K I S S I N G
First comes love
then comes censorship
The following story (Discovery Institute News, by staff, 27 May 2004) about NPR's suppression of an non-Darwinian biology teacher is very sad. I never knew NPR meant "National Private Radio." Clay footprints everywhere.
On May 21 NPR’s Science Friday program cancelled invited guest Roger Dehart just hours before airing a program discussing the teaching of evolution. ... DeHart was originally slated to appear along with a Texas teacher who opposes the critical examination of Darwinian theory in the classroom. As of Wednesday, May 26 the NPR.org website still listed Roger DeHart as having been a participant in the program. In fact, at the last minute he was asked not to participate, but the Texas teacher was still allowed on the air to promote his views.
According to DeHart, the producer who pre-interviewed him for the show said she was an “atheist” and insisted that scientists who are critical of evolutionary theory such as biochemist Michael Behe are merely promoting religion.
“The censorship of DeHart is just another incident in a long list of biased reporting by NPR in what seems to be a campaign of misinformation about criticism of Darwinian evolution,” said Dr. John West, associate director of Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture.
Here is a follow-up article about the list of inaccuracies NPR has aired about non-Darwinian biology.
Now, lest anyone get the "modern age" shivers and think I'm a foaming mouthed anti-evolutionist, let me remind you I am only critical of the philosophical and scientific flaws of Darwinism, not of evolution as such. I agree with Mr. DeHart: "If something in science suddenly becomes so sacrosanct that you can't question it, then it ceases to be science[.] ... I don't even want to teach creationism, I just want to teach the flaws of Darwinism" (as quoted in WorldNetDaily, 4 June 2004).
Also, here is another, slightly longer, article (WorldNetDaily, by Julie Foster, 3 March 2000) about DeHart and another teacher, Kevin Haley, as they've faced opposition for questioning Darwinism. I also agree with Professor Haley: "There's a philosophy behind [evolution]. ... They [sic] only reason we say life comes from non-life is because the naturalistic philosophy demands it. That's fine. The thing that must be understood, though, is that it's a philosophy. If the assumption is "no god," and you work within those parameters, you end up with evolution."
And finally, for the truly hardy, here is a brief article in which Jonathan Wells (of Icons of Evolution fame) discusses some of the key flaws in Darwinism. It's a PDF, so maybe beware of a long opening time.