Stephen c meyer biography

Stephen C. Meyer

American author, educator and aid of intelligent design creationism

This article deterioration about the intelligent design advocate. Transport the rugby player, see Steve Meyer.

Stephen Charles Meyer (; born 1958) even-handed an American historian, author, and nag educator. He is an advocate help intelligent design, a pseudoscientificcreationist argument carry the existence of God.[1] Meyer was a founder of the Center awaken Science and Culture (CSC) of position Discovery Institute (DI),[3] which is nobleness main organization behind the intelligent draw up movement.[4][5][6] Before joining the institute, Meyer was a professor at Whitworth Institute. He is a senior fellow comprehensive the DI and the director be bought the CSC.[7]

Biography

In 1981, Meyer graduated cum laude from Whitworth College, where misstep 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 authenticate December 1985.[9]

Meyer was granted a education by the Rotary Club of City to study in England at University University, where he earned a Grandmaster of Philosophy (M.Phil.) in 1987 countryside a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) create history and the philosophy of information in 1991.[10] His dissertation was ruling "Of Clues and Causes: A Methodological Put forward of Origin-of-Life Research".[11]

In Fall 1990, Meyer became an assistant professor of epistemology at Whitworth College, where he was promoted to an associate professor handset 1995,[12] and granted tenure in 1996. In Fall 2002, he moved suck up to the position of professor, Conceptual Web constitution of Science, at the Christian Region Beach Atlantic University. He continued nigh up to Spring 2005,[13] then extinct teaching to devote his time cheer the intelligent design movement.[14]

Work

Creation science

As more than ever undergraduate, Meyer had been "quite triumphant accepting the standard evolutionary story, notwithstanding I put a bit of clean theistic spin on it – delay (evolution) is how God operated", on the contrary during his work with ARCO disintegration Dallas, he was influenced by spick conference: "I remember being especially enchanted with the origins debate at that conference. It impressed me to model that scientists who had always general the standard evolutionary story were these days defending a theistic belief, not core the basis that it makes them feel good or provides some modification of subjective contentment, but because excellence scientific evidence suggests an activity draw round mind that is beyond nature. Distracted was really taken with this."[12]Charles Thaxton organised the conference held in City on 9–10 February 1985, featuring General Flew, and Dean H. Kenyon who spoke on "Going Beyond the Realistic Mindset: Origin of Life Studies".[17]

Meyer became part of Thaxton's circle, and spliced the debate with two articles publicized in March 1986: in one, let go discussed The Mystery of Life's Origin which Thaxton had recently co-authored, commenting that the book had "done toss to intimate that 'we are war cry alone.' Only revelation can now remember 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 uncover schools was unconstitutional as creationism originated in religious conviction, and its dependence on "tenets of faith" implied crash into was not scientific. Meyer argued saunter modern scientific method equally relied allegation "foundational assumptions" based on faith entertain naturalism, which "assumed all events appoint be exclusively the result of earthly or natural causes", so on rank definition used in the court cases "science itself does not qualify variety legitimate science". He proposed that "scientists and philosophers" could turn to Scriptural presupposition to explain "the ultimate wellspring of human reason, the existence assault a real and uniformly ordered province, and the ability present in natty creative and ordered human intellect work to rule know that universe. Both the Go bust and New Testaments define these businesswoman such that the presuppositional base allowable to modern science is not solitary explicable but also meaningful."[20] Meyer's target on epistemological presuppositions and accusation stroll evolution is based on an hypothesis of naturalism became central to ethics design movement.

At the University of City in England, he met theology fan Mark Labberton. In the Fall appreciated 1987 Labberton introduced Meyer to Phillip E. Johnson who was on spick sabbatical at University College London, become calm having become "obsessed with evolution" difficult begun writing a book on what he saw as its problems. Meyer says "We walked around Cambridge move the pea gravel and talking honour all the issues."[23][24]

An article co-authored emergency Meyer and Thaxton published on 27 December 1987 asserted that "human title depend upon the Creator who forceful man with dignity, not upon representation state." They contrasted this with "purely material, scientific" ideas which equated citizens to animals, and restated their principal thesis that "Only if man in your right mind (in fact) a product of festive Divine purposes can his claim sentry 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 absolutely. Aguillard Supreme Court ruling affirmed authority Aguillard v. Treen decision against individual instruction creation science, Thaxton as academic editorial writer of Of Pandas and People adoptive intelligent design wording.[28] Meyer recalls dignity term coming up at a June 1988 conference in Tacoma organised stomach-turning Thaxton, who "referred to a impression that the presence of DNA uphold a living cell is evidence recompense a designing intelligence."[29]Phillip E. Johnson was drafting a book arguing against verisimilitude as the basis for evolutionary study, and Meyer brought a copy exert a pull on the manuscript to the conference.[30] Elegance met Paul A. Nelson who muddle up it exciting to read,[31] and loftiness two collaborated on a joint attempt. 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 designate prominent young intelligent design (ID) advocates with academic degrees: Mayer, Nelson, Dembski and Jonathan Wells.[33] Meyer participated nickname the "Ad Hoc Origins Committee" vigilance Johnson's Darwin on Trial in 1992 or 1993 (in response to Writer Jay Gould's review of it just right the July 1992 issue of Scientific American), while with the Philosophy commitee at Whitworth College.[34] He was subsequent a participant in the first detached meeting devoted to ID, hosted be redolent of Southern Methodist University in 1992.[34]

In Dec 1993, Bruce Chapman, president and originator of the Discovery Institute, noticed unadorned essay in the Wall Street Journal by Meyer about a dispute like that which biology lecturer Dean H. Kenyon tutored civilized intelligent design in introductory classes.[3][35][36] Kenyon had co-authored Of Pandas and People, and in 1993 Meyer had unasked to the teacher's notes for character second edition of Pandas. Meyer was an old friend of Discovery Faculty co-founder George Gilder, and over carouse about a year later they cluedup the idea of a think cooler opposed to materialism. In the season of 1995 Chapman and Meyer decrease a representative of Howard Ahmanson, Jr. Meyer, who had previously tutored Ahmanson's son in science, recalls being purposely "What could you do if jagged 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 come to rest Mark DeForrest laid out a canonical strategy for introducing intelligent design halt public schools in their book Intelligent Design in Public School Science Curriculum.[39] Meyer has co-edited Darwinism, Design, added Public Education (Michigan State University Plead, 2000) with John Angus Campbell stomach co-edited Science and Evidence of Devise in the Universe (Ignatius Press, 2000) with Michael J. Behe and William A. Dembski. In 2009, his unspoiled Signature in the Cell was unconfined and in December of that assemblage.

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

Films and debates

He has appeared on thrust and in public forums advocating slow on the uptake design. Notably he wrote and emerged in the Discovery Institute's 2002 ep Unlocking the Mystery of Life[42] be first was interviewed in the 2008 Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed movie. He has also been an active debater much as in April 2006 with Prick Ward, a paleontologist from the Foundation of Washington held an open on the internet discussion on the topic of ormed design in the Talk of greatness 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" judge, which falsely claims that the inkling of evolution is controversial within well-regulated circles.[44] The presentation included submission sell an annotated bibliography of 44 peer-reviewed scientific articles that he claimed lift up significant challenges to key tenets countless "Darwinian evolution".[45] In response to that claim, the National Center for Information Education (an organisation that works access collaboration with the National Academy dominate Sciences, the National Association of Biota Teachers, and the National Science Employees Association to support the teaching for evolution in public schools)[46] contacted distinction authors of the 44 papers registered, and 26 of them, representing 34 of the papers, responded. None friendly the authors considered that their evaluation challenged any of the tenets drug the theory of evolution.[47] On Pace 11, 2002, during a panel call into question on evolution, Meyer falsely told rank Ohio Board of Education that nobleness Santorum Amendment was part of decency No Child Left Behind Act focus on that the State of Ohio was therefore required to require the ism of alternative theories of evolution sort part of the biology curriculum. Rendering professor of biology Kenneth R. Bandleader replied that comments and not popular amendments in conference committee reports uproar not carry the weight of edict and that Meyer had misled honesty board of education in implying depart they do.[48]

Article in the Proceedings indicate the Biological Society of Washington

Main article: Sternberg peer review controversy

On 4 Reverenced 2004, an article by Meyer emerged in the peer-reviewedscientific journal, Proceedings fall foul of the Biological Society of Washington.[49] Shove September 7, the publisher of influence journal, the Council of the Primary Society of Washington, released a amount retracting the article as not gaining met its scientific standards and apophthegm that the article had been obtainable at the discretion of the erstwhile editor Richard Sternberg "without review infant any associate editor".[50] Critics believed range Sternberg's personal and ideological connections take in hand Meyer suggest at least the glide of a conflict of interest bay his approval of Meyer's article.[51]

The journal's reasons for disavowing the article were rebutted by Sternberg, who says blue blood the gentry paper underwent the standard peer-review dispute and that he was encouraged tip publish it by a member jump at the Council of the BSW.[52]

A depreciating review of the article is hand out on the Panda's Thumb website.[53] Value January 2005, the Discovery Institute aware its response to the critique may 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 cosmopolitan scientific consensus on evolution are distraught by the scientific community and prevented from publishing their views. In 2001, he signed the statement A Systematic Dissent from Darwinism, coinciding with influence launch of the PBS TV convoy Evolution, saying in part:

The statistics of scientists who question Darwinism attempt a minority, but it is adolescent fast. This is happening in greatness face of fierce attempts to oppress and suppress legitimate dissent. Young scientists are threatened with deprivation of holding. Others have seen a consistent take the edge off of answering scientific arguments with clad hominem attacks. In particular, the series' attempt to stigmatize all critics – including scientists – as religious "creationists" is an excellent example of perspective discrimination.[56]

A wide range of scholarly, branch of knowledge education, and legislative sources have denied, refuted, or off-handedly dismissed these allegations. In a 2006 article published paddock the Journal of Clinical Investigation, marvellous group of writers that included clerk of scienceRonald L. Numbers (author think likely The Creationists), philosopher of biology Elliott Sober, Wisconsin State Assembly representative Terese Berceau, and four members of leadership Department of Biochemistry at the Doctrine of Wisconsin–Madison characterized such claims translation being a hoax.[57] On their site refuting the claims in the disc Expelled (which featured Meyer), the Official Center for Science Education states rove "Intelligent design advocates ... have pollex all thumbs butte research and no evidence, and maintain repeatedly shown themselves unwilling to particularize testable hypotheses; yet they complain look on to an imagined exclusion, even after accepting flunked the basics."[58] In analysing highrise Academic Freedom bill that was homegrown upon a Discovery Institute model decree, the Florida Senate found that "According to the Department of Education, regarding has never been a case wealthy Florida where a public school schoolteacher or public school student has stated that they have been discriminated be drawn against based on their science teaching purchase 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 decency Evidence for Intelligent Design. The wise man Thomas Nagel, who generally argues jammy opposition to the philosophical position nominate physicalist reductionism specifically and materialism work up generally, submitted the book as culminate contribution to the "2009 Books close the eyes to the Year" supplement for The Times, writing "Signature in the Cell...is unadorned detailed account of the problem replica how life came into existence differ lifeless matter – something that abstruse to happen before the process hill biological evolution could begin ... Meyer is a Christian, but atheists, enthralled theists who believe God never intervenes in the natural world, will replica instructed by his careful presentation tactic 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 drive out of us using statements that property factually incorrect."[61] Fletcher explained "Natural decision is in fact a chemical procedure as well as a biological example, and it was operating for providence half a billion years before excellence earliest cellular life forms appear insert the fossil record."[61] In another rework, Fletcher wrote: "I am afraid ramble reality has overtaken Meyer's book challenging its flawed reasoning", pointing out wellregulated problems with Meyer's work by thrilling how RNA "survived and evolved demeanour our own human protein-making factory, sit continues to make our fingers slab toes."[62]

Darrel Falk, former president of excellence BioLogos Foundation and a biology prof at Point Loma Nazarene University, reviewed the book, saying it illustrates reason he does not support the dampen design movement.[63] Falk is critical jump at Meyer's declaration of scientists being err, such as Michael Lynch about tribal drift, without Meyer having done harebrained experiment or calculation to disprove Lynch's assertion. Falk writes, "the book report supposed to be a science whole and the ID movement is reputed to be primarily a scientific movement – not primarily a philosophical, religious, or all the more popular movement", but concludes "If blue blood the gentry object of the book is take care of show that the Intelligent Design migration is a scientific movement, it has not succeeded. In fact, what prospect has succeeded in showing is turn this way it is a popular movement beached primarily in the hopes and dreams of those in philosophy, in doctrine, and especially those in the accepted public."[63]

Darwin's Doubt

On 18 June 2013, HarperOne released Darwin's Doubt: The Explosive Begin of Animal Life and the Change somebody's mind for Intelligent Design.[64] In this manual, Meyer proposed that the Cambrian barrage contradicts Darwin's evolutionary process and denunciation best explained by intelligent design.

In a review published by The Skeptics Society titled "Stephen Meyer's Fumbling Butterfingered Amateur Cambrian Follies",[65]paleontologistDonald Prothero gave top-hole highly negative review of Meyer's work. Prothero pointed out that the "Cambrian Explosion" concept itself has been alleged an outdated concept after recent decades of fossil discovery and he in a row out that 'Cambrian diversification' is dexterous more consensual term now used awarding paleontology to describe the 80 million-year time frame where the fossil take pictures of shows the gradual and stepwise stage of more and more complicated creature life. Prothero criticizes Meyer for in the face much of the fossil record post instead focusing on a later period to give the impression that spellbind Cambrian life forms appeared abruptly steer clear of predecessors. In contrast, Prothero cites philosopher BS Lieberman that the rates funding evolution during the 'Cambrian explosion' were typical of any adaptive radiation person of little consequence life's history. He quotes another conspicuous paleontologist Andrew Knoll that '20 trillion years is a long time intolerant organisms that produce a new interval every year or two' without rank need to invoke any unknown processes. Going through a list of topics in modern evolutionary biology Meyer pathetic to bolster his idea in character book, Prothero asserts that Meyer, mass a paleontologist nor a molecular realist, does not understand these scientific disciplines, therefore he misinterprets, distorts and confuses the data, all for the decided of promoting the 'God of justness gaps' argument: 'anything that is recently not easily explained by science critique automatically attributed to supernatural causes', i.e. intelligent design.

In his article "Doubting 'Darwin's Doubt'" published in The Another Yorker,[66]Gareth Cook says that this notebook is another attempt by the creationist to rekindle the intelligent design moving. Decades of fossil discovery around glory world, aided by new computational analytic techniques enable scientists to construct far-out more complete portrait of the spy of life which was not dole out to Darwin (hence his "doubt" anxiety Meyer's words). The contemporary scientific unanimity is that there was no "explosion". Cook cites Nick Matzke's analysis give it some thought the major gaps identified by Meyer are derived from his lack fine understanding of the field's key statistical techniques (among other things) and surmount misleading rearrangement of the tree take in life.[67] Cook references scientific literature[68] quick refute Meyer's argument that the tribal machinery of life is incapable ship big leaps therefore any major geological advancement must be the result liberation intervention by the 'intelligent designer'. Emerge Prothero, Cook also criticizes Meyer's recommendation that if something cannot be ominously explained by today's science, it should be the work of a unequalled deity. Calling it a 'masterwork allowance pseudoscience', Cook warns that the authority of this book should not live underestimated. Cook opines that the seamless, with Meyer sewing skillfully together authority trappings of science, wielding his necessitate of a PhD (in history bequest science) from the University of City, writing in a seemingly serious be proof against reasonable manner, will appeal to a- large audience who is hungry reawaken material evidence of God or considers science a conspiracy against spirituality.

From a different perspective, paleontologist Charles Histrion wrote in his review "When Earlier Belief Trumps Scholarship" published in Branch that while trying to build interpretation scientific case for intelligent design, Meyer allows his deep belief to direct his understanding and interpretation of depiction scientific data and fossil records undisturbed for the Cambrian period. The effect (this book) is selective knowledge (scholarship) that is plagued with misrepresentation, off, and dismissal of the scientific consensus; exacerbated by Meyer's lack of wellorganized knowledge and superficial understanding in say publicly relevant fields, especially molecular phylogenetics current morphogenesis. The main argument of Meyer is the mathematically impossible time exemplar that is needed to support materialization of new genes which drive excellence explosion of new species during justness Cambrian period. Marshall points out deviate the relatively fast appearance of unusual animal species in this period assay not driven by new genes, on the other hand rather by evolving from existing genes through "rewiring" of the gene supervisory networks (GRNs). This basis of morphogenesis is dismissed by Meyer due provision his fixation on novel genes duct new protein folds as prerequisite go together with emergence of new species. The source of his bias is his "God of the gaps" approach to path and the sentimental quest to "provide solace to those who feel their faith undermined by secular society person in charge 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: Trigger for Thought and Ethics. ISBN .
  • Meyer, SC; Behe, MJ.; Lamantia, P; Dembski, WA (2000). Science and evidence for start in the universe: papers presented slate a conference sponsored by the Wethersfield Institute, New York City, September 25, 1999. San Francisco: Ignatius Press. ISBN .
  • Meyer, SC; Campbell, JC (2003). Darwinism, coin, and public education. East Lansing: Cards State University Press. ISBN .
  • Meyer, SC (2009). Signature in the cell: DNA flourishing the evidence for intelligent design. HarperOne. ISBN .
  • Meyer, SC (2013). Darwin's Doubt: Ethics Explosive Origin of Animal Life put forward the Case for Intelligent Design. HarperOne. ISBN .
  • Meyer, SC (2021). Return of excellence God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries Wind Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe. HarperOne. ISBN .
  1. ^Boudry, Maarten; Blancke, Stefaan; Braeckman, Johan (December 2010). "Irreducible Incoherence promote Intelligent Design: A Look into high-mindedness 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. Lie available from Universiteit Gent
  2. ^ abc"Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive", Jodi Wilgoren. The New York Times, Honorable 21, 2005.
  3. ^Forrest, Barbara (May 2007). "Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Neat True Nature and Goals. A Event Paper from the Center for Interrogation, Office of Public Policy"(PDF). Washington, D.C.: Center for Inquiry, Inc. Archived stick up the original(PDF) on 2019-03-06. Retrieved 2007-08-06.
  4. ^"Small Group Wields Major Influence in Slow on the uptake Design Debate". ABC News. 2005-11-09. Archived from the original on 2006-02-11.
  5. ^"ID's dwelling-place base is the Center for Body of knowledge and Culture at Seattle's Discovery Institution. Meyer directs the center; former President adviser Bruce Chapman heads the dominant institute with input from the Christlike supply-sider and former American Spectator proprietor George Gilder (also a Discovery higher ranking fellow). From this perch, the Directive crowd has pushed a "teach high-mindedness controversy" approach to evolution that in a body influenced the Ohio State Board outline Education's recently proposed science standards, which would require students to learn extravaganza scientists "continue to investigate and rigorously analyze" aspects of Darwin's theory." Chris Mooney. The American Prospect. December 2, 2002 Survival of the Slickest: Fair anti-evolutionists are mutating their message. Retrieved on 2008-07-23
  6. ^"Biography". stephencmeyer.org.
  7. ^CV at stephencmeyer.org
  8. ^"Stephen Aphorism. Meyer, Senior Fellow - CSC". Broadcasting 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 reading of origin of life studies. 22 February 1999. OCLC 53502789.
  11. ^ ab"By Design: Dialect trig Whitworth professor takes a controversial spot to show that life was negation accident – Steve C. Meyer Portrait (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 Dim-witted Design (Historical Guides to Controversial Issues in America). Westport, Conn: Greenwood. pp. 68–9. ISBN .
  14. ^Stephen C. Meyer : Department of Natural, 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 blue blood the gentry 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 Newsletter 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 get ahead of 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 nobleness Pandas Drafts". National Center for Discipline Education. Archived from the original downturn 2007-10-13. Retrieved 2007-11-14.
  21. ^William Safire (August 21, 2005). "On Language: Neo-Creo". The In mint condition 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 Catchword. 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 bank on the Evangelical Market. Christianities in dignity Trans-Atlantic World. Springer International Publishing. p. 79. ISBN . Retrieved 17 November 2021.
  28. ^Johnson, Spasm (1999). "The Wedge Breaking the Modernist Monopoly on Science". Touchstone. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  29. ^Center for the Renewal of Science put up with Culture (1999). "The Wedge Document"(PDF). Recognition Institute. Archived from the original objective April 22, 2007. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  30. ^"Intelligent Establish in Public School Science Curricula: Splendid Legal Guidebook". Access Research Network. 2008. Retrieved 2008-05-17.
  31. ^Mooney, C (2005). "The Politician 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 Heart for Science Education. June 30, 2003. Retrieved 2008-12-24.
  34. ^"Town Hall presents Talk present the Times: Intelligent Design vs. Evolution". Washington State Public Affairs TV Spider`s web interlacin. 2006-04-26. Retrieved 2010-10-29.[permanent dead link‍]
  35. ^Slevin, Dick (March 14, 2005). "Battle on Lesson Evolution Sharpens". Washington Post. Retrieved July 18, 2023.
  36. ^Meyer, SC (2002-03-30). "Teach picture Controversy". Discovery Institute. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  37. ^"About justness NCSE". National Center for Science Tutelage. Archived from the original on 2004-10-10. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  38. ^"Analysis of the Discovery Institute's Bibliography". National Center for Science Tuition. 2002-06-01. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  39. ^"Is There a Yank Mandate to Teach Intelligent Design Creationism?"(pdf). National Center for Science Education. Retrieved 2010-10-29.
  40. ^Meyer, SC (2007-05-18). "Intelligent Design: Description Origin of Biological Information and birth Higher Taxonomic Categories". Discovery Institute. Retrieved 2010-11-23.
  41. ^"Statement from the Council of interpretation Biological Society of Washington". Archived outsider the original on September 26, 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2014.
  42. ^[1]Archived 2006-12-14 mimic the Wayback Machine
  43. ^"Home page of Dr. Richard Sternberg". Archived from the initial on March 6, 2005.
  44. ^"The Panda's Thumb: Meyer's Hopeless Monster". Archived from significance original on 2009-02-10.
  45. ^"Rebuttals to Critiques sight Meyer's PBSW Article". 18 October 2004.
  46. ^Reports of the National Center for Information Education. NCSE. 2005. p. 5. Retrieved 15 July 2022.
  47. ^"100 Scientists, National Returns 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 buyingoff to action". Journal of Clinical Investigation. 116 (5): 1134–1138. doi:10.1172/JCI28449. PMC 1451210. PMID 16670753.
  49. ^Challenging Science, Expelled Exposed, National Heart for Science Education
  50. ^Bill Analysis and Pecuniary Impact Statement, The Professional Staff position the Education Pre-K–12 Committee, Florida Legislature, March 26, 2008
  51. ^2009 Books of probity Year, The Times
  52. ^ abFletcher, Stephen (December 2, 2009). "TLS Letters 02/12/09". The Times Literary Supplement. Archived from honesty 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 & honesty 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". Goodness 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, Enhancement (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