Professor Brian Alters said most scientists have the same level of confidence in the occurrence of evolution as they do in that simple mathematics equation.
But a teacher should be respectful to a student whose religion says two plus two equals five, he testified yesterday in Dover's intelligent design trial in U.S. Middle District Court in Harrisburg.
An expert on teaching science and evolution, Alters teaches at McGill University in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, and directs the
university's Evolution Education Research Centre.
Alters used the example of math to explain how science teachers should deal with possible religious questions spurred by talk of evolution.
He testified that Dover's statement about intelligent design is basically a way of making two plus two equal five in the high school's biology classes.
"It (evolution) is a fact because the confidence level is so high there is no debate" over its validity in the scientific community, he said.
But the one-minute statement, read to students by administrators, degrades the standing of the theory of evolution and singles it out as flawed science, he testified.
Analyzes wording: He said because the statement begins with talk of state standards mandating the teaching of evolution, it makes it sound as though the administrators don't really want to teach it.
"We'd rather not do it, but ... ," Alters said, summarizing the
The statement also says, "The Theory is not a fact," which Alters said is not true.
In science, the word "theory" has a different meaning than it does to the layman, he said. It's not just a guess, but rather there is a lot of evidence that supports it, he said.
And all scientific theories are tested as new evidence is found, he said.
But the wording in the statement implies that evolution is less viable than other theories, Alters testified.
The statement implies, "This is one of those half-baked ideas ..." he said.
By not allowing students to ask questions about the statement that had been read, students might assume that evolution is "a secret science," he said in a hushed tone.
The statement also mentions "gaps" in the theory of evolution.
But it doesn't mention gaps in intelligent design, which it offers as an alternative to evolution even though none of the nation's largest science and education organizations support the teaching of intelligent design in science classrooms, Alters said.
Cites opposition: He said the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Science Teachers Association and the National Association of Biology Teachers and the American Association of University Professors have issued statements supporting the teaching of evolution and characterizing intelligent design as a non-scientific movement.
Intelligent design is a form of creationism and pits science against religion, Alters testified.
"You can play the game of science and still have your religious beliefs, too," he said. "Evolution does not deny the existence of God. It doesn't say anything about God."
The Dover Area school board's policy and the statement are "probably the worst thing I've heard of in science education," Alters said.
Science class should be a "safe place ... sort of a neutral place," but religion is being brought into the classroom, and students must defend their religious views, he said.
"What a terrible thing to do to kids," Alters said.
On cross-examination, school board attorney Robert Muise established that Alters is not a scientist, never taught biology, never witnessed a class in Dover or spoke to students or teachers, was not in a biology class when the statement was read and had no idea what gestures or tones administrators used when they read the statement.
Back after a break: The trial resumed yesterday -- after a five-day break -- with continued cross-examination of Bertha Spahr, head of Dover Area High School's science department.
Spahr had testified last week that board members ignored the advice of its science department when it voted to include intelligent design in its curriculum.
Parents and plaintiffs Cyndi Sneath and Steve Stough also testified.
Sneath said she got involved in the case for her children, including a 7-year-old son who loves to talk about NASA.
She said she thinks it is her "privilege" to teach her children about religion.
Stough, a middle-school science teacher in the Southern School District, said he had thought the talk of intelligent design and creationism "would just go away."
After the policy was put in place, he realized the board intended to go through with its plans, so he called the American Civil Liberties Union hotline for legal help.
The case will continue tomorrow with more testimony from Stough and Kevin Padian, a professor of integrative biology at the University of California at Berkeley and curator of the university's museum of paleontology.
The defense is expecting to begin calling its first witnesses on Monday.
Those scheduled include intelligent design scientist and Lehigh University professor Michael Behe, superintendent Richard Nilsen and assistant superintendent Michael Baksa.
Reach Christina Kauffman at 505-5434 or ckauffman@yorkdispatch.com.
Font Resize
