rather than religious mythology, and on the other side the many Americans who passionately resist those efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • Polanyi Review Committee Report
    THE EXTERNAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT BAYLOR UNIVERSITY The External Review Committee was convened to review the status of the Michael Polanyi Center at Baylor University, which was established a year ago with the primary aim of advancing the understanding of the sciences. In the early summer, members of the Committee received copies of books and articles relevant to the work of the Center. On September 8 and 9, 2000, the Committee met to discuss what they had read, to hear from persons who addressed matters about which the Committee was concerned, and to formulate a response to the charge the Committee had been given. The vigorous discussions about the issues contained in the charge reflected the variety in the backgrounds and perspectives of the Committee members. The outcome of these discussions was a thorough and even- handed review of the concerns before the Committee. It is important from the outset to emphasize that the sciences at Baylor University are the inheritors of a long and distinguished tradition. For many years, undergraduate instruction in the sciences at Baylor has been conducted in an exciting and effective manner. The graduate and research programs are solid and well respected throughout the scientific community. Not only have students and faculty been active in the mainstream of scientific disciplines, but they have also pursued initiatives in new areas and directions. Baylor’s heritage, in this regard, is clearly one of which it can be proud. The relationship of the sciences to other academic fields is a further responsibility that Baylor seeks to address. Relationships between the sciences and the humanities, as well as issues relating to the environment and public policy, are matters of real concern to the Baylor community.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing and Strengthening Belief in God I
    DEVELOPING AND STRENGTHENING BELIEF IN GOD I First Cause (Cosmological) and Design (Teleological) Arguments he cornerstone of Jewish belief is that God created the universe ex nihilo with Tthe Torah as His Divine plan and that He continually guides and supervises His creation. Nevertheless, there are many people who do not share this belief, or at least question it. There is a need, therefore, to present a range of approaches to developing and strengthening belief in God. The traditional Jewish approach to belief in God is based on the Exodus from Egypt and hashgachah pratit (Divine Providence). These approaches are discussed in the Morasha classes on Passover, Torah M’Sinai, and Hashgachah Pratit. The goal of this series of classes is to present additional approaches to belief – those based on logic and science – to help strengthen one’s belief in God. Specifically, this series will present three arguments for the existence of God. The first class, after defining the aim of the series on the whole, will explore two deductive arguments for the existence of God, namely the First Cause or Cosmological Argument, and the Design or Teleological Argument. The second class in the series will explore the inductive approach, focusing on the Moral Argument. In order to help students digest the logical force of the arguments presented, the series will conclude with an exploration of the decision making process. In this first class we will explore the following questions: Where did the world come from? Does it make sense that the world always existed? What does modern science have to say about the subject? Does the design found in nature imply that there is a Divine Designer? Does the Theory of Evolution explain this phenomenon? 1 Core Beliefs DEVELOPING & STRENGTHENING BELIEF I Class Outline: Section I.
    [Show full text]
  • Searching for Security in the Mystical the Function of Paranormal Beliefs
    Searching for Security in the Mystical The Function of Paranormal Beliefs MARTIN R. GRIMMER ver the past two decades, the paranor- mal has enjoyed something of a revival Owithin popular culture. There have been countless books, magazine and newspaper articles, movies, and television programs devoted to topics ranging from UFOs, the Bermuda Triangle, lost continents, Yetis, and Belief in the the Loch Ness monster, to pyramid power, astrology, levitation, telepathy, precognition, paranormal and poltergeists. Sociologist Marcello Truzzi appears to satisfy (1972) suggested that this boom in paranormal interest began around the late sixties, noting some very basic, if that Ouija boards outsold such popular board inconsistent games as Monopoly. human needs. It Lately, the paranormal seems to have mani- fested in the form of the New Age movement— will probably a loose combination of ideas encompassing spir- remain with us itualism, mysticism, alternative healing, and a healthy dose of commercialism. Some may think forever. this is mainly an American phenomenon, but it is estimated that Australians alone now spend $100 million a year on personal-transformation courses that delve deeply into such fringe areas as rebirthing, shamanism, channeling, and crystal healing. To some observers, the New Age movement is seen as a sort of quasi-religious justification for "yuppiedom"—how to make money and feel "really great" about it at the same time. Winter 1992 Research studies worldwide have written on this topic, several themes revealed an extensive belief in and in the human motive to believe can acceptance of the paranormal. In a be identified. survey of the readers of Britain's New First, paranormal beliefs may oper- Scientist magazine, a high proportion ate to reassure the believer that there of whom are reported to hold post- is order and control in what may graduate degrees, Evans (1973) found otherwise appear to be a chaotic that 67 percent believed that ESP was universe (Frank 1977).
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Washington University St. Louis: Open Scholarship Washington University Law Review Volume 83 Issue 1 2005 Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution Matthew J. Brauer Princeton University Barbara Forrest Southeastern Louisiana University Steven G. Gey Florida State University Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Education Law Commons, First Amendment Commons, Religion Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Matthew J. Brauer, Barbara Forrest, and Steven G. Gey, Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution, 83 WASH. U. L. Q. 1 (2005). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol83/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Washington University Law Quarterly VOLUME 83 NUMBER 1 2005 IS IT SCIENCE YET?: INTELLIGENT DESIGN CREATIONISM AND THE CONSTITUTION MATTHEW J. BRAUER BARBARA FORREST STEVEN G. GEY* TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Irreducible Complexity and Darwinian Gradualism: a Reply to Michael J
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Asbury Theological Seminary Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers Volume 19 Issue 1 Article 1 1-1-2002 Irreducible Complexity and Darwinian Gradualism: A Reply to Michael J. Behe Paul Draper Follow this and additional works at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy Recommended Citation Draper, Paul (2002) "Irreducible Complexity and Darwinian Gradualism: A Reply to Michael J. Behe," Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers: Vol. 19 : Iss. 1 , Article 1. Available at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy/vol19/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers by an authorized editor of ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY AND DARWINIAN GRADUALISM: A REPLY TO MICHAEL J. BEHE Paul Draper In Darwin's Black Box, Michael). Behe argues that, because certain biochemical systems are both irreducibly complex and very complex, it is extremely unlikely that they evolved gradually by Darwinian mechanisms, and so extremely likely that they were intelligently designed. I begin this paper by explaining Behe's argument and defending it against the very common but clearly mistaken charge that it is just a rehash of William Paley'S design argu­ ment. Then I critically discuss a number of more serious objections to the argument. I conclude that, while Behe successfully rules out some Darwinian paths to the biochemical systems he discusses, others remain open.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pseudoscience of Anti-Anti-Ufology
    SI Sept/Oct 2009 pgs 7/29/09 11:24 AM Page 28 PSYCHIC VIBRATIONS ROBERT SHEAFFER The Pseudoscience of Anti-Anti-UFOlogy Many readers are surely familiar with is more their style. Deception is the practiced prestidigitation can never be author and pro-UFO lecturer Stanton T. name of the game.” trusted in anything. He criticizes Friedman, who calls himself the “Flying Friedman goes on to name names: Nickell for raising “the baseless Project Saucer physicist” because he actually did He critiques Joe Nickell’s article “Return Mogul explanation” for Roswell, which work in physics about fifty years ago (al- cannot be correct, says Friedman, though not since). Well, Stanton is upset because it does not match the claims by the skeptical writings contained in made in later years by alleged Roswell SI’s special issue on UFOs (January- witnesses (although it does match quite /February 2009) and elsewhere. He has well the account of Mac Brazel, the orig- written two papers thus far denouncing inal witness, given in 1947). us, and it is the subject of his Keynote He moves on to my critique of the Address at the MUFON Conference in Betty and Barney Hill case, where I note August. the resemblance of their “hypnosis UFO In February, Friedman wrote an arti- testimony” to Betty Hill’s post-incident cle, “Debunkers at it Again,” reviewing dreams. I wrote, “Barney had heard her our UFO special issue (www.theufo repeat [them] many times,” which he chronicles.com/2009/02/debunkers-at- claims is “nonsense.” According to it-again.html).
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Name: Kenneth R
    1. Name: Kenneth R. Miller Professor of Biology Department of Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, & Biochemistry 2. Home address: 142 Martin Street Rehoboth, MA 02769 3. Education: Brown University Sc. B. Biology 1970 University of Colorado Ph. D. Biology 1974 Dissertation topic: Structure of the Photosynthetic Membrane 4. Professional Appointments: Lecturer Harvard Univ. 1974-1976 Assistant Professor Harvard Univ. 1976-1980 Assistant Professor Brown Univ. 1980-1982 Associate Professor Brown Univ. 1982-1986 Professor Brown Univ. 1986- 5. Completed Publications a. Books & Monographs Miller, K. R. (editor) Advances in Cell Biology, Volume I. JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn., London, England. 1987. pp. 1-190.g Miller, K. R. (editor) Advances in Cell Biology, Volume II. JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn., London, England. 1988. pp. 1-312. Miller, K. R. (1988) Energy and The Cell. (A Carolina Biology Reader, J. J. Head, editor) Carolina Biological, Burlington, North Carolina. 16 pp. Miller, K. R. (editor) Advances in Cell Biology, Volume III. JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn., London, England. 1989. pp. 1-273. Miller, K. R., & J. S. Levine (1990) Biology. (A high school biology text, generally known as the “Elephant” book). 1st Edition. Prentice Hall Co. 1077 p. (© 1991). CV: Kenneth R. Miller (Updated through 2016) Page 1 Levine, J. S., & K. R. Miller (1990) Biology: Discovering Life (A college biology text) 1st Edition. D. C. Heath & Co. 839 pp. (© 1991). Miller, K. R., & J. S. Levine (1992) Biology. (revision of the “Elephant” book). 2nd Edition. Prentice Hall Co. 1077 p. (© 1993). Levine, J. S., & K. R. Miller (1993) Biology: Discovering Life (A college biology text) 2nd Edition.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case Against Intelligent Design
    1 THE CASE AGAINST INTELLIGENT DESIGN. The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name by Jerry Coyne Post date: 08.11.05 Issue date: 08.22.05 Of Pandas and People By Percival Davis and Dean H. Kenyon (Haughton Publishing Company, 170 pp., $24.95) I. Exactly eighty years after the Scopes "monkey trial" in Dayton, Tennessee, history is about to repeat itself. In a courtroom in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania in late September, scientists and creationists will square off about whether and how high school students in Dover, Pennsylvania will learn about biological evolution. One would have assumed that these battles were over, but that is to underestimate the fury (and the ingenuity) of creationists scorned. The Scopes trial of our day--Kitzmiller, et al v. Dover Area School District et al-- began innocuously. In the spring of 2004, the district's textbook review committee recommended that a new commercial text replace the outdated biology book. At a school board meeting in June, William Buckingham, the chair of the board's curriculum committee, complained that the proposed replacement book was "laced with Darwinism." After challenging the audience to trace its roots back to a monkey, he suggested that a more suitable textbook would include biblical theories of creation. When asked whether this might offend those of other faiths, Buckingham replied, "This country wasn't founded on Muslim beliefs or evolution. This country was founded on Christianity and our students should be taught as such." Defending his views a week later, Buckingham reportedly pleaded: "Two thousand years ago, someone died on a cross.
    [Show full text]
  • Comment the Communication Strategies of Neocreationism Between the United States and Europe
    SISSA – International School for Advanced Studies Journal of Science Communication ISSN 1824 – 2049 http://jcom.sissa.it/ Comment The communication strategies of neocreationism between the United States and Europe Astrid Pizzo In their essay which appeared in 1972 in Models in Paleobiology , Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge, introducing the theory of punctuated equilibrium, stressed the fact that no scientific theory develops as a simple and logical extension of facts and of patiently recorded observations, and that the particular vision of the world that the scientist adheres to is able to influence, even unconsciously, the way in which data are collected, selected and then interpreted. Scientists, being aware of the existence of an intrinsic problem of prejudice in their scientific research activity, know that, in order to produce original and innovative ideas, it is fundamental to try to revolutionise their research image, to look at reality in a new light, to read data with alternative viewpoints. According to the American philosopher Robert Pennock 1,2, creationists ignore this aspect completely: they look to the Sacred Scriptures to find answers on the origin of the world and of life, and then try to interpret the empirical evidence so that it fits the scriptures. However, American creationism has changed radically in recent decades. Unlike creationists in the strict sense of the word, who use what is said in the Bible explicitly, at times even literally, to attack the theory of evolution, the advocates of Intelligent Design, who opened their season in the Seventies with the publication of Scientific Creationism by Henry Morris 3, do not adopt a stance of direct opposition to evolutionism, but try to work alongside it and to make use of scientific method to find the evidence of the divine hand in nature.
    [Show full text]
  • The Clockmaker Returns
    Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 1989–2011 Volume 20 Number 1 Article 12 2008 The Clockmaker Returns James L. Farmer Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/msr BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Farmer, James L. (2008) "The Clockmaker Returns," Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 1989–2011: Vol. 20 : No. 1 , Article 12. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/msr/vol20/iss1/12 This Science and Religion is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 1989–2011 by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Title The Clockmaster Returns Author(s) James L. Farmer Reference FARMS Review 20/1 (2008): 139–45. ISSN 1550-3194 (print), 2156-8049 (online) Abstract Review of The Case for Diving Design: Cells, Complexity, and Creation (2006), by Frank B. Salisbury. The Clockmaker Returns James L. Farmer Review of Frank B. Salisbury. The Case for Divine Design: Cells, Complexity, and Creation. Springville, UT: CFI, 2006. xv + 256 pp., with subject index, notes, glossary, appendixes, and bibliography. $15.99. or much of the twentieth century, few geologists believed, in spite Fof evidence to the contrary, that continents could drift. Continental drift was called “geopoetry” because there was no known mechanism to drive continents through the hard oceanic crust. Now continental drift is “geoscience” because the theory of plate tectonics explains the motion. Similarly, cosmology was once considered to be nonscience because there was no way to test hypotheses.
    [Show full text]