User:GodBlessYou2/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User:GodBlessYou2

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by GodBlessYou2 (talk | contribs) at 21:46, 8 March 2017 (→‎=Additional material). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Proposed new section, in Creation-evolution controversy article, recommended placement below "Appeal of Consequence," subsection 4.6,

Appeals to Scientific Consensus

The vast majority of the scientific community and academia supports evolutionary theory as the only explanation that can fully account for observations in the fields of biology, paleontology, molecular biology, genetics, anthropology, and others.[1][2][3][4][5] (See Level of support for evolution.)

Counterargument
Some scientists argue that trust in science hinges on the ability of scientists to assert a consensus view.

This consensus is so embedded in academia that some critics believe it has created a chilling effect on scientists who might raise questions regarding the adequacy of evolutionary theory.[6] For example, sociologist Rodney Stark has also asserted that a "fear of censure"[7] exists such that any questions regarding the adequacy of evolution may be perceived as support for creationism.[8] In Ben Stein's much publicized documentary Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed the alleged discrimination against scientists who question evolution theory is presented as a major obstacle serious engagement with the theory of Intelligent design. In the film, Stein interviewed several academics, including biologist Richard Sternberg, and astrobiologist Guillermo Gonzalez, who claimed, according to the Toledo Blade that "their careers were derailed for failing to follow the party line on evolution."[6] Similarly, Jerry Bergman claims he has documented hundreds of cases of scientists "whose careers have been capsized for doubting Darwin." [6][9]

How many scientists does it take to establish a consensus? And how do we know that the group claiming to have the expertise to evaluate the evidence in support of a specific hypothesis actually have more expertise (and wisdom) than those who also claim to have expertise and yet disagree with the "established consensus"? In essence, an "appeal to authority" is only as good as the omnipotence of the authority.

The claim that academics are systematically punished for voicing doubts about evolution has been dismissed and refuted by many leading scientists and organizations.[10][11] In response to Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, the National Center for Science Education created a Expelled Exposed[12], a website with multiple resources criticizing the film including expanded biographical material on each of the six academics interviewed in the film who alleged that they had been discriminated against because of their views. Similarly, an article in Scientific American asserts that Stein provided only a "selective retelling" of Richard Sternberg's role with the Smithsonian Institution. The film failed to disclose, for example, that Sternberg's departure was planned before the controversy erupted over his decision to publish a paper on paper intelligent design by Steven Meyer.[13] Stein's assertion of widespread prejudice against scientists who hold religious beliefs was also dismissed by examples of the "[t]housands of other biologists across the U.S. who all know evolution to be true also still religious."[13] In a 2006 article published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation, a group of scientists argued that the claim that “persecuted scientist against the establishment” allegation made by creationists is a "hoax.".[14]

References

  1. ^ Myers, PZ (2006-06-18). "Ann Coulter: No evidence for evolution?". Pharyngula. scienceblogs.com. Retrieved 2006-11-18.
  2. ^ The National Science Teachers Association's position statement on the teaching of evolution.
  3. ^ IAP Statement on the Teaching of Evolution Joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the United Kingdom's Royal Society (PDF file)
  4. ^ From the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the world's largest general scientific society: 2006 Statement on the Teaching of Evolution (PDF file), AAAS Denounces Anti-Evolution Laws
  5. ^ Fact, Fancy, and Myth on Human Evolution, Alan J. Almquist, John E. Cronin, Current Anthropology, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Jun., 1988), pp. 520–522
  6. ^ a b c Yonke, David (2008-04-28). "Expelled: Intelligent design film fuels debate over how life came to be". Toledo Blade. Retrieved 7 January 2014.
  7. ^ Stark, Rodney (September 2004). "Fact, Fable, and Darwin". One America. Retrieved 31 December 2014. Popper's tribulations illustrate an important basis for the victory of Darwinism: A successful appeal for a united front on the part of scientists to oppose religious opposition has had the consequence of silencing dissent within the scientific community. The eminent observer Everett Olson notes that there is 'a generally silent group' of biological scientists 'who tend to disagree with much of the current thought' about evolution, but who remain silent for fear of censure.
  8. ^ Stark, Rodney (2003). For The Glory of God: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-hunts and the End of Slavery. Princeton University Press. p. 176. My reluctance to pursue these matters is based on my experience that nothing causes greater panic among many of my colleagues than any criticism of evolution. They seem to fear that someone might mistake them for Creationists if they even remain in the same room while such talk is going on.
  9. ^ Jerry Bergman. Slaughter of the Dissidents: The Shocking Truth about Killing the Careers of Darwin Doubters, 2nd edition, April 2011, 422 pages, Leafcutter Press.
  10. ^ Catsoulis, Jeanette Catsoulis (April 18, 2008.). "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed Movie Review". New York Times. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |dead-url= (help)
  11. ^ Gefter, Amanda (12 April 2008). "Warning! They've Got Designs on You". New Scientist. 198 (2651). London, England: Reed Business Information, Ltd.: 46. Bibcode:2008NewSc.198...46S. doi:10.1016/S0262-4079(08)61555-9.
  12. ^ "Expelled Exposed". National Center for Science Education. Retrieved December 31, 2014.
  13. ^ a b Rennie, John; Mirsky, Steve (April 16, 2008). "Six Things in Expelled That Ben Stein Doesn't Want You to Know...about intelligent design and evolution". Scientific American. Retrieved December 31, 2014.
  14. ^ "Another plea often articulated by ID proponents is the idea that there is a community of ID scientists undergoing persecution by the science establishment for their revolutionary scientific ideas. A search through PubMed fails to find evidence of their scholarship within the peer-reviewed scientific literature. In the original Wedge document, a key part of the plan to displace evolutionary biology was a program of experimental science and publication of the results. That step has evidently been skipped." Attie, A. D.; Sober, E.; Numbers, R. L.; Amasino, R. M.; Cox, B.; Berceau, T.; Powell, T.; Cox, M. M. (2006). "Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action" (Full free text). Journal of Clinical Investigation. 116 (5): 1134–1138. doi:10.1172/JCI28449. PMC 1451210. PMID 16670753.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:GodBlessYou2/sandbox&oldid=769331733"