ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
*****************************************************************************

Never have I assumed that people here - or in any group - are atheists. This
was never about Christianity or belief or faith. This was about intelligent
design and evolution. Yes, I'm critical of intelligent designers and I make
a point of defending science against this example of pseudoscience and any
others. I've made it my career to fight pseudoscience and I find my work
extraordinarily rewarding and valuable to society. But I do recognize the
difference between evidence-based ideas and faith-based ideas. I deal solely
with the former unless faith-based ideas are claiming to be science or are
purporting to have scientific evidence to back them up.

I don't attack the people, I attack the ideas and when it comes to ideas and
claims that are vying for a place within our knowledge base, my mode of
attack is no holds barred. My choice of words may sound aggressive, possibly
"vicious", but again - none of this is directed towards humanity, it's
directed towards the information we (and our children) are being confronted
with. We are bombarded with all sorts of data and we need to be able to
distinguish fact from fiction. Already we are seeing the disadvantages of
blurring the boundaries of science.

Evolution is both a fact and a theory. It has withstood two hundred years of
scrutiny, has continued to gather evidence in its favor, and has contributed
to almost every discipline known to man. There is undoubtedly more to learn
and we will continue to tweak the details of the theory but as far as the
biological change of life through time goes - evolution explains it very
well and is one of the most important and powerful discoveries we have made.
If it offends the sensibilities of human belief - so what. Too bad. As far
as I'm concerned religion is irrelevant to science and it's up to the
individual to decide how they choose to combine or separate the two fields.

There are too many science museums and public schools, in my opinion, that
already censor evolution or certain aspects of its findings, especially in
the US. I was trained not to use the word evolution when I worked at a
science museum in Houston and the documents we were provided about this
originated from a museum in Chicago so it wasn't just a southern phenomenon.
My career began in Canada where I don't ever remember being confronted with
the need to censor science (although I'm told this has changed) and I was
truly surprised to learn about the creationist movement, and its effect on
education, when I came to the US ten years ago.

When it comes to science - what to teach our children, what to exhibit in
our museums - our decisions should be based in science alone. We want people
to understand the natural processes that shape the universe and ourselves -
that's all it should be about and people should have the opportunity to
learn about everything we know to date. We provide them with the information
but it is up to them what conclusions to make or how to digest this
information with the other things in their head. It's not our responsibility
to decide what might offend a person's belief. I give humans more credit
than that. They'll figure out how to handle the science they learn and are
confronted by, they'll deal with any controversies that may arise, and so
on. The only time scientists and science educators should involve themselves
in these issues is when non-science and pseudoscience are affecting the
science they do and present to society.

For me, this is all especially important for children. Children should be
exposed to everything we know. It's not them who want their education
censored or incomplete and I believe that in order for them to navigate our
reality successfully - to have the most opportunities to fulfill their
dreams - they deserve their science classes and experiences at museums to be
undiluted and untouched by pseudoscience.

My comment about being concerned about the "raise them to fear the Lord" was
misplaced. This wasn't the proper medium to make such a comment and I
apologize. I do believe children will be incapable of interpreting fear as
respect unless they are told but nevertheless, it was an irrelevant comment
to the other I was making.

I haven't seen much disrespect here to those with religious beliefs although
if the evolution/intelligent design subject is treated as anything other
than an issue of science vs. pseudoscience I can see how this interpretation
could be made. To believe that our discussion on the subject is an affront
to Christians or people's belief, however, is wrong and it's up to those
people making that interpretation to separate their personal opinions from
the scientific evidence we use to show that ID is a pseudoscience and has no
place in the education we provide the public.

Respectfully,
Amanda

***

Amanda Chesworth
Educational Director, CSICOP
http://www.csicop.org
Inquiring Minds Program
http://www.inquiringminds.org



----- Original Message -----
From: "jeff courtman" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: Creation museum comments


> ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
> Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related
institutions.
>
****************************************************************************
*
>
>  There's no need for translation of "fear" - it has, as one of its
meanings,
> 'to revere and respect'.   Just like the word 'awful', which more often
than
> not, is used to describe something terrible, can also be used (without
fear
> of being wrong, I might add) to describe something that creates a feeling
of
> awe.
>
> Why belittle anyone for trying to make sense of their universe?  Would
you,
> for instance, be sarcastic towards indigenous people who still might
believe
> a photograph captures their soul?
>
> Although I admit to succumbing to cheap shots sometimes, it is not about
> feeling superior in my knowlege, or 'they', whoever 'they' are, feeling
> superior in their faith.  It is about dialogue that might, if nothing
else,
> lead to mutual respect.  An agreement to disagree.  And, as in often the
> case, such a dialogue might not appeal to extrememists from either end of
> the bell curve.
>
> Can I be amused at a game of Intelligent Design where players try to win
as
> many brains as possible?  Yes.  Should I make fun of people who take it as
> truth?  Probably not.
>
> It is  that gray area between belief/knowledge and proselytizing, from
> either camp, that I think concerns me most.
>
>
> Jeff Courtman
> Exhibits & Special Projects Coordinator
> 251.208.6851
> Exploreum Science Center
> www.exploreum.net
>
> ***********************************************************************
> More information about the Informal Science Education Network and the
> Association of Science-Technology Centers may be found at
http://www.astc.org.
> To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
> message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
> [log in to unmask]
>

***********************************************************************
More information about the Informal Science Education Network and the
Association of Science-Technology Centers may be found at http://www.astc.org.
To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]