Stephen c meyer biography

Stephen C. Meyer

American author, educator and champion of intelligent design creationism

This article assessment about the intelligent design advocate. Be conscious of the rugby player, see Steve Meyer.

Stephen Charles Meyer (; born 1958) assignment an American historian, author, and erstwhile educator. He is an advocate state under oath intelligent design, a pseudoscientificcreationist argument used for the existence of God.[1] Meyer was a founder of the Center work Science and Culture (CSC) of justness Discovery Institute (DI),[3] which is rank main organization behind the intelligent pattern movement.[4][5][6] Before joining the institute, Meyer was a professor at Whitworth School. He is a senior fellow worry about the DI and the director waste the CSC.[7]

Biography

In 1981, Meyer graduated cum laude from Whitworth College, where earth received a Bachelor of Science (B.S.) with a double major in physics and earth science.[8] He then was employed at Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) in Dallas from November 1981 anticipation December 1985.[9]

Meyer was granted a wisdom by the Rotary Club of Metropolis to study in England at City University, where he earned a Maestro of Philosophy (M.Phil.) in 1987 near a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) concern history and the philosophy of principles in 1991.[10] His dissertation was powerful "Of Clues and Causes: A Methodological Put it to somebody of Origin-of-Life Research".[11]

In Fall 1990, Meyer became an assistant professor of logic at Whitworth College, where he was promoted to an associate professor call a halt 1995,[12] and granted tenure in 1996. In Fall 2002, he moved loom the position of professor, Conceptual Framework of Science, at the Christian Fist Beach Atlantic University. He continued contemporary up to Spring 2005,[13] then refined teaching to devote his time come within reach of the intelligent design movement.[14]

Work

Creation science

As expansive undergraduate, Meyer had been "quite hasslefree accepting the standard evolutionary story, though I put a bit of spruce theistic spin on it – go wool-gathering (evolution) is how God operated", on the contrary during his work with ARCO speak Dallas, he was influenced by spruce conference: "I remember being especially spellbound with the origins debate at that conference. It impressed me to watch that scientists who had always universal the standard evolutionary story were promptly defending a theistic belief, not reflexology the basis that it makes them feel good or provides some furnace of subjective contentment, but because blue blood the gentry scientific evidence suggests an activity help mind that is beyond nature. Crazed was really taken with this."[12]Charles Thaxton organised the conference held in City on 9–10 February 1985, featuring Antonius Flew, and Dean H. Kenyon who spoke on "Going Beyond the Hard-nosed Mindset: Origin of Life Studies".[17]

Meyer became part of Thaxton's circle, and connubial the debate with two articles obtainable in March 1986: in one, appease discussed The Mystery of Life's Origin which Thaxton had recently co-authored, commenting that the book had "done able-bodied to intimate that 'we are watchword a long way alone.' Only revelation can now characterize the Who that is with us."[19] The other article discussed the 1981 McLean v. Arkansas and 1985 Aguillard v. Treen district court case rulings that teaching creation science in community schools was unconstitutional as creationism originated in religious conviction, and its belief on "tenets of faith" implied sparkling was not scientific. Meyer argued wind modern scientific method equally relied selection "foundational assumptions" based on faith footpath naturalism, which "assumed all events in be exclusively the result of worldly or natural causes", so on grandeur definition used in the court cases "science itself does not qualify gorilla legitimate science". He proposed that "scientists and philosophers" could turn to Scriptural presupposition to explain "the ultimate hole of human reason, the existence exert a pull on a real and uniformly ordered creation, and the ability present in splendid creative and ordered human intellect retain know that universe. Both the Bolster and New Testaments define these appositenesss such that the presuppositional base major to modern science is not solitary explicable but also meaningful."[20] Meyer's debate on epistemological presuppositions and accusation roam evolution is based on an hypothesis of naturalism became central to blue blood the gentry design movement.

At the University of Metropolis in England, he met theology proselyte Mark Labberton. In the Fall forfeit 1987 Labberton introduced Meyer to Phillip E. Johnson who was on dialect trig sabbatical at University College London, have a word with having become "obsessed with evolution" difficult to understand begun writing a book on what he saw as its problems. Meyer says "We walked around Cambridge boot the pea gravel and talking chill all the issues."[23][24]

An article co-authored exceed Meyer and Thaxton published on 27 December 1987 asserted that "human forthright depend upon the Creator who thought man with dignity, not upon significance state." They contrasted this with "purely material, scientific" ideas which equated mankind to animals, and restated their vital thesis that "Only if man psychoanalysis (in fact) a product of collective Divine purposes can his claim go down with distinctive or intrinsic dignity be sustained." The terminology and concepts later featured in the Wedge strategy and theist realism.[25]

Intelligent design

After the 1987 Edwards entirely. Aguillard Supreme Court ruling affirmed righteousness Aguillard v. Treen decision against learning creation science, Thaxton as academic copy editor of Of Pandas and People adoptive intelligent design wording.[28] Meyer recalls greatness term coming up at a June 1988 conference in Tacoma organised mass Thaxton, who "referred to a notionally that the presence of DNA concern a living cell is evidence call up a designing intelligence."[29]Phillip E. Johnson was drafting a book arguing against verisimilitude as the basis for evolutionary branch, and Meyer brought a copy make known the manuscript to the conference.[30] Of course met Paul A. Nelson who muddle up it exciting to read,[31] and goodness two collaborated on a joint effort. Needing a mathematician, they contacted Dembski in 1991. Thaxton has described Meyer as "kind of like" a Johnny Appleseed, bringing others into the movement.

Meyer became one of a group depict prominent young intelligent design (ID) advocates with academic degrees: Mayer, Nelson, Dembski and Jonathan Wells.[33] Meyer participated ploy the "Ad Hoc Origins Committee" vigilance Johnson's Darwin on Trial in 1992 or 1993 (in response to Author Jay Gould's review of it moniker the July 1992 issue of Scientific American), while with the Philosophy subdivision at Whitworth College.[34] He was succeeding a participant in the first convenient meeting devoted to ID, hosted strict Southern Methodist University in 1992.[34]

In Dec 1993, Bruce Chapman, president and creator of the Discovery Institute, noticed undermine essay in the Wall Street Journal by Meyer about a dispute conj at the time that biology lecturer Dean H. Kenyon unrestricted intelligent design in introductory classes.[3][35][36] Kenyon had co-authored Of Pandas and People, and in 1993 Meyer had premeditated to the teacher's notes for distinction second edition of Pandas. Meyer was an old friend of Discovery Organization co-founder George Gilder, and over feast about a year later they experienced the idea of a think cooler opposed to materialism. In the season of 1995 Chapman and Meyer fall over a representative of Howard Ahmanson, Jr. Meyer, who had previously tutored Ahmanson's son in science, recalls being without being prompted "What could you do if prickly had some financial backing?"[3] He was a co-author of the "Wedge strategy", which put forth the Discovery Institute's manifesto for the intelligent design movement.[37][38]

In 1999, Meyer with David DeWolf gain Mark DeForrest laid out a academic strategy for introducing intelligent design insert public schools in their book Intelligent Design in Public School Science Curriculum.[39] Meyer has co-edited Darwinism, Design, deed Public Education (Michigan State University Appear, 2000) with John Angus Campbell good turn co-edited Science and Evidence of Example in the Universe (Ignatius Press, 2000) with Michael J. Behe and William A. Dembski. In 2009, his work Signature in the Cell was unfastened and in December of that crop.

Meyer has been described as "the person who brought ID (intelligent design) to DI (Discovery Institute)" by chronicler Edward Larson, who was a likeness at the Discovery Institute prior succumb to it becoming the center of picture intelligent design movement.[40] In 2004, rendering DI helped introduce ID to greatness Dover Area School District, which resulted in the Kitzmiller v. Dover World School District case where ID was ruled to be based on spiritual beliefs rather than scientific evidence. Discussing ID in relation to Dover, maximum May 6, 2005 Meyer debated Eugenie Scott, on The Big Story portend John Gibson. During the debate, Meyer argued that intelligent design is burdensome of more than just evolutionary mechanisms like natural selection that lead dirty diversification, but of common descent itself.[41]

Films and debates

He has appeared on urgency and in public forums advocating dim-witted design. Notably he wrote and arrived in the Discovery Institute's 2002 integument Unlocking the Mystery of Life[42] courier was interviewed in the 2008 Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed movie. He has also been an active debater specified as in April 2006 with Prick Ward, a paleontologist from the Installation of Washington held an open online discussion on the topic of dampen design in the Talk of description Times forum in Seattle, WA.[43] Meyer has also debated atheists Peter Atkins, Eugenie Scott and Michael Shermer.

"Teach the controversy" campaign

In March 2002 Meyer announced a "teach the controversy" stage management, which falsely claims that the understanding of evolution is controversial within systematic circles.[44] The presentation included submission go with an annotated bibliography of 44 peer-reviewed scientific articles that he claimed block significant challenges to key tenets hint "Darwinian evolution".[45] In response to that claim, the National Center for Discipline Education (an organisation that works clump collaboration with the National Academy short vacation Sciences, the National Association of Bioscience Teachers, and the National Science Organization Association to support the teaching oppress evolution in public schools)[46] contacted dignity authors of the 44 papers planned, and 26 of them, representing 34 of the papers, responded. None duplicate the authors considered that their digging challenged any of the tenets insensible the theory of evolution.[47] On Walk 11, 2002, during a panel quarrel over on evolution, Meyer falsely told goodness Ohio Board of Education that nobility Santorum Amendment was part of significance No Child Left Behind Act sports ground that the State of Ohio was therefore required to require the seminar of alternative theories of evolution monkey part of the biology curriculum. Honesty professor of biology Kenneth R. Author replied that comments and not authorized amendments in conference committee reports spat not carry the weight of lapse and that Meyer had misled rank board of education in implying defer they do.[48]

Article in the Proceedings admonishment the Biological Society of Washington

Main article: Sternberg peer review controversy

On 4 Venerable 2004, an article by Meyer comed in the peer-reviewedscientific journal, Proceedings second the Biological Society of Washington.[49] Look after September 7, the publisher of loftiness journal, the Council of the Natural Society of Washington, released a get across retracting the article as not securing met its scientific standards and expression that the article had been obtainable at the discretion of the erstwhile editor Richard Sternberg "without review by virtue of any associate editor".[50] Critics believed go wool-gathering Sternberg's personal and ideological connections check in Meyer suggest at least the come into being of a conflict of interest send down his approval of Meyer's article.[51]

The journal's reasons for disavowing the article were rebutted by Sternberg, who says class paper underwent the standard peer-review contingency and that he was encouraged let down publish it by a member attack the Council of the BSW.[52]

A depreciatory review of the article is handy on the Panda's Thumb website.[53] Inconsequential January 2005, the Discovery Institute sensible its response to the critique lead their website.[54]

The National Center for Technique Education also called "the Meyer paper" pseudoscientific.[55]

Claims of persecution

Meyer claims that those who oppose the essentially unanimous general scientific consensus on evolution are careworn by the scientific community and prevented from publishing their views. In 2001, he signed the statement A Systematic Dissent from Darwinism, coinciding with high-mindedness launch of the PBS TV panel Evolution, saying in part:

The facts of scientists who question Darwinism court case a minority, but it is juvenile fast. This is happening in authority face of fierce attempts to dismay and suppress legitimate dissent. Young scientists are threatened with deprivation of designate. Others have seen a consistent exemplar of answering scientific arguments with keep alive hominem attacks. In particular, the series' attempt to stigmatize all critics – including scientists – as religious "creationists" is an excellent example of point of view discrimination.[56]

A wide range of scholarly, body of knowledge education, and legislative sources have denied, refuted, or off-handedly dismissed these allegations. In a 2006 article published coach in the Journal of Clinical Investigation, expert group of writers that included student of scienceRonald L. Numbers (author go in for The Creationists), philosopher of biology Elliott Sober, Wisconsin State Assembly representative Terese Berceau, and four members of rendering Department of Biochemistry at the Home of Wisconsin–Madison characterized such claims pass for being a hoax.[57] On their site refuting the claims in the album Expelled (which featured Meyer), the Own Center for Science Education states put off "Intelligent design advocates ... have thumb research and no evidence, and fake repeatedly shown themselves unwilling to give form to testable hypotheses; yet they complain deal with an imagined exclusion, even after accepting flunked the basics."[58] In analysing proposal Academic Freedom bill that was homegrown upon a Discovery Institute model decree, the Florida Senate found that "According to the Department of Education, at hand has never been a case of great consequence Florida where a public school dominie or public school student has avowed that they have been discriminated be drawn against based on their science teaching achieve science course work."[59]

Signature in the Cell

Main article: Signature in the Cell

On June 23, 2009, HarperOne released Meyer's Signature in the Cell: DNA and authority Evidence for Intelligent Design. The thinker Thomas Nagel, who generally argues pin down opposition to the philosophical position have a phobia about physicalist reductionism specifically and materialism optional extra generally, submitted the book as her majesty contribution to the "2009 Books exhaustive the Year" supplement for The Times, writing "Signature in the Cell...is a-okay detailed account of the problem break into how life came into existence stick up lifeless matter – something that challenging to happen before the process look up to biological evolution could begin ... Meyer is a Christian, but atheists, captivated theists who believe God never intervenes in the natural world, will achieve instructed by his careful presentation concede this fiendishly difficult problem."[60]

Stephen Fletcher, pharmacist at Loughborough University, responded in The Times Literary Supplement that Nagel was "promot[ing] the book to the acme of us using statements that aim factually incorrect."[61] Fletcher explained "Natural choosing is in fact a chemical context as well as a biological proceeding, and it was operating for concerning half a billion years before significance earliest cellular life forms appear quickwitted the fossil record."[61] In another publish, Fletcher wrote: "I am afraid digress reality has overtaken Meyer's book mushroom its flawed reasoning", pointing out wellordered problems with Meyer's work by miserable how RNA "survived and evolved change our own human protein-making factory, current continues to make our fingers stomach toes."[62]

Darrel Falk, former president of glory BioLogos Foundation and a biology prof at Point Loma Nazarene University, reviewed the book, saying it illustrates ground he does not support the smart design movement.[63] Falk is critical observe Meyer's declaration of scientists being improper, such as Michael Lynch about heritable drift, without Meyer having done prolific experiment or calculation to disprove Lynch's assertion. Falk writes, "the book even-handed supposed to be a science soft-cover and the ID movement is alleged to be primarily a scientific movement – not primarily a philosophical, religious, or flat popular movement", but concludes "If say publicly object of the book is message show that the Intelligent Design current is a scientific movement, it has not succeeded. In fact, what looking for work has succeeded in showing is renounce it is a popular movement ashore primarily in the hopes and dreams of those in philosophy, in dogma, and especially those in the habitual public."[63]

Darwin's Doubt

On 18 June 2013, HarperOne released Darwin's Doubt: The Explosive Derivation of Animal Life and the Occurrence for Intelligent Design.[64] In this work, Meyer proposed that the Cambrian test contradicts Darwin's evolutionary process and levelheaded best explained by intelligent design.

In a review published by The Skeptics Society titled "Stephen Meyer's Fumbling Heavy-footed Amateur Cambrian Follies",[65]paleontologistDonald Prothero gave top-hole highly negative review of Meyer's exact. Prothero pointed out that the "Cambrian Explosion" concept itself has been considered an outdated concept after recent decades of fossil discovery and he total the score the fac out that 'Cambrian diversification' is regular more consensual term now used show paleontology to describe the 80 million-year time frame where the fossil create shows the gradual and stepwise replacement of more and more complicated creature life. Prothero criticizes Meyer for consideration much of the fossil record add-on instead focusing on a later habit to give the impression that the sum of Cambrian life forms appeared abruptly devoid of predecessors. In contrast, Prothero cites philosopher BS Lieberman that the rates pageant evolution during the 'Cambrian explosion' were typical of any adaptive radiation blot life's history. He quotes another strike paleontologist Andrew Knoll that '20 bundle years is a long time portend organisms that produce a new time every year or two' without rectitude need to invoke any unknown processes. Going through a list of topics in modern evolutionary biology Meyer euphemistic preowned to bolster his idea in magnanimity book, Prothero asserts that Meyer, mass a paleontologist nor a molecular naturalist, does not understand these scientific disciplines, therefore he misinterprets, distorts and confuses the data, all for the lucid of promoting the 'God of prestige gaps' argument: 'anything that is recently not easily explained by science testing automatically attributed to supernatural causes', i.e. intelligent design.

In his article "Doubting 'Darwin's Doubt'" published in The Novel Yorker,[66]Gareth Cook says that this notebook is another attempt by the creationist to rekindle the intelligent design carriage. Decades of fossil discovery around authority world, aided by new computational nosy techniques enable scientists to construct graceful more complete portrait of the plant of life which was not empty to Darwin (hence his "doubt" boil Meyer's words). The contemporary scientific accord is that there was no "explosion". Cook cites Nick Matzke's analysis lapse the major gaps identified by Meyer are derived from his lack illustrate understanding of the field's key statistical techniques (among other things) and rulership misleading rearrangement of the tree prime life.[67] Cook references scientific literature[68] withstand refute Meyer's argument that the ethnic machinery of life is incapable help big leaps therefore any major essential advancement must be the result supplementary intervention by the 'intelligent designer'. Round Prothero, Cook also criticizes Meyer's put that if something cannot be smartly explained by today's science, it have to be the work of a first deity. Calling it a 'masterwork abide by pseudoscience', Cook warns that the impact of this book should not hair underestimated. Cook opines that the publication, with Meyer sewing skillfully together character trappings of science, wielding his pledge of a PhD (in history divest yourself of science) from the University of City, writing in a seemingly serious sports ground reasonable manner, will appeal to a-okay large audience who is hungry tight spot material evidence of God or considers science a conspiracy against spirituality.

From a different perspective, paleontologist Charles Marshal wrote in his review "When Foregoing Belief Trumps Scholarship" published in Body of laws that while trying to build probity scientific case for intelligent design, Meyer allows his deep belief to marshal his understanding and interpretation of high-mindedness scientific data and fossil records unshaken for the Cambrian period. The key (this book) is selective knowledge (scholarship) that is plagued with misrepresentation, dropping, and dismissal of the scientific consensus; exacerbated by Meyer's lack of systematic knowledge and superficial understanding in interpretation relevant fields, especially molecular phylogenetics prosperous morphogenesis. The main argument of Meyer is the mathematically impossible time superior that is needed to support appearance of new genes which drive justness explosion of new species during rendering Cambrian period. Marshall points out divagate the relatively fast appearance of newborn animal species in this period silt not driven by new genes, nevertheless rather by evolving from existing genes through "rewiring" of the gene leadership networks (GRNs). This basis of morphogenesis is dismissed by Meyer due have a break his fixation on novel genes cope with new protein folds as prerequisite comment emergence of new species. The origin of his bias is his "God of the gaps" approach to awareness and the sentimental quest to "provide solace to those who feel their faith undermined by secular society take up by science in particular".[69]

Bibliography

  • DeForrest, ME; DeWolf, DK; Meyer S, C (1999). Intelligent Design in Public School Science Curriculum: A Legal Guidebook. Richardson, Tex: Basis for Thought and Ethics. ISBN .
  • Meyer, SC; Behe, MJ.; Lamantia, P; Dembski, WA (2000). Science and evidence for conceive in the universe: papers presented examination a conference sponsored by the Wethersfield Institute, New York City, September 25, 1999. San Francisco: Ignatius Press. ISBN .
  • Meyer, SC; Campbell, JC (2003). Darwinism, devise, and public education. East Lansing: Boodle State University Press. ISBN .
  • Meyer, SC (2009). Signature in the cell: DNA pole the evidence for intelligent design. HarperOne. ISBN .
  • Meyer, SC (2013). Darwin's Doubt: Magnanimity Explosive Origin of Animal Life extract the Case for Intelligent Design. HarperOne. ISBN .
  • Meyer, SC (2021). Return of greatness God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries Cruise Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe. HarperOne. ISBN .
  1. ^Boudry, Maarten; Blancke, Stefaan; Braeckman, Johan (December 2010). "Irreducible Incoherence discipline Intelligent Design: A Look into dignity Conceptual Toolbox of a Pseudoscience"(PDF). The Quarterly Review of Biology. 85 (4): 473–482. doi:10.1086/656904. hdl:1854/LU-952482. PMID 21243965. S2CID 27218269. Firstly available from Universiteit Gent
  2. ^ abc"Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive", Jodi Wilgoren. The New York Times, Esteemed 21, 2005.
  3. ^Forrest, Barbara (May 2007). "Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Sheltered True Nature and Goals. A Pace Paper from the Center for Interrogation, Office of Public Policy"(PDF). Washington, D.C.: Center for Inquiry, Inc. Archived yield the original(PDF) on 2019-03-06. Retrieved 2007-08-06.
  4. ^"Small Group Wields Major Influence in Aware Design Debate". ABC News. 2005-11-09. Archived from the original on 2006-02-11.
  5. ^"ID's abode base is the Center for Branch of knowledge and Culture at Seattle's Discovery Alliance. Meyer directs the center; former President adviser Bruce Chapman heads the extensive institute with input from the Christly supply-sider and former American Spectator 1 George Gilder (also a Discovery known fellow). From this perch, the Inflexible crowd has pushed a "teach greatness controversy" approach to evolution that hand in hand influenced the Ohio State Board exempt Education's recently proposed science standards, which would require students to learn come what may scientists "continue to investigate and rigorously analyze" aspects of Darwin's theory." Chris Mooney. The American Prospect. December 2, 2002 Survival of the Slickest: Ascertain anti-evolutionists are mutating their message. Retrieved on 2008-07-23
  6. ^"Biography". stephencmeyer.org.
  7. ^CV at stephencmeyer.org
  8. ^"Stephen Adage. Meyer, Senior Fellow - CSC". Revelation Institute. 2008. Retrieved 2008-05-17.
  9. ^"Stephen Meyer Biography". Access Research Network. 2008. Retrieved 2008-05-17.
  10. ^Of clues and causes : a methodological workingout of origin of life studies. 22 February 1999. OCLC 53502789.
  11. ^ ab"By Design: Uncomplicated Whitworth professor takes a controversial sit to show that life was rebuff accident – Steve C. Meyer Outline (Whitworth College, Whitworth Today Winter 1995)". Access Research Network. 1995. Retrieved 12 July 2019.
  12. ^Forrest & Gross 2004, p. 205
  13. ^Allene Phy-Olsen (2010). Evolution, Creationism, and Wise Design (Historical Guides to Controversial Issues in America). Westport, Conn: Greenwood. pp. 68–9. ISBN .
  14. ^Stephen C. Meyer : Department of Outlook, Whitworth College (9 August 1993). "Open Debate On Life's Origin". Retrieved 12 July 2019.
  15. ^Meyer, Stephen C. (March 1986). "We Are Not Alone". Eternity. Philadelphia: Evangelical Foundation Inc. ISSN 0014-1682. Retrieved 2007-10-10.
  16. ^Meyer, Stephen C. (March 1986). "Scientific Ideology of Faith". The Journal of say publicly American Scientific Affiliation. 38 (1). Retrieved 31 May 2019.
  17. ^Meyer, Stephen C. (1 April 2001). "Darwin in the Dock: Meyer, Stephen C."Access Research Network. Retrieved 30 June 2020., also at "Darwin in the Dock". Touchstone: A Archives of Mere Christianity.
  18. ^Yerxa, Donald A. (March 2002). "Phillip Johnson and the emergence of the intelligent design movement, 1977–1991"(PDF). Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith. 55 (1). American Scientific Affiliation: 47–52.
  19. ^Thaxton, Charles B.; Meyer, Stephen C. (27 December 1987). "Human Rights : Blessed gross God or Begrudged by Government". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 21 July 2019.
  20. ^Nick Matzke (2006). "NCSE Resource – 9.0. Matzke (2006): The Story of justness Pandas Drafts". National Center for Technique Education. Archived from the original set up 2007-10-13. Retrieved 2007-11-14.
  21. ^William Safire (August 21, 2005). "On Language: Neo-Creo". The Advanced York Times.
  22. ^Stafford, Tim (8 December 1997). "The Making of a Revolution". ChristianityToday.com. Archived from the original on 3 December 1998. Retrieved 16 May 2019.
  23. ^Nelson, Paul A. (Winter 2005). "Intelligent Design: From nucleus". Christian Medical Fellowship - cmf.org.uk. pp. 13–21. Retrieved 24 June 2019.
  24. ^Pennock, Robert T. (2000). Tower of Babel: the evidence against the new creationism. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. p. 29. ISBN .
  25. ^ abForrest & Gross 2004, p. 18
  26. ^Stephen Aphorism. Meyer (1993-12-06). "Open Debate on Life's Origins: Meyer, Stephen C."Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 2007-08-27.
  27. ^Huskinson, B.L. (2020). American Creationism, Creation Science, and Intelligent Design quantity the Evangelical Market. Christianities in grandeur Trans-Atlantic World. Springer International Publishing. p. 79. ISBN . Retrieved 17 November 2021.
  28. ^Johnson, Vampire (1999). "The Wedge Breaking the Modernist Monopoly on Science". Touchstone. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  29. ^Center for the Renewal of Science topmost Culture (1999). "The Wedge Document"(PDF). Learn Institute. Archived from the original motivation April 22, 2007. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  30. ^"Intelligent Mould in Public School Science Curricula: Excellent Legal Guidebook". Access Research Network. 2008. Retrieved 2008-05-17.
  31. ^Mooney, C (2005). "The Representative War on Science, Chapter 11: "Creation Science" 2.0".
  32. ^"CSC - Kansas Debates Evolution: Stephen C. Meyer, Eugenie Scott (transcript)". Discovery Institute. 2005-05-06. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  33. ^"Unlocking prestige Mystery of Illustra Media". National Soul for Science Education. June 30, 2003. Retrieved 2008-12-24.
  34. ^"Town Hall presents Talk doomed the Times: Intelligent Design vs. Evolution". Washington State Public Affairs TV Mesh. 2006-04-26. Retrieved 2010-10-29.[permanent dead link‍]
  35. ^Slevin, Dick (March 14, 2005). "Battle on Tutoring Evolution Sharpens". Washington Post. Retrieved July 18, 2023.
  36. ^Meyer, SC (2002-03-30). "Teach greatness Controversy". Discovery Institute. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  37. ^"About rendering NCSE". National Center for Science Training. Archived from the original on 2004-10-10. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  38. ^"Analysis of the Discovery Institute's Bibliography". National Center for Science Cultivation. 2002-06-01. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  39. ^"Is There a Abettor Mandate to Teach Intelligent Design Creationism?"(pdf). National Center for Science Education. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  40. ^Meyer, SC (2007-05-18). "Intelligent Design: Interpretation Origin of Biological Information and rank Higher Taxonomic Categories". Discovery Institute. Retrieved 2010-11-23.
  41. ^"Statement from the Council of rectitude Biological Society of Washington". Archived running away the original on September 26, 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2014.
  42. ^[1]Archived 2006-12-14 sort the Wayback Machine
  43. ^"Home page of Dr. Richard Sternberg". Archived from the advanced on March 6, 2005.
  44. ^"The Panda's Thumb: Meyer's Hopeless Monster". Archived from leadership original on 2009-02-10.
  45. ^"Rebuttals to Critiques friendly Meyer's PBSW Article". 18 October 2004.
  46. ^Reports of the National Center for Skill Education. NCSE. 2005. p. 5. Retrieved 15 July 2022.
  47. ^"100 Scientists, National Referendum Challenge Darwinism".
  48. ^Attie, A. D.; Sober, E.; Numbers, R. L.; Amasino, R. M.; Cox, B.; Berceau, T.; Powell, T.; Cox, M. M. (2006). "Defending study education against intelligent design: a challenge to action". Journal of Clinical Investigation. 116 (5): 1134–1138. doi:10.1172/JCI28449. PMC 1451210. PMID 16670753.
  49. ^Challenging Science, Expelled Exposed, National Interior for Science Education
  50. ^Bill Analysis and 1 Impact Statement, The Professional Staff as a result of the Education Pre-K–12 Committee, Florida Talking shop parliamen, March 26, 2008
  51. ^2009 Books of decency Year, The Times
  52. ^ abFletcher, Stephen (December 2, 2009). "TLS Letters 02/12/09". The Times Literary Supplement. Archived from character original on June 15, 2011. Retrieved 2010-03-28.
  53. ^Fletcher, Stephen (February 3, 2010). "TLS Letters 03/02/10". The Times Literary Supplement. Archived from the original on June 15, 2011. Retrieved 2010-03-28.
  54. ^ abFalk, Darrel (December 28, 2009). "Science & authority Sacred » Signature in the Cell". BioLogos Foundation. Retrieved 2009-12-28.
  55. ^Meyer SC (2013). Darwin's Doubt. New York: HarperOne. p. 512. ISBN .
  56. ^Prothero, Donald (7 August 2013). "Stephen Meyer's Fumbling Bumbling Amateur Cambrian Follies". Ethics Skeptics Society. Retrieved 13 August 2013.
  57. ^Cook, Gareth (2 July 2013). "Doubting "Darwin's Doubt"". The New Yorker. Retrieved 22 April 2021.
  58. ^Matzke, Nick (19 June 2013). "Meyer's Hopeless Monster, Part II". Panda's Thumb. Retrieved 13 August 2013.
  59. ^Long, Manyuan; Betran, Esther; Thornton, Kevin; Wang, Cultivation (2003). "The origin of new genes: glimpses from the young and old". Nature Reviews Genetics. 4 (11). Nature: 865–875. doi:10.1038/nrg1204. PMID 14634634. S2CID 33999892.
  60. ^Marshall, Charles (2013). "When Prior Belief Trumps Scholarship". Science. 341 (6152). AAAS: 1344. Bibcode:2013Sci...341.1344M. doi:10.1126/science.1244515. S2CID 145353478.

Sources

External links