Given the recent news stories about whether or not to teach "intelligent design" in schools, I'm sure some of you have checked out the Discovery Institute's
website. Clever, isn't it? It looks very "scientific". Even better is their Center for Science and Culture
Scientific Research & Scholarship site, with the DNA molecule as part of the slick artwork.
In fact, the Discovery Institute is probably pretty appealing to some scientists, physicians, etc. ... like this man, who eventually saw through the Institute's glossy façade:
Bob Davidson is a scientist -- a doctor, and for 28 years a nephrology professor at the University of Washington medical school.
He's also a devout Christian who believes we're here because of God. It was these twin devotions to science and religion that first attracted him to Seattle's Discovery Institute. That's the think tank that this summer has pushed "intelligent design" -- a replacement theory for evolution -- all the way to the lips of President Bush and into the national conversation.
Davidson says he was seeking a place where people "believe in a Creator and also believe in science.
"I thought it was refreshing," he says.
Not anymore. He's concluded the institute is an affront to both science and religion.
"When I joined I didn't think they were about bashing evolution. It's pseudo-science, at best ... What they're doing is instigating a conflict between science and religion."
The author of the article says he suspects that Dr. Davidson's doubts might be an indication that other scientists who are Discovery Institute members may be having doubts as well.
And Davidson really nails it:
"It's laughable: There have been millions of experiments over more than a century that support evolution," he says. "There's always questions being asked about parts of the theory, as there are with any theory, but there's no real scientific controversy about it."
Davidson began to believe the institute is an "elaborate, clever marketing program" to tear down evolution for religious reasons. He read its writings on intelligent design -- the notion that some of life is so complex it must have been designed -- and found them lacking in scientific merit.
An "elaborate, clever marketing program" that may not fool scientists, but just might start to influence the American public enough so that these poll numbers will lean toward belief in "intelligent design", and science will fall by the wayside.