Free Science

2018 Censor of the Year

As Darwin himself said, in a scientific context, “A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question.” But through intimidation and silencing of views counter to evolutionary orthodoxy, such a “fair result” is just what our Censor seeks to undermine. Thank you, readers, for your nominations. For 2018, we’ve chosen what is I think our best, or rather worst, COTY yet: the omnipresent online encyclopedia, Wikipedia. Let’s review the facts briefly. Intelligent design poses an ultimate question: Does nature offer evidence of purpose and design, or not? All thoughtful people must ask themselves that. Today, the natural first recourse for the questioning individual is to turn to Google. …

2018 Censor of the Year

Every year Discovery Institute’s Center for Science & Culture recognizes a Censor of the Year, an outstanding example of a person or institution that contributed to the pro-Darwin “consensus” through intimidation, agitation, or professional retaliation. The 2018 Winner is…

Princeton Faculty Adopts Statement Affirming Commitment to Freedom of Expression

Because the University is committed to free and open inquiry in all matters, it guarantees all members of the University community the broadest possible latitude to speak, write, listen, challenge, and learn. Except insofar as limitations on that freedom are necessary to the functioning of the University, the University fully respects and supports the freedom of all members of the University community “to discuss any problem that presents itself.”

The “Teach the Controversy” Controversy

In 2000, my coauthors and I published an article proposing that public schools would violate no constitutional prohibition (and would improve science education) by permitting biology teachers to ―teach the controversy‖ concerning biological evolution.1 This proposal generated substantial academic commentary.2 As this article details, members of the United States Congress and education officials in a few states have expressed some support for the idea. However, most academic commentators have accused the authors of substituting a renamed but substantially equivalent form of ― creationism in an attempt to circumvent existing law. Others have accused the proponents of hijacking perfectly respectable concepts—like academic freedom or viewpoint neutrality — for disreputable purposes, such as advancing religion. This article will recount the reaction to the proposal to ― teach the controversy‖ and will respond to the primary arguments raised against it. Read More ›

Is Science Democratic?

A recent Zogby International poll found that 65 percent of Ohioans believe “Biology teachers should teach Darwin’s theory of evolution, but also the scientific evidence against it.” Only 19 percent favored biology teachers teaching just Darwin’s theory and only that evidence which supports it.