Austin, USA - A study released Tuesday reported that 95 percent of surveyed science professors at Texas universities say that evolution -- not intelligent design -- should be taught in public schools.
The report, titled "Evolution, Creationism and Public Education: Surveying What Texas Scientists Think about Educating Our Kids in the 21st Century," showed that most scientists purport to believe in evolution, and don't find weaknesses in the theory significant enough to teach.
The issue of how to teach evolution at public schools is being debated by the Texas Board of Education, with some suggesting that the "weaknesses" of the evolution theory also be taught. Their decision will come into affect in May 2009.
"This survey was obviously designed to produce a favorable result specifically to put pressure on the State Board of Education to drop the 'strengths and weaknesses' wording from the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills science standards," said Dr. Charles Garner, Baylor professor of chemistry and biochemistry.
The study was funded by the Texas Freedom Network, a non-profit organization aimed at advancing an agenda of religious freedom and individual liberties to counter the religious right. The survey included 464 respondents from 34 public universities and 15 private universities in Texas. It went out to 1,019 biologists and biological anthropologists, 45 percent of which responded.
Dr. Richard Eve, professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Arlington, designed the study and authored the report.
The report presents findings of the study, which were derived from 59 questions, some open-ended, sent to participants in late 2007 and early 2008.
According to the report, 95 percent of faculty said that just evolution should be taught in schools. Five percent said that both evolution and intelligent design should be taught, and none responded that only intelligent design should be taught.
The survey asked: "Do 'weaknesses' advanced by proponents of creationism or intelligent design represent valid scientific objections to evolution?" Ninety-four percent said no.
Ninety-eight percent of those surveyed said that young earth creationism, which holds that the earth is less than 10,000 years old and all species were created essentially as they are today, should not be taught in schools.
Ninety-four percent said that old earth creationism, which holds that the earth is ancient but that evolution occurs only within narrow and divinely ordained limits, should not be taught.
Ninety-two percent said that intelligent design, which holds that some intelligent agent intervened in the creation or evolution of life, should not be taught.
Of those surveyed, about 90 percent agreed with the statement: "Modern evolutionary biology is largely correct in its essentials, but still has open questions for active scienti?c research."
About 8 percent agreed that evolutionary biology will face corrections with further research, but these advances "will not invoke intervention by any super- natural agent."
Just over 2 percent thought that it was necessary to invoke an intelligent designer. According to the report, then, "only about 2 percent of Texas' science faculty can properly be said to express any degree of sympathy for creationism or intelligent design."
Ninety-one percent said they believe that it is possible for someone who accepts evolutionary biology to have religious faith. Garner said that the fact that scientists agree on something doesn't prove its validity.
"By conducting a survey like this at all, they are trying to engage in 'consensus science,' he said.
Garner quoted the late Michael Crichton, author of Jurassic Park, on "consensus science": "I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way," Crichton said.
Garner said that most intelligent design proponents didn't respond to the survey.
"Notice that only 45% of those surveyed responded. This is not a bad response rate, but nearly all dissenters will be in the 55 percent that did not respond. Why would they not respond? Have you heard of 'Expelled'?" Garner said.
"Expelled" is a documentary that presents claims that mainstream science suppresses religious scientists who criticize evidence that supports evolution.
The documentary implies that professors who are proponents of intelligent design might be fired or denied tenure.
"Most scientists are on the side of 'evolution', but this survey was designed to distort the real picture," Garner said.
Cody Cobb, a senior biochemistry major from Spring, said he is pleased but not surprised with the results of the survey. He thinks that since scientists are largely not convinced that there are serious weaknesses with evolutionary theory, students shouldn't be taught that there are.
"Grade school is not the battleground for new ideas in science. Any curriculum that does not reflect current consensus among the relevant experts is performing a disservice to students. To change a curriculum properly one must first convince the relevant experts that it needs changing," Cobb said.