Icons of Evolution

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Copy of the cover of Icons of Evolution, showing a representation of hominid evolution that is discredited. Hominid evolution is Wells' ultimate icon

Icons of Evolution is a controversial book by the Intelligent Design advocate and fellow of the Discovery Institute, Jonathan Wells, and a 2002 video about the book. In it, Wells attempts to overthrow the paradigm of evolution by attacking how it is taught contending that the 10 case studies used to illustrate and teach evolution are flawed. Many in the scientific community have strongly criticised the book and its claims that schoolchildren are deliberately misled and its conclusions as to the evidentiary status of the theory of evolution, which is considered by biologists to be the central unifying paradigm of biology [1],[2].

Several of the scientists whose work is sourced in the book have written rebuttals to Wells, stating that they were quoted out of context, that their work has been misrepresented, or that it does not imply Wells' conclusions.

The response of the single publisher named by Wells as having revised textbooks on the basis of his work has been condemned by Steven Schafersman, President of Texas Citizens for Science, a pro-evolution organization[3] [4].

1 Unification Church
2 Wells' Icons
3 Response of the scientific community to Icons
4 Icons of Evolution video
5 References
6 External links
- 6.1 Pro-Wells
- 6.2 Websites critical of Wells

[edit] Unification Church

Wells, a member of the Unification Church, has attracted criticism directed at his religious background. In a statement made several years prior to the publication of Icons of Evolution, Wells wrote:

Father's (Sun Myung Moon's) words, my studies, and my prayers convinced me that I should devote my life to destroying Darwinism, just as many of my fellow Unificationists had already devoted their lives to destroying Marxism. When Father chose me (along with about a dozen other seminary graduates) to enter a Ph.D. program in 1978, I welcomed the opportunity to prepare myself for battle. [5]

Wells' has responded to critics who focus on his faith:

Because of its profound and harmful consequences for religion, science and culture, I decided to devote my life to criticizing this philosophy and destroying its domination of our educational system.

That was, and still is, my motivation. I have never concealed it.

The question is: How relevant is my motivation? A zealous prosecutor may be committed to bringing down organized crime, but his commitment may be motivated by any number of things--such as a righteous devotion to justice, or a self-serving desire for personal advancement. Once he’s in the courtroom, however, the only thing that really matters is the evidence. The mob’s lawyers can attack the prosecutor’s motivations all they want, but if they can’t refute his facts, their clients may be convicted. In science, too, what matters is the evidence.

Darwinism’s defenders often claim that nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. But this is like a defense attorney telling a jury that nothing makes sense except in the light of his arguments. Ultimately, the jury must reach their verdict on the basis of the facts before them. So it is in science. Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evidence. That is why the icons of evolution are so vigorously defended--even to the point of attacking my motivations. [6]

[edit] Wells' Icons

Wells' ten icons are:

A pdf version of an article written by Wells summarising his icons can be found here. A pdf of one of the most detailed critiques can be found here.

[edit] Response of the scientific community to Icons

The response of those in the scientific community who have taken the time to reply to Wells' polemic attack on the teaching of evolution has been to roundly reject his claims and conclusion.

Nick Matzke wrote that: "Icons of Evolution makes a travesty of the notion of honest scholarship", and that "Icons contains numerous instances of unfair distortions of scientific opinion, generated by the pseudoscientific tactics of selective citation of scientists and evidence, quote-mining, and "argumentative sleight-of-hand", the last meaning Wells's tactic of padding his topical discussions with incessant, biased editorializing" ^[1].

Dave Wisker wrote of Chapter 8: "The general reader is done a great disservice by this chapter in Icons of Evolution. Jonathan Wells does not sufficiently address the biographical or scientific literature on Darwin's Finches to enable the reader to make an informed decision regarding his argument. He writes, with exquisite irony, "It makes one wonder how much evidence there really is for Darwin's theory". Since, as we have seen, Wells avoids most of it regarding Darwin's Finches, one wonders how much evidence there is to support his book"^[2].

Of the motive of Wells' book Alan D. Gishlick wrote: "It is clear from Wells's treatment of the "icons" and his grading scheme that his interest is not to improve the teaching of evolution, but rather to teach anti-evolutionism. Under Wells's scheme, teachers would be hostile to evolution as part of biology instruction. Wells and his allies hope that this would open the door to alternatives to evolution (such as "intelligent design") without actually having to support them with science", and "In conclusion, the scholarship of Icons is substandard and the conclusions of the book are unsupported. In fact, despite his touted scientific credentials, Wells doesn't produce a single piece of original research to support his position. Instead, Wells parasitizes on other scientists' legitimate work"^[3].

These specific rejections stand beside the already broader response of the scientific community in overwhelmingly rejecting intelligent design^[4] as a valid scientific theory, instead seeing it as pseudoscience^[5].

[edit] Icons of Evolution video

In 2002, a 75-minute video titled Icons Of Evolution and directed by Bryan Boorujy was released by Discovery Institute (ASIN: 0972043314). In it, Wells discusses the ideas presented in the book.

The video was mentioned in testimony during Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District by plaintiff Bryan Rehm. Rehm testified that Alan Bonsell, then-chairman of the board's curriculum committee, asked them to watch "Icons of Evolution" after teachers expressed concern that Bonsell did not believe in evolution and wished to see classroom discussions of evolution balanced "fifty-fifty" with creationism.

[edit] References

^ Icon of Obfuscation Jonathan Wells's book Icons of Evolution and why most of what it teaches about evolution is wrong Nick Matzke. Talk.Origins Archive
^ Jonathan Wells and Darwin's Finches Dave Wisker. Talk.Origins Archive, 2002
^ Icons of Evolution? Why much of what Jonathan Wells writes about evolution is wrong Alan D. Gishlick. National Center for Science Education
^ See: 1) List of scientific societies rejecting intelligent design 2) Kitzmiller v. Dover page 83. The Discovery Institute's Dissent From Darwin Petition has been signed by about 500 scientists. The AAAS, the largest association of scientists in the U.S., has 120,000 members, and firmly rejects ID. More than 70,000 Australian scientists and educators condemn teaching of intelligent design in school science classes. List of statements from scientific professional organizations on the status intelligent design and other forms of creationism.
^ National Science Teachers Association, a professional association of 55,000 science teachers and administrators in a 2005 press release: "We stand with the nation's leading scientific organizations and scientists, including Dr. John Marburger, the president's top science advisor, in stating that intelligent design is not science

[edit] External links

[edit] Pro-Wells

[edit] Websites critical of Wells

Peppered moth

Biology

Overview, ecology, and genetics | Evolution of

Writers and researchers

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../i/c/o/Icons_of_Evolution_ce1e.html"

Category: Intelligent design books