Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Leaked PBS Memo Reveals Improper Political Agenda
Discovery Institute via US Newswire ^ | 09/27/2001 | Discovery Institute

Posted on 09/27/2001 7:43:35 AM PDT by 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


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-298 next last
To: Northman
A Scientific Dissent on Darwinism

"I am skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."

Henry F.Schaefer: Director, Center for Computational
Quantum Chemistry: U. of Georgia • Fred Sigworth: Prof.
of Cellular & Molecular Physiology- Grad. School: Yale
U. • Philip S. Skell: Emeritus Prof. Of Chemistry: NAS
member • Frank Tipler: Prof. of Mathematical Physics:
Tulane U. • Robert Kaita: Plasma Physics Lab: Princeton
U. • Michael Behe: Prof. of Biological Science: Lehigh
U. • Walter Hearn: PhD Biochemistry-U of Illinois •
Tony Mega: Assoc. Prof. of Chemistry: Whitworth
College • Dean Kenyon: Prof. Emeritus of Biology: San
Francisco State U. • Marko Horb: Researcher, Dept. of
Biology & Biochemistry: U. of Bath, UK • Daniel Kubler:
Asst. Prof. of Biology: Franciscan U. of Steubenville •
David Keller: Assoc. Prof. of Chemistry: U. of New
Mexico • James Keesling: Prof. of Mathematics: U. of
Florida • Roland F. Hirsch: PhD Analytical Chemistry-U.
of Michigan • Robert Newman: PhD Astrophysics-Cornell
U. • Carl Koval: Prof., Chemistry & Biochemistry: U. of
Colorado, Boulder • Tony Jelsma: Prof. of Biology:
Dordt College • William A.Dembski: PhD Mathematics-U.
of Chicago: • George Lebo: Assoc. Prof. of Astronomy:
U. of Florida • Timothy G. Standish: PhD Environmental
Biology-George Mason U. • James Keener: Prof. of
Mathematics & Adjunct of Bioengineering: U. of Utah •
Robert J. Marks: Prof. of Signal & Image Processing: U.
of Washington • Carl Poppe: Senior Fellow: Lawrence
Livermore Laboratories • Siegfried Scherer: Prof. of
Microbial Ecology: Technische Universitaet Muenchen •
Gregory Shearer: Internal Medicine, Research: U. of
California, Davis • Joseph Atkinson: PhD Organic
Chemistry-M.I.T.: American Chemical Society, member •
Lawrence H. Johnston: Emeritus Prof. of Physics: U. of
Idaho • Scott Minnich: Prof., Dept of Microbiology,
Molecular Biology & Biochem: U. of Idaho • David A.
DeWitt: PhD Neuroscience-Case Western U. • Theodor
Liss: PhD Chemistry-M.I.T. • Braxton Alfred: Emeritus
Prof. of Anthropology: U. of British Columbia • Walter
Bradley: Prof. Emeritus of Mechanical Engineering:
Texas A & M • Paul D. Brown: Asst. Prof. of
Environmental Studies: Trinity Western U. (Canada) •
Marvin Fritzler: Prof. of Biochemistry & Molecular
Biology: U. of Calgary, Medical School • Theodore
Saito: Project Manager: Lawrence Livermore
Laboratories • Muzaffar Iqbal: PhD Chemistry-U. of
Saskatchewan: Center for Theology the Natural
Sciences • William S. Pelletier: Emeritus Distinguished
Prof. of Chemistry: U. of Georgia, Athens • Keith
Delaplane: Prof. of Entomology: U. of Georgia • Ken
Smith: Prof. of Mathematics: Central Michigan U. •
Clarence Fouche: Prof. of Biology: Virginia Intermont
College • Thomas Milner: Asst. Prof. of Biomedical
Engineering: U. of Texas, Austin • Brian J.Miller: PhD
Physics-Duke U. • Paul Nesselroade: Assoc. Prof. of
Psychology: Simpson College • Donald F.Calbreath: Prof.
of Chemistry: Whitworth College • William P. Purcell:
PhD Physical Chemistry-Princeton U. • Wesley Allen:
Prof. of Computational Quantum Chemistry: U. of
Georgia • Jeanne Drisko: Asst. Prof., Kansas Medical
Center: U. of Kansas, School of Medicine • Chris Grace:
Assoc. Prof. of Psychology: Biola U. • Wolfgang Smith:
Prof. Emeritus-Mathematics: Oregon State U. • Rosalind
Picard: Assoc. Prof. Computer Science: M.I.T. • Garrick
Little: Senior Scientist, Li-Cor: Li-Cor • John L.
Omdahl: Prof. of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology: U.
of New Mexico • Martin Poenie: Assoc. Prof. of
Molecular Cell & Developmental Bio: U. of Texas,
Austin • Russell W.Carlson: Prof. of Biochemistry &
Molecular Biology: U. of Georgia • Hugh Nutley: Prof.
Emeritus of Physics & Engineering: Seattle Pacific U. •
David Berlinski: PhD Philosophy-Princeton:
Mathematician, Author • Neil Broom: Assoc. Prof.,
Chemical & Materials Engineeering: U. of Auckland •
John Bloom: Assoc. Prof., Physics: Biola U. • James
Graham: Professional Geologist, Sr. Program Manager:
National Environmental Consulting Firm • John
Baumgardner: Technical Staff, Theoretical Division: Los
Alamos National Laboratory • Fred Skiff: Prof. of
Physics: U. of Iowa • Paul Kuld: Assoc. Prof.,
Biological Science: Biola U. • Yongsoon Park: Senior
Research Scientist: St. Luke's Hospital, Kansas City •
Moorad Alexanian: Prof. of Physics: U. of North
Carolina, Wilmington • Donald Ewert: Director of
Research Administration: Wistar Institute • Joseph W.
Francis: Assoc. Prof. of Biology: Cedarville U. •
Thomas Saleska: Prof. of Biology: Concordia U. • Ralph
W. Seelke: Prof. & Chair of Dept. of Biology & Earth
Sciences: U. of Wisconsin, Superior • James G. Harman:
Assoc. Chair, Dept. of Chemistry & Biochemistry: Texas
Tech U. • Lennart Moller: Prof. of Environmental
Medicine, Karolinska Institute: U. of Stockholm •
Raymond G. Bohlin: PhD Molecular & Cell Biology-U. of
Texas: • Fazale R. Rana: PhD Chemistry-Ohio U. •
Michael Atchison: Prof. of Biochemistry: U. of
Pennsylvania, Vet School • William S. Harris: Prof. of
Basic Medical Sciences: U. of Missouri, Kansas City •
Rebecca W. Keller: Research Prof., Dept. of Chemistry:
U. of New Mexico • Terry Morrison: PhD Chemistry-
Syracuse U. • Robert F. DeHaan: PhD Human Development-
U. of Chicago • Matti Lesola: Prof., Laboratory of
Bioprocess Engineering: Helsinki U. of Technology •
Bruce Evans: Assoc. Prof. of Biology: Huntington
College • Jim Gibson: PhD Biology-Loma Linda U. • David
Ness: PhD Anthropology-Temple U. • Bijan Nemati: Senior
Engineer: Jet Propulsion Lab (NASA) • Edward T.
Peltzer: Senior Research Specialist: Monterey Bay
Research Institute • Stan E. Lennard: Clinical Assoc.
Prof. of Surgery: U. of Washington • Rafe Payne: Prof.
& Chair, Biola Dept. of Biological Sciences: Biola U. •
Phillip Savage: Prof. of Chemical Engineering: U. of
Michigan • Pattle Pun: Prof. of Biology: Wheaton
College • Jed Macosko: Postdoctoral Researcher-
Molecular Biology: U. of California, Berkeley • Daniel
Dix: Assoc. Prof. of Mathematics: U. of South
Carolina • Ed Karlow: Chair, Dept. of Physics: LaSierra
U. • James Harbrecht: Clinical Assoc. Prof.: U. of
Kansas Medical Center • Robert W. Smith: Prof. of
Chemistry: U. of Nebraska, Omaha • Robert DiSilvestro:
PhD Biochemistry-Texas A & M U. • David Prentice:
Prof., Dept. of Life Sciences: Indiana State U. • Walt
Stangl: Assoc. Prof. of Mathematics: Biola U. •
Jonathan Wells: PhD Molecular & Cell Biology-U. of
California, Berkeley: • James Tour: Chao Prof. of
Chemistry: Rice U. • Todd Watson: Asst. Prof. of Urban
& Community Forestry: Texas A & M U. • Robert Waltzer:
Assoc. Prof. of Biology: Belhaven College • Vincente
Villa: Prof. of Biology: Southwestern U. • Richard
Sternberg: Pstdoctoral Fellow, Invertebrate Biology:
Smithsonian Institute • James Tumlin: Assoc. Prof. of
Medicine: Emory U. • Charles Thaxton: PhD Physical
Chemistry-Iowa State U.

21 posted on 09/27/2001 8:25:38 AM PDT by Twrch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

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

New derogatory word for "Christians"--taliban. Very original.

It's my understanding that evolution is still the ONLY theory taught in the educational system. I'm in the "bible belt" and thats certainly the only theory my kids are being taught.(In school that is.) Doesn't sound like the desire the take BACK education could be the agenda here. Maybe they're pushing to have the word THEORY removed from evolution. Since there's so much proof and all........

22 posted on 09/27/2001 8:27:11 AM PDT by dubyagee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: proud American in Canada
This issue was settled once and for all many years ago. My understanding of the outcome of all the court battles is that for lack of scientific or other bonified evidence, both theories would be taught and not refuted. What PBS is doing is against the law as I understand it.
23 posted on 09/27/2001 8:27:27 AM PDT by Cold Heat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: proud American in Canada
Carbon dating ican only be done on organic material. Dating on rock samples and such is done by looking at an element that decays into another element and making an assumption based on how much of the latter element is present that it took x amount of years for the former element to decay so it's x years old. Unfortuantely they assume that the only way the latter element can be present is by decay but they don't actually know what the proportions of the elements are because again, nobody was there to test the sample after it's formation. What most people want to believe is that these scientist are objective people when many of the evolutionary scientists are avowed athiests. I'm not advocating either position, but I would prefer it to be an honest discussion with assumptions being placed on the table for all to see.
24 posted on 09/27/2001 8:28:52 AM PDT by Nyralthotep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: realpatriot71
Yes, but you are talking micro-evolution not macro evolution. Macro-evolution is the jump from one species to another, the belief that a bird came out of a lizards shell is one example of a macro-evolution idea.
25 posted on 09/27/2001 8:31:14 AM PDT by Nyralthotep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Only a sincere desire to take back education from the Taliban creationists, so that kids can grow up able to think rationally. Horrible thought, huh? However, if it were up to me, I'd take the gov't out of the education business altogether, and let the free market run the schools. Better, cheaper, and free from coersion too.

Yeah, public education is such a hotbed of creationism! (/sarcasm)

If evolution is a fact....why are they resorting to propaganda to push it?

26 posted on 09/27/2001 8:31:43 AM PDT by Politically Correct
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dubyagee
No agenda here, is there?

Is there an agenda when people are so ignorant of the idea of evolution that they ask, "If we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" Is there an agenda when people adopt so luddite a stance to science that they root for the gaps in our knowledge to expand, that they interpret every ambiguity or plus-or-minus error bar in measurement as absolute ignorance? I suppose the ultimate victory for such people would be to wake up in a world in which all scientific knowledge to date had been lost.

That is the science of ID. It offers nothing but the message that we know nothing and can never know anything so we might as well assume everything is supernatural. Sounds like an agenda to me.

I already know that the premise behind the agenda is wrong. And I'm not impressed with willful ignorance and lawyerly deceit as attempted persuasion.

27 posted on 09/27/2001 8:33:56 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Nora
Didn't Newt & company say they were going to defund PBS after the 1994 elections?

I liked (and voted for) the Republicans when they talked like that....

28 posted on 09/27/2001 8:37:20 AM PDT by Jethro Tull
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rvoitier
"Evolution makes me wonder that if we came from apes, then why are they still here? "

Sometimes when I read things like this at this site, I wonder how so many people with the IQ of apes manage to use a computer.

Perhaps if you took some time to learn a little about evolutionary theory, to study archeology, to try to understand the EVIDENCE and mechanisms of evolution, you wouldn't pose stupid questions like that one.

All the creationists out there could stand to do the same. Isn't it about time for you people to face reality and understand that the story of creation is a FABLE? I swear, sometimes you Bible-thumpers remind me a lot of Clintonites - "Don't confuse me with facts! What am I going to believe, my eyes, or some guy with a funny hat?"

29 posted on 09/27/2001 8:38:50 AM PDT by Sicon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Nora
I agree-defund Public Broadcasting but you are all wet on your evolution/creation rant.
30 posted on 09/27/2001 8:41:23 AM PDT by Lion Den Dan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sicon
That "fable" as you call it is rooted in the religion of Christianity. We have something called freedom of religion in this country. Defending that freedom is not a rant. It is a right....
31 posted on 09/27/2001 8:46:13 AM PDT by Cold Heat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Lion Den Dan
ME?

I have ranted not!!!

I posted a press release on a topic I had noticed many FReepers were interested in. Other than searching to make sure it wasn't already up, I haven't even looked at the threads until this one. I feel a little obligation to visit a thread that I start.

32 posted on 09/27/2001 8:46:32 AM PDT by Nora
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Northman
Creationist is a dirty word used to smear any reasonable well articulated opponent of evolution. Frankly your wishful thinking and labels against opponents of the evolutionary theory is telling of gullibility.
33 posted on 09/27/2001 8:47:46 AM PDT by lavaroise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sicon
I could say the same to you. There are a great many Christian PHD's who were evolutionists at one time and then had a look at the evidence and saw evolution as the theory it truly is. Have you eve looked at some of the creationist theories or is your one and only true god science? I am astounded by the lack of critical thinking on this issue. It seems suspend all critical thinking in favor of knee jerk responses. What are your biases for treating creation as a fable? You obviously have them or you would not believe so strongly about the issue. That's what I'm talking about, putting your biases on the table and looking at evidences as objectively as possible. From your response about the ape iq thing, I see that as merely an ad hominem which is truly a sign of a lack of maturity since you seem to respect no other opinion but your own.
34 posted on 09/27/2001 8:49:00 AM PDT by Nyralthotep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Sicon
Isn't it about time for you people to face reality and understand that the story of creation is a FABLE?

You believe what you think and I'll believe what I think. PSB needs to stay out of it with THEIR OPINION!

35 posted on 09/27/2001 8:57:58 AM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

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

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

36 posted on 09/27/2001 9:00:18 AM PDT by Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
Ditto! that is the gist of the results of many years of court hearings. Lets let it stand and expose those who would do otherwise..
37 posted on 09/27/2001 9:01:56 AM PDT by Cold Heat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Lion Den Dan
The issue here isn't whether one theory is correct or the other. The issue here is that there is credible concrete evidence of PBS embracing a political position, and planning on how to influence policy toward their stance. Obviously, PBS has always come from the left. That's no secret. But to have a memo from the management of PBS, showing their intent, takes the opinion into the realm of indisputable fact. That is the important information from this post. I'm actually not an advocate of defunding PBS, because I enjoy some of it, but things like this need to used as evidence that it needs to be reformed.
38 posted on 09/27/2001 9:17:20 AM PDT by SoDak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Sicon
All the creationists out there could stand to do the same. Isn't it about time for you people to face reality and understand that the story of creation is a FABLE? I swear, sometimes you Bible-thumpers remind me a lot of Clintonites - "Don't confuse me with facts! What am I going to believe, my eyes, or some guy with a funny hat?"

You assume that all "Bible-thumpers" are dumb hicks who wouldn't take the time to investigate anything even if they had the intellect to do it. Such an assumption is just wrong and a cursory glance at the historic or current literature would reveal that fact. However, it is clear from your inflammatory and insulting remarks that you are more comfortable in your own formulated reality undisturbed by threatening cogent arguments.

If the evolutionists could disprove the Bible, they would do it in a minute. In frustration, they are left, like you, with ad hominem attacks and vitriolic rhetoric.

39 posted on 09/27/2001 9:18:19 AM PDT by Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-298 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson