Leaked PBS Memo Reveals Improper Political Agenda

Discovery Institute via US Newswire ^ | 09/27/2001 | Discovery Institute

[Nora]

Discovery Institute: Memo Reveals 'Evolution' Agenda

U.S. Newswire
27 Sep 6:00

Leaked PBS Memo Reveals Improper Political Agenda Behind 'Evolution' Series, Says Discovery Institute

To: National Desk, Science and Education Reporters
Contact: Mark Edwards of the Discovery Institute, 206-292-0401, ext. 107;
e-mail: medwards@discovery.org

SEATTLE, Sept. 27 /U.S. Newswire/ -- An internal PBS memo made public today reveals an improper political agenda behind WGBH/Clear Blue Sky's ongoing series "Evolution", according to the Seattle-based Discovery Institute. The memo describes how "Evolution" will be used to influence government officials and promote political action in order to shape how evolution is taught in public schools.

Dated June 15, 2001, the memo bears the title "The Evolution Controversy, Use It or Lose It: Evolution Project/WGBH Boston" The document outlines the overall goals of the ongoing PBS series Evolution and describes the marketing strategy for the series. The complete text of the PBS memo is posted at http://www.reviewevolution.com.

According to the document, which was leaked by a source within PBS, one of the goals of "Evolution" is to "co-opt existing local dialogue about teaching evolution in schools." Another goal is to "promote participation," including "getting involved with local school boards."

In addition, the document identifies "government officials" as one of the target audiences for the series, and it describes a publicity campaign accompanying the series that will include writing op-eds for newspapers and "guerilla/viral marketing."

"Clearly, one purpose of 'Evolution' is to influence Congress and school boards and to promote political action regarding how evolution is taught in public schools," says Discovery Institute President Bruce Chapman. "In fact, 'Evolution's' marketing plan seems to have the trappings of a political campaign."

"Public television is funded in part by American taxpayers, and it should be held to high standards of fairness. It is inappropriate for public broadcasting to engage in activities designed to directly influence the political process by promoting one viewpoint at the expense of others," said Chapman.

According to Discovery Institute's John West, the political agenda behind "Evolution" is made even more explicit by its enlistment of Eugenie Scott as one of the official spokespersons for the series.

Scott runs the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), an advocacy group that by its own description is dedicated to "defending the teaching of evolution in the public schools." According to the group's Web site, the NCSE provides "expert testimony for school board hearings," supplies citizens with "advice on how to organize" when "faced with local creationist challenges," and assists legal organizations that litigate "evolution/creation cases."

"The NCSE is a single-issue group that takes only one side in the political debate over evolution in public education," says West, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Seattle Pacific University. "It is inappropriate for public television to enlist NCSE's executive director as an official spokesperson for this program."

------
Founded in 1990, Discovery Institute is a non-profit, non- partisan public policy center for science, technology, regional development, environment, and defense. More information about the Institute and its activities can be found at www.discovery.org.

KEYWORDS:
SCIENCE, EDUCATION

-0-
/U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
09/27 06:00
Copyright 2001, U.S. Newswire

[PatrickHenry]

This absolutely outrageous statement only serves to show your complete lack of objectivity on the issue.

I'm entirely objective. Evolution is the only rational theory in the game. You want to put science on an equal standing with swami-lore, and you say I'm lacking in objectivity?

[Ice-D]

It most certainly is observable - try "The Beak of the Finch: A Story of Evolution in Our Time" By Jonathon Weiner, a Pulitzer Prize winning observation of evolution.

[woollyone]

"Drug and pesticide resistance. The "Evolution" series has concentrated heavily on these beneficial mutations. Maybe you should watch it."

Oh yeah, genetic engineering. Shows intellegent design huh! As in a Creator. In this case though it is man that has stepped in the place of God. Maybe you sould watch your arguments, for your a are arguing for intelleget design.

More pointedly, can you show us an example of a corn plant turning into a bean plant? After all, this is what evolutionists must be able to explain away; macroevolution.

baa

[woollyone]

"Drug and pesticide resistance. The "Evolution" series has concentrated heavily on these beneficial mutations. Maybe you should watch it."

Oh yeah, genetic engineering. Shows intellegent design huh! As in a Creator. In this case though it is man that has stepped in the place of God. Maybe you sould watch your arguments, for your a are arguing for intelleget design.

More pointedly, can you show us an example of a corn plant turning into a bean plant? After all, this is what evolutionists must be able to explain; macroevolution.

baa

[dubyagee]

- try "The Beak of the Finch: A Story of Evolution in Our Time" By Jonathon Weiner,

This is too funny. I was just about to tell you, you'd probably be getting a link about the big beaked finches or the moths that changed color. There's also a flower that morphed into a flower!!! Can you believe that one???

[Ice-D]

I know everybody has jumped all over this, but who has actually read the memo? I just finished reading it, and it seems like a marketing plan! I think this 'report' by the Discovery Institute is quite disingenuous. Here is a sample of the memo;

Science and religion can coexist. With this project we address the question of how life develops on Earth from the point of view of science, and not from the spiritual realm. Both realms can coexist side by side, but they speak to entirely different questions: one to the How, the other to the Why? Many key people who have spoken out on evolution, from Dr. Jane Goodall and Dr. Ken Miller to Pope John Paul III and Rev. Dr. Arthur Peacocke are helping us reinforce the idea that science and religion are not mutually exclusive. Belief in evolution does not challenge religious beliefs. Pope John Paulll has declared that evolution is a time-tested scientific theory that does not contradict the tenets of the Roman Catholic Church. Catholicism, conservative and reform Judaism, and many Protestant denominations such as The United Church of Christ and the Episcopal Church acknowledge that evolution is the description of a mechanism that governs the natural processes of life on Earth. Evolution does not claim to say anything about the existence of God, or about people's spiritual beliefs.

Just seems like a sensible marketing plan considering the nature of this topic.

[Ice-D]

Instead of calling it laughable, and dashing off non-sequiters, why not sensibly refute it?

[anguish]

errr.. Don't you think he's talking about things like bacteria that has developed resistance against drugs? Or are you suggesting that they too are man-made?

[f.Christian]

swampi-lore---you!

[woollyone]

"It most certainly is observable - try "The Beak of the Finch: A Story of Evolution in Our Time" By Jonathon Weiner, a Pulitzer Prize winning observation of evolution."

Again, finch's beaks may change through breeding, as my Golden Retreiver is a product of selective breeding. Can a Finch's beak turn into a pair of lips? If so, would it survive? I can also point out the exmples of the woodpecker and the Cleaner-Fish and demonstrate that it is an impossibility for these creature to have evolved naturally. Each of these two examples show intellegent design.

But can you demonstrate a finch turning into a lizzard, or a dog? That's the type of transition that is required for evolution to be believable...that a species can turn into another species.

baa

[PatrickHenry]

... there is no evidence of the first required step in the entire Evolutionary process

There is (protein molecules are formed in various natural ways) but no truly living cell has yet been produced in the lab. What of it? Are you saying that until that final step is taken, your sticking with Noah's Ark? No science is acceptable to you, until it has achieved finality? And until then, you're sticking with mythology? I suppose you won't ever visit a doctor, for anything, until all disease is conquered. Neat way to think. You happy with it?

[dubyagee]

A moth changes its colors. A bird develops a larger beak. A flower becomes a different kind of flower. I see nothing here to refute. These things in no way, shape, or form, show that given enough time a sea creature, or monkey, or anything else could eventually become a human being. Now if you had eternity, maybe.......

[Nyralthotep]

Again people with ad hominem attacks with statements like this: "since one of the most-used mantras of the Talibanic creationists is"

So do you like being called a homophobe? I cannot respect or even take seriously anyone with such blatant disrespect for other opinions. Again a sign of immaturity. I can see you are as rabid about evolution as the homosexuals are about their agendas and there is no middle ground, just dogma and insults when your opinion is questioned.

[Pete]

Here is what you said:

Only a sincere desire to take back education from the Taliban creationists

. And:

I'm entirely objective. Evolution is the only rational theory in the game. You want to put science on an equal standing with swami-lore, and you say I'm lacking in objectivity?

Comparing creationists to the Taliban and using terms like "swami-lore" are hostile and emotional statements. Ad hominem is a fallacy of logic. All of these are signs of a lack of objectivity. You may believe that you are objective but your inflammatory posture betrays your bias.

[Wm Bach]

It's not the function of the federal government to launch advocacy campaigns on local government. If you're against gun control, why are you in favor of federal government control of local government? Won't that lead to a totalitarian state too?

Gosh, I never thought about that hmmmm... hmmmmm... interesting... PBS issues a memo (I read the whole thing, I don't know what memo Discovery Institute's John West was reading, 'cuase he isn't even close.) basically saying that it's goal was to foster scientific literacy amongst some target audiences, including high school students, and basically to drum up interest in the program. The memo also states that, while it is a film about Evolution, that they have dedicated an hour of the program to the complaints of Creationists.

Yep. That equates with the federal government "controlling" local government. It's the exact same thing as coming to take away my guns. I can see why one should be alarmed. uh huh.

[WRhine]

Definition 1. an evil or lawless person, often beyond hope of redemption.

If directed at me personally I have to ask, do you know me? If directed at anyone who believes in Evolution it sounds much like a Muslim Mullah chant of "infidel" to anyone that is perceived as being a threat to their terrorist murder squads. In my opinion it you that is beyond redemption and you prove it every time you post.

[daniel boob]

Your tax dollars at work.

[VadeRetro]

That's it? That's your obesrvable evidence? And you're gonna rest your entire theory on a mere 200 alleged exaples? Darwin claimed that there would be thousands of such examples! Your 200 finds are but 1/100th of the fossil record. Actually, the number of transition examples should be almost as many at the fully mutated variety.

Those are just the vertebrates. (Admittedly, vertebrates fossilize better than do a lot of the invertebrate life forms. Nevertheless, there's a growing fossil records for invertebrates including protozoans.)

What's so "iffy" about the two hundred examples I gave you that you can excuse dithering between "not ONE" and "just ONE?" Discredit an example for me:

A comparision of Eusthenopteron, a lobe-finned fish, with Acanothostega, an early amphibian:

A Comparision of their skulls.

What's an amphibian doing with a fish head?

A Framing Narrative from Glenn R. Morton, recovering Young Earth Creationist.

[fella]

bump