Apparently not.
Being somewhat more critical and often reactionary than some of my
colleagues, I would have to say it is more than simply shameful or
factually ill-advised. It is simultaneously horrifying, and disgusting, and
yet strangely not surprising. Of course, I reside in Kansas, whose
thoroughly rotten philosophical core leads to such activities on a daily
basis, so I have become unfortunately accustomed to such incredible
short-sightedness.
The farce that is "intelligent design" speaks, or rather fails abjectly to
speak, for itself, and one would think that the Smithsonian crew would see
that it is far more than a standard favor for a donor. Then again, you
might also think it would occur to them to wonder why such an organization
would donate money to the Smithsonian in the first place, given that it
rejects everything for which the National Museum of Natural History stands.
Perhaps to gain a soapbox for their point of view from a respected
position, which they hope will undermine the validity of the purpose of
that very position? Didn't we have a discussion about this recently
concerning a Smithsonian researcher using his influence improperly to plant
an ID paper in a scientific journal? Coincidence? I doubt it.
The most interesting thing about the whole topic to me, given that I read
about it every week in my local paper, is that the "discussion" or the
"battleground", if you will, is completely one sided. Scientists and anyone
intelligent enough to grasp the concept of evolution do not waste much time
defending their position, because there is nothing to defend against. The
central concern is that the majority of our population is "challenged"
enough to accept belief in whatever they are told, and especially whatever
they are told the most often, rather like an urban myth gotten out of hand.
Since it is the ID proponents who are currently speaking the loudest and
most fervently, irrespective of the scientific or philosophical validity of
their beliefs, many will be swayed into foolishness whether or not they can
understand evolutionary theory.
Where it really stabs home for me is the undermining of the education of
our children, which is already problematic enough. I give adults the
benefit of the doubt that they are capable of making their own decisions,
whether or not I agree with their conclusions. But children should not be
forced into this arena until they have the freedom and capacity to
understand what is being proposed and counter proposed.
All the above should be considered my personal and biased opinion, which
has nothing to do with my institution or the public opinion of the State of
Kansas.
Mark Janzen
Registrar/Collections Manager
Edwin A. Ulrich Museum of Art
Martin H. Bush Outdoor Sculpture Collection
Wichita State University
(316)978-5850
martin weiss
<mweiss@NYSCIENCE
.ORG> To
Sent by: Museum [log in to unmask]
discussion list cc
<[log in to unmask]
SE.LSOFT.COM> Subject
Smithsonian to Co Sponsor
Intelligent Design Movie
05/28/2005 02:58
PM
Please respond to
Museum discussion
list
<[log in to unmask]
SE.LSOFT.COM>
Mr Kremer, and Smithsonian, have you no shame!
May 28, 2005
Smithsonian to Screen a Movie That Makes a Case Against Evolution
By JOHN SCHWARTZ
Fossils at the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History
have been used to prove the theory of evolution. Next month the museum will
play host to a film intended to undercut evolution.
The Discovery Institute, a group in Seattle that supports an alternative
theory, "intelligent design," is announcing on its Web site that it and the
director of the museum "are happy to announce the national premiere and
private evening reception" on June 23 for the movie, "The Privileged
Planet: The Search for Purpose in the Universe."
The film is a documentary based on a 2004 book by Guillermo Gonzalez, an
assistant professor of astronomy at Iowa State University, and Jay W.
Richards, a vice president of the Discovery Institute, that makes the case
for the hand of a creator in the design of Earth and the universe.
News of the Discovery Institute's announcement appeared on a blog
maintained by Denyse O'Leary, a proponent of the intelligent design theory,
who called it "a stunning development." But a museum spokesman, Randall
Kremer, said the event should not be taken as support for the views
expressed in the film. "It is incorrect for anyone to infer that we are
somehow endorsing the video or the content of the video," he said.
The museum, he said, offers its Baird Auditorium to many organizations and
corporations in return for contributions - in the case of the Discovery
Institute, $16,000.
When the language of the Discovery Institute's Web site was read to him,
with its suggestion of support, Mr. Kremer said, "We'll have to look into
that."
He added, "We're happy to receive this contribution from the Discovery
Institute to further our scientific research."
The president of the Discovery Institute, Bruce Chapman, said his
organization approached the museum through its public relations company and
the museum staff asked to see the film. "They said that they liked it very
much - and not only would they have the event at the museum, but they said
they would co-sponsor it," he recalled. "That was their suggestion. Of
course we're delighted."
Mr. Kremer said he heard about the event only on Thursday. He added that
staff members viewed the film before approving the event to make sure that
it complied with the museum's policy, which states that "events of a
religious or partisan political nature" are not permitted, along with
personal events such as weddings, or fund-raisers, raffles and cash bars.
It also states that "all events at the National Museum of Natural History
are co-sponsored by the museum."
Evolution has become a major battleground in the culture wars, with bitter
debates in legislatures and school boards, national parks and museums.
Although Charles Darwin's theory is widely viewed as having been proved by
fossil records and modern biological phenomena, it is challenged by those
who say that it is flawed and that alternatives need to be taught.
When asked whether the announcement on the Discovery Institute's Web site
meant to imply that the museum supports the film and the event, Mr. Chapman
replied:
"We are not implying in any sense that they endorsed the content, but they
are co-sponsoring it, and we are delighted. We're not claiming anything
more than that. They certainly didn't say, 'We're really warming up to
intelligent design, and therefore we're going to sponsor this.' "
* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy
Search Corrections RSS Help Contact Us Back to Top
--
Martin Weiss, Ph.D
Vice President, Science
New York Hall of Science
47-01 111 th Street
Corona, New York 11368
718 699 0005 x 356
========================================================= 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).
|
