Thank you, David, Lois, Stephen, Martin &--for such great posts. 

The Smithsonian Institution represents authority and excellence--especially
outside the DC area and overseas. SI's internal churnings and changes--its
human dimensions--are more obvious to those of us closer to home. They were
astute in backing away from any suggestion of sponsorship.

Several articles on the Discovery Institute website boast of SI's
acceptance of the ID program and imply SI's approval. Recognized scientific
and educational organizations would not need to "enlarge" upon the meaning
of a showing at NMNH, and would simply announce it as a scheduled event.
Anyone going to the Discovery Institute web pages would only get that
organization's spin on the film showing. 

ID isn't baseball, but rather an unverifiable belief system that Discovery
Institute asserts penetrates recognized phenomenon.Oh--and there are plenty
of observable physical principles at work in baseball--as everyone
knows--and all kinds of insects can be identified at a ballpark.
When I pray for a hit, I pray for the laws of physics to come together
intelligently--for my team. 

Rebecca Trussell

> [Original Message]
> From: David E. Haberstich <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: 6/2/2005 3:13:37 AM
> Subject: Re: ID Movie at Smithsonian
>
> In a message dated 5/31/2005 5:48:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
> << Perhaps the National Museum of American
>  History would provide the appropriate venue, in that case, not the
National
>  Museum of Natural History which unequivocally recognizes the  the
>  scientific method for the proving of theories.  >>
>
> Let me begin by saying I'm not singling out this quote to offer a
specific 
> argument.  I was just searching through all the messages on this topic to
find a 
> convenient point of departure.  And, although I work at the Smithsonian,
this 
> isn't a hot topic of discussion in my circle--in fact, I've heard zilch
about 
> it at the Smithsonian.  As in many areas, all I know is what I read on 
> Museum-L!
>
> I no longer know what's "appropriate" for the Museum of Natural History.  
> After all, not too long ago they hosted a major exhibition on
baseball--how 
> "scientific" was that?!!  Precedent for "inappropriate" programs has
already been 
> set.  The ID movie event may well turn out to be a major PR gaffe, since 
> perception certainly is important--or perhaps a lot of people are making
a bigger 
> deal out of it than it really is, and perhaps generating controversy is 
> precisely what the ID group has as part of its agenda.  Perhaps they hope
to provoke 
> scientists and defenders of the evolution establishment (if you will)
into 
> sounding intolerant of competing ideas.  Just a thought.  
>
> As far as the scheduled event is concerned, some of the messages indicate 
> that people are forgetting that it's a private, invitation-only affair,
and the 
> general museum public will know nothing about it--they're not going to
think 
> the Smithsonian is endorsing the views expressed by the movie or its
sponsoring 
> organization because they will be blissfully unaware--unless, of course,
the 
> anti-ID forces raise a sufficiently huge fuss.
>
> I'm wondering (and I'll have to inform myself, since I'm truly writing
out of 
> ignorance) if the money accompanying this event is really a "donation." 
The 
> program has the earmarks of a rental of the facility rather than a
donation.  
> I would guess that it's going to be held in the evening, after the museum 
> closes to the public, and may be accompanied by a reception for the
invited 
> guests.  If so, programs of a similar format happen all the time, and
occurred long 
> before the current Smithsonian administration, with its aggressive
emphasis on 
> fund-raising, came into power.  
>
> On one hand, any museum needs to be careful about the outside "sponsored" 
> events and programs it allows to use its facilities, and it needs to be
cautious 
> about the donations it accepts and the strings that may be attached, lest
such 
> acceptances be perceived as endorsements.  On the other, misperceptions
can 
> easily be blown out of proportion.  And I really don't know what 
> "co-sponsorship" means, especially in this case, since co-sponsorship
certainly would seem 
> to imply at least a limited stamp of approval.  It might be safer just to 
> "rent" space to any and all, without regard to agenda, ideology, or 
> appropriateness, in a blatant attempt to raise funds--while making a hard
distinction between 
> that kind of business decision and the programs, exhibitions, etc. which
the 
> museum wholeheartedly supports and endorses as part of its mission.  To 
> "co-sponsor" projects with which the institution disagrees or which it
cannot 
> endorse is asking for trouble.  
>
> David Haberstich   
>
> =========================================================
> Important Subscriber Information:
>
> The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail
message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should
read "help" (without the quotes).
>
> If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
[log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff
Museum-L" (without the quotes).

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).