Eugenie Scott, Executive Director for the National Center for Science Education, spoke to UTM students last Monday, March 27, on the issue of the evolution/creation debate.

Scott focused her speech on two main parts: an explanation and definition of evolution and an argument of why creationism (including Intelligent Design) should not be taught in science classes.

“What is this idea that has people’s knickers in a twist,” said Scott at the beginning of her explanation of evolution.

Scott’s explanation of evolution was very in-depth and rivaled what some students learn in a biology class. Scott reinforced several times the point that, “Individuals don’t evolve, populations do.” “She well summarized all of the information in a broad and historical context,” said Matthew Huber, a senior geology major from Starkville, Miss.

Scott gave a historical timeline of the evolution/creation legal battle in public schools including the 1968 Supreme Court case Epperson vs. Arkansas which reversed the Arkansas Supreme Court decision to allow the banning of the teaching of evolution in Arkansas public schools.

Scott then gave an explanation of the history of creation science beginning with the book, The Genesis Flood, by John Whitcomb and Henry Morris. Scott then quoted Morris, which sums up her argument that creation science is not science at all, but an attempt to prove a theory by searching for evidence to support it and discarding evidence which does not, “The work of God must take first priority and secondly, the observed facts of science,” said Morris.

Scott also outlined what she called the “two model approach,” in which creationists argue that if evolution is wrong, then their own version of creation must therefore be right. Scott pointed out how this is illogical by showing that even if evolution is wrong, that does not prove any one theory of creation right. Scott noted that there are many theories of creation ranging from the Christian creation commonly associated with the creation/evolution debate to Hopi legends.

“I don’t believe in evolution. I accept evolution. Science isn’t about belief,” said Scott.

Scott’s speech then turned to an explanation and definition of ID, which she jokingly referred to as “Creationism Light.” According to Scott, the science of ID focuses on the detection of evidence for design. She then explained the two main ways ID supporters go about this: irreducible complexity (the idea that some things in life i.e. bacterial flagellum etc. are so complex that they could not have occurred randomly) and complex specified information (which is found by a design filter, a similar technique is used in the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence or S.E.T.I.). Both, Scott says, do not disprove evolution.

Scott went on to address what she called the “three pillars of creationism:” “Evolution is a ‘theory in crisis;’” “Evolution and religion are incompatible;” and “It is only fair to teach creationism/ID along side evolution.”

Scott asked the audience to ask their biology professors if there were any other accepted scientific theories about the origin of life. She then explained that many religious people, including the late Pope John Paul II, accepted evolution as not contradicting religion. “Intelligent Design is actually unfair…It wants to bypass the scientific community and go straight to text books,” said Scott.

After the speech Scott fielded questions from audience members. “The U.S. is really unusual in its high rate of rejection of evolution…It’s also the case that we really need to do a better job teaching evolution. There were a lot of ‘ohs’ in the audience which says evolution is not being taught well in schools.

Some students disagreed with Scott’s views.

“I believe in creationism. I think that it’s a shame that evolution supporters can denounce creationism by saying it’s not proven but admit that their beliefs are also not proven,” said Justin Chandler, a freshman marketing major.

Jennifer Ryan, a sophomore English major, was beleaguered with everything presented.

“She presented so much information that I’m a bit overwhelmed. I like to stick with Proverbs chapter 30 verses 2-3: ‘I am the most ignorant of men; I do not have a man’s understanding. I have not learned wisdom, nor have I knowledge of the Holy One.’”