Project Steve and Its Detractors

A few days ago, I blogged about Project Steve. Predictably, I ruffled some pro-creationist feathers, particularly those of M. Mitchell who commented.

So M., I'm sorry if I've offended you but this is not a "petty squabble". The reason for Project Steve is to show that a larger and much more prestigious group of scientists can be compiled that discount rather than support creationism--even while limiting themselves to those named Steve. It's a whimsical idea but as a rhetorical tool, it also sheds light on exactly what's happening here.

Creationists compile lists of scientists to cause the illusion that there is scientific merit to their positions when in fact, the opposite is true. One of the most important features of a scientific theory is that it has to be testable, i.e. it has to lead to conclusions that can be disproven. Creationism does not meet that standard as attributing the known world to God (or some other "intelligent" designer) can NEVER be tested nor proven wrong.

People have looked at the fossil record and carbon dating evidence for evolution and simply said 'God created that these findings thus giving the "illusion" that evolution is a viable conclusion.' How can a scientist possibly respond to this? Such an idea is impervious to refutation.

For this reason, the vast majority of scientists refuse to endorse creationism as science. I have no problem with including such theories in classes on religion...just not in science class.

Even one like myself who unashamedly believes in God can recognize the difference. This is no petty squabble.

Project Steve and Evolution

This post assumes that the reader believes in evolution. It's not funny otherwise and is likely insulting. There. You've been warned so I cannot be held responsible for the indignation you may experience.

The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) has embarked on Project Steve to convince evolution deniers that their list of scientists endorsing such beliefs is shall we say...deficient. To counter their list, the NCSE has attempted to compile a similar list of evolution adherents.

To be a signatory, one must have a doctorate (can be an M.D.) and be willing to sign the following statement endorsing evolution:

Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to "intelligent design," to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools.

Oh, and you have to be named Steve or some variant thereof (Stephen, Stephanie, Esteban, etc.)

So far, Project Steve has 860 signatories the most recent of whom is Steve Vance. Within the U.S., this would correspond to almost 54,000 scientists (1.6% Steve variants according to census figures). Two thirds of them are biologists. This is a far higher proportion than is on any list of deniers. It is also a far more prestigious group. The majority are working scientists. Many on the denier lists are not.

The NCSE hopes that when anyone shows you a list of evolution deniers, your response should be "but how many Steves are on your list!?"