At The Down House: Darwin’s Home

Darwin in Light Blue

Charles R Darwin (1809-1882) statue at the London Museum of Natural History, 2010 – photo G Paz-y-Mino-C

I visited the Down House, Darwin’s Home, in July 2010. Here are a few pictures I wanted to share in celebration of the International Darwin Day, February 12. Prior to visiting the Down House, which is located just a few miles South East of London, I went to Canterbury, Kent, to attend the International Society of Protistologists (ISoP) annual meeting, at the University of Kent. Coincidentally, back in 1991, as an undergraduate student, I obtained a Diploma in Endangered Species Management from the University of Kent, which offered such certification in partnership with the Jersey Wildlife Preservation Trust (nowadays Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust).

Let’s start at the main entrance to the Down House. I had to wait for several minutes to capture the image below with no people around, although there were about a hundred visitors by the time I arrived to the House, in the morning hours. The House is a museum, which preserves the interior as in the late 1800s. A very nice small store, with items of value, books and historical replicas of Darwinian souvenirs, operates in one of the rooms of the first floor. In there, I bought some “notebooks,” with front and back covers made of leather and with antique-looking imprints of Darwin’s image; the notebooks were both pricy and very beautiful. In the second and third floors, I found a modern and computerized educational interpretation setting. All very impressive.

But, let’s take a look at the House’s main entrance, below:

Down House front entrance

A few rules to visit Darwin’s Home:

Down House Rules for Visitors

And a plaque to commemorate the acquisition of the House by English Heritage in May 1996:

Down House Plaque

Below, view of the House, from “the gardens side.” Again, about one hundred people were visiting the House while I was there, but I had to find the right moment to capture images with no visible visitors (I do this in most of my photography):

Down House Side View from gardens

This Sun-clock indicates close to 11:00 AM:

Down House Solar Clock

Detail of  the very well kept gardens, British country-side style:

Down House Gardens

On my way to the “green house,” so peaceful walk…

Down House Greenhouse outside

Inside the green house, I found orchids and carnivorous plants on the shelves, and ferns on the ground. Darwin used to keep a collection of such plants to study and was particularly fascinated by the complexity, ‘feeding-upon-insects habits,’ and creatures living inside the ‘pitcher’ forms of some of the carnivorous plants:

Down House Greenhouse inside

A close up of pitcher carnivorous plants:

Pitcher carnivorous plants Down House

A close up of cute “bug biting” carnivorous plans available for purchase (funds to support the Down House and its museum):

Down House Carnivorous Plants

A majestic centuries-old tree on the walking trail… probably admired by Darwin during his daily walks around the property (Darwin’s “thinking path”):

Down House Old Tree

A clever recreation setting for the visitors and families walking through the gardens (always intellectually proper, Darwinian style, except for the plastic):

Down House clever outdoors game

The beautiful Cathedral of Canterbury in the City of Canterbury, located South East of London and farther East of the Down House. I spent a week in this historical city while attending ISoP’s meeting at the University of Kent and just before visiting Darwin’s Home:

Canterbury Cathedral

Being at Darwin’s Down House was a forever-to-remember experience. The interior and exterior of the House were kept impeccably. I recommend to all biologist –and to anyone who values the history of science– to visit this place, walk quietly along the “thinking path,” just like Darwin did, and imagine his presence. It gave me much joy and calmness to be in such outdoors, watch the birds, the old trees and insects, all descendants from the ancestral wildlife which Darwin admired and so deeply understood. — © 2015 by Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C. all rights reserved.

Related Articles and Media Reports:

Darwin Day Awaits Designation by US Congress

Evolution Stands Faith Up: Reflections on Evolution’s Wars

Richard Dawkins Foundation Newsletter: Evolution Illiteracy among America’s Finest Educators

Why people do not accept evolution?

The Incompatibility Hypothesis (IH): evolution versus supernatural causation

The Boston Globe Metro: Basic knowledge of Darwin’s theory lost in some classes

Boston.com: Happy Birthday, Charles Darwin!

South Coast Today: Evolution misunderstood by students, faculty

Science Challenges Golden Age of Violin Making

Dr. Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C — © 2015

New England Science Public – An Initiative for the Public Understanding of Science – on Twitter @EvoLiteracy@gpazymino – ResearchGate Academia.edu

Golden Age of Violin Making Challenged by Modern Science

[click on subtitle to be redirected to The Standard Times]

“…As for the value of a Stradivari or a Guarneri del Gesu, they are priceless relics of our collective history, treasures from our always evolving civilizations. I wish they continue to be preserved for eternity, to be fervently admired for what they mean and meant; but not for what they no longer are.”

Stradivarius 60 minutes Evolution Literacy

Anastasiya Petryshak playing a Stradivarius at the Violin Museum of Cremona, Italy (CBS 60-Minutes, click on image)

Unsubstantiated beliefs interfere with the acceptance of evidence. Belief is a powerful cultural pollutant: it disrupts, distorts, delays and stops the assessment of reality, what I call in my academic work “the 3Ds + S cognitive effects of illusory thinking.” Indeed, I explore, at a scientific level, why people struggle when confronting inner beliefs with facts, and for that I examine acceptance of evolution by highly educated audiences —university professors, educators of prospective teachers, and college students at elite institutions, who, despite their fine education, embrace distinctive degrees of superstition.

But illusory thinking is not restricted to deniers of evolution or human-induced climate change, another truth rejected by the general public (although less frequently by the literate) upon the conviction that “as long as we faithfully repudiate imminent environmental menace, it shall never happen.”

Self-deceptive ideas, collectively or individually reinforced, affect our ordinary living; and science keeps documenting astonishing examples:

Let’s celebrate the New Year with music and with the most revered classical instrument, the violin. World class virtuosos believe that instruments crafted during the Golden Age of violin-making (1550s to 1750s), by Antonio Stradivari or Giuseppe Guarneri “del Gesu,” outshine the quality of other violins, chiefly the contemporary ones.

Various attributes have been hypothesized to account for the tonal superiority of Old Italian violins: local weather effects on wood growth, density of early– and late–growth layers in the wood, chemical treatment of the timber, varnishing, plate-tuning techniques, and the spectral balance of the radiated sound (efficient energy propagation in each of the instrument’s sound–producing–frequencies). However, no tests had been conducted to discern between the professed value (monetary, historical, or just musical) ascribed to the antique violins in respect to the plain acoustics of their modern counterparts.

Violin Making Evolution Literacy

Violin Making — Where And How To Start If You Want To Make Violins?

The first properly controlled study on player preferences among old and new violins was published in 2012, in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). In it, 21 experienced violinists played and compared instruments crafted by Stradivari (one violin) and Guarneri del Gesu (two violins) with three new, exquisite exemplars. Under double-blind conditions, in which neither the violinists nor the experimenters knew the identity of the instruments, the players preferred the new violins over the old. In fact, the least appreciated was the Stradivari. And most players seemed unable to tell whether their favorite instrument was new or old.

“…the perceived monetary and historical value of the Old Italian violins were so ‘cognitively influential’ that they likely primed the violinists to believe that such instruments had better tonal quality…”

The combined estimated price of the antique violins was $10-million, about one hundred times that of the new instruments. And this was precisely what Claudia Fritz and her collaborators at the National Center of Scientific Research, University of Paris, who coauthored the study, intended to bring to our attention: both the perceived monetary and historical value of the Old Italian violins were so “cognitively influential” (my emphasis) that they likely primed the violinists to believe that such instruments had better tonal quality.

Of course Fritz and collaborators’ study ignited emotional responses among musicians. The very violinists who judged the virtues of the instruments hardly accepted the results of the trials. The research challenged conventional wisdom and a five-century old tradition. “There is nothing like an Old Italian violin sound,” goes the saying.

Violinis Itzhak Perlman 60 minutes Evolution Literacy

Violinist Itzhak Perlman “If you want to play a pianissimo, that is almost inaudible and yet it carries through a hall that seats 3,000 people, there’s your Strad… I can actually see the sound in my head …it has silk. God, it’s so difficult to describe …there is a sparkle to the sound.” (CBS 60-Minutes, click on image)

To overcome the passionate criticism –scientists adore rebuttals— Fritz and her team published a second paper in PNAS, in the spring of 2014. Their follow-up study contrasted soloist evaluations of six Old Italian (five Stradivari) and six new violins, thus increasing the sample size and sharpening the methods. Ten renowned virtuosos evaluated the instruments under, again, double-blind experimental conditions.

Six out of the 10 performers chose the new violins as “most preferred” over the Old Italians. The soloists also rated higher the preferred new violins than the older instruments in playability, articulation and projection; and at least equal to an old violin in timbre. Fritz and coauthors bravely reiterated: “some studies open new fields for investigation; [ours] attempts to close a perennially fruitless one —the search for the ‘secrets of Stradivari.’ Great efforts have been made to explain why instruments by Stradivari, and other Italian makers, sound better than high-quality new violins, but without providing scientific evidence that this is, in fact, the case.”

Belief disrupts, distorts, delays or stops the acceptance of scientific evidence. And only science can ultimately guide us to accurately explore reality, to demystify the polluters of our perception. As for the value of a Stradivari or a Guarneri del Gesu, they are priceless relics of our collective history, treasures from our always evolving civilizations. I wish they continue to be preserved for eternity, to be fervently admired for what they mean and meant; but not for what they no longer are. — © 2015 by Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C. all rights reserved.

Related Articles

Dehumanizing Academia by Dismantling the Humanities

Fragmentary Truths and the Intellectual Imbalance in Academia

The Incompatibility Hypothesis: Evolution vs Supernatural Causation

Bill Nye defeats Ken Ham at Creation Museum

Evolution Stands Faith Up: Reflections on Evolution’s Wars

On Francis Collins’ and Karl Giberson “The Language of Science and Faith”

 

Dehumanizing Academia by Dismantling the Humanities

Dr. Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C — © 2014

New England Science Public – An Initiative for the Public Understanding of Science – on Twitter @EvoLiteracy@gpazymino

Dehumanizing Academia

[click on subtitle to be redirected to The Standard Times]

“…our history and future survival as prosperous civilizations will depend on the integration of what we discover about ourselves via science, about our bodies, brains and cultures, and on what we internalize from such discoveries via the humanities, the sentinels of knowledge in society…”

Edward O Wilson BBC2 Evolution Literacy Paz-y-Mino-C

Harvard Professor Edward O. Wilson during the interview posted online by BBC2’s Newsnight

In his latest book (2014), “The Meaning of Human Existence,” Harvard Professor Edward O. Wilson, 85, makes an unwise remark: he calls Oxford Professor Richard Dawkins, 73, an “eloquent science journalist.” If Wilson’s intention had been to plea for higher standards in contemporary media reporting, then Dawkins’ exquisite communication skills, proficiency in science, sharp intellect, and always controversial presence (in the right journalistic sense), would have made him a robust role model for investigative journalism. But Wilson aimed at demeaning Dawkins by invoking the character of a profession, one that has given coverage to Wilson’s career during half a century.

The Guardian (U.K.) titled the Wilson vs. Dawkins exchange a “biological warfare.” Perhaps by now the reader realizes how journalistically treasured are these scuffles. But The Guardian’s story itself fed on a previous BBC2’s Newsnight interview, where Wilson reiterated his judgment about Dawkins. Via Twitter, Dawkins responded by reaching out to his one million followers: “anybody who thinks I’m a journalist, who reports what other scientists think –as Wilson described Dawkins’ work— is invited to readThe Extended Phenotype.” The latter, published in 1982, is a follow up to the famous “The Selfish Gene” of 1976; both outstanding scientific contributions to theoretical biology.

Richard Dawkins Evolution Literacy Paz-y-Mino-CBefore going any further, it is indeed imprudent to use the term “science journalist” as a dishonor, to discredit a colleague, and to inattentively belittle a vital occupation.

The Wilson-Dawkins crossfire was triggered by Dawkins’ review of Wilson’s earlier book “The Social Conquest of Earth” of 2012. In it, Wilson drifted away from a well established concept in biology, called Kin Selection, which helps understand why organisms that cooperate with close relatives, more than with strangers, can improve survival and reproduction, thus leaving descendants who carry the traits that make them social and altruistic. The evolution of high sociality, cooperation, altruism and intelligence in the human animal are often explained under kin selection theory (natural selection ultimately favoring kin).

Kin selection is an experimentally documented phenomenon, supported by most evolutionary biologists, to the point that when Wilson and collaborators wrote an article for Nature, in 2010 (which became part of a contentious chapter in “The Social Conquest of Earth”), challenging the kin selection principle and suggesting that high cooperation and altruism can still evolve regardless of kinship, 137 world scientists authored and signed a debunk-letter-to-the-Wilson’s position, which Nature published the following year. [Note that in a paper published in PLoS Biology, March 23, 2015, authors Liao, Rong and Queller completely dismiss the Wilson’s team proposal of 2010; in fact, Liao et al. state that “all… apparently novel conclusions –in the Nature’s 2010 article– are essentially false”].

E O Wilson Books Evolution Literacy Paz-y-Mino-CIn the 2010 paper, Wilson and associates acknowledged that kin selection could still work, but that an alternative scenario based on a combination of individual and group selection, not necessarily closely related members, results in a mathematically sounder model than the “elderly” –ossified– kin selection. The same assertion appeared in Wilson’s “The Social Conquest of Earth,” about which Dawkins –after borrowing words attributed to American poet and satirist Dorothy Parker— declared: “this is not a book to be tossed lightly aside. It should be thrown with great force.” And sincere regret (Dawkins’ emphasis).

“…Creationists, of course, grew excited about the scientists’ disagreement. Not so fast. Evolution is true regardless of the dispute over kin selection…”

Creationists, of course, grew excited about the scientists’ disagreement. Not so fast. Evolution is true regardless of the dispute over kin selection [note that researchers are constantly reexamining hypotheses and paradigms, for example, see discussion about Standard Evolutionary Theory SET versus Extended Evolutionary Synthesis EES in Nature]. And both Wilson and Dawkins, as evolutionary biologists, are secular, openly and vigorously opposed to creationism, including Theistic Evolution, Creation Science, Intelligent Design, and Evolutionary Creation; all represent belief-based views of reality, which impose a Creator or Designer in the background of causality. Wilson and Dawkins have categorically stated that there is no scientific evidence in support of any style of creationism.

“…[the] American universities… seem committed to turning off the humanities, dismantling the social sciences, and replacing them with for-profit, translational research to generate goods for patents and commercialization…”

Unfortunately, the message Wilson sought to convey in “The Meaning of Human Existence” was eclipsed by the exchange with Dawkins; Ed threw unnecessary punches, while Richard diverted them back with customary power; a fight with no winner. And Wilson’s book is crucially important to raise awareness about the current dehumanization of academia at American universities, which seem committed to turning off the humanities (philosophy, history, archeology, anthropology, arts, law, literature and linguistics), dismantling the social sciences, and replacing them with for-profit, translational research to generate goods for patents and commercialization; a path leading to the extinction of curiosity-driven science and risk-taking ideas, which have modernized fundamental scientific work: wisdom driven.

In closing, Wilson makes an excellent connection between human evolution and the humanities. He reasons that our history and future survival as prosperous civilizations will depend on the integration of what we discover about ourselves via science, about our bodies, brains and cultures, and on what we internalize from such discoveries via the humanities, the sentinels of knowledge in society (including journalism, my emphasis). And he envisions the relevant humanities under no faith: “the best way to live in this real world is to free ourselves of demons and tribal gods.” — © 2014 by Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C. all rights reserved.

Related Articles

Fragmentary Truths and the Intellectual Imbalance in Academia

The Incompatibility Hypothesis: Evolution vs Supernatural Causation

Bill Nye defeats Ken Ham at Creation Museum

Evolution Stands Faith Up: Reflections on Evolution’s Wars

On Francis Collins’ and Karl Giberson “The Language of Science and Faith”

New Book: Why does Evolution Matter? The Importance of Understanding Evolution

Why does Evolution Matter? The Importance of Understanding Evolution

This historical documentation of the scientific discussions that took place in the Galapagos, 178 years after Charles Darwin visited the islands, attests to the legacy of a Voyage that transformed Darwin’s own understanding of nature; the discoveries that awakened humanity to accept the mutability of species, and later face the reality of evolution by means of natural selection. Evolution is true, it has always been. And this book adds powerful evidence in its support, from a social, environmental, molecular and public health perspectives…

Why Evolution Matters Book - Evolution LiteracyCambridge Scholars has just released (October 1, 2014) the book “Why does Evolution Matter? The Importance of Understanding Evolution,” edited by Dr. Gabriel Trueba, from the Microbiology Institute at University San Francisco of Quito (USFQ), in Ecuador. The volume is conceptualized in four sections (Evolution and Society, Environmental Change, Molecular Evolution, Evolution and Public Health) and includes twelve chapters written by international researchers.

Most of the chapters summarize the keynote addresses presented by the authors at the Galapagos III World Evolution Summit, which was organized by USFQ and its Galapagos Institute for the Arts and Sciences (GAIAS), in June 2013. “This historical documentation [the book] of the scientific discussions that took place in the Galapagos, 178 years after Charles Darwin visited the islands [September 1835], attests to the legacy of a Voyage that transformed Darwin’s own understanding of nature; the discoveries that awakened humanity to accept the mutability of species, and later face the reality of evolution by means of natural selection. Evolution is true, it has always been. And this book adds powerful evidence in its support, from a social, environmental, molecular and public health perspectives… An ideal compilation of material for a broad audience, particularly researchers in academia, and those seeking a volume for a graduate seminar on evolutionary topics.”

Under the scope “Why Does Evolution Matter,” the 200-attendee Galapagos III World Evolution Summit took place at the Charles Darwin Center in Puerto Baquerizo Moreno, San Cristobal Island. At the Summit, USFQ and GAIAS launched officially the Lynn Margulis Center for Evolutionary Biology and showcased the Galapagos Science Center, an impressive research facility at the USFQ Galapagos campus. — © 2014 Evolution Literacy all rights reserved.

Related Readings:

Editing Darwin to Reach the Almost Unreachable Reader
Paz-y-Miño-C., G. & Espinosa A. 2013. Galapagos III world evolution summit: why evolution matters. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 6:28. [PDF]. Open Access.
Unforgettable Galapagos, a Summit, and Why Evolution Matters
Galapagos Evolution Conference Adds to Understanding Part II
Darwin Day Awaits Designation by U.S. Congress

 

Editing Darwin to Reach the Almost Unreachable Reader

Editing Darwin to Reach the Almost Unreachable Reader

Dr. Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C — © 2014

New England Science Public – An Initiative for the Public Understanding of Science – on Twitter @EvoLiteracy@gpazymino

…If we possessed a perfect pedigree of mankind, a genealogical arrangement of the [ethnicities]… would afford the best classification of the various languages… [If] all extinct languages, and all intermediate and slowly changing dialects, had to be included, such an arrangement would… be the only possible one.

In 1859, Charles Darwin wrote, so Darwinianly, the passage above in “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.” He envisioned the roots and evolution of languages via common ancestry, a process of gradual modification, from simple to diversified variants over time. In modern terms: an evolutionary phenomenon, not only factual for organisms that communicate complexly with one another, but also a feature detectable in non-human animal cultures (when sophisticated cognition allows culture), vocalizations and signals inherited through learning rather than by means of exclusive genetic programming.

The_Readable_Darwin_Evolution_Literacy_Paz-y-Mino-CPerhaps Darwin envisioned –as I wish to think— that his own Victorian writing style of the 1800s would change, drift comparably to a dialect, and in the future require a “translator” to bring up to date the Darwinian message. And this is what my valued colleague, Jan A. Pechenik, Professor of Biology at Tufts University, has done. In his 2014 “The Readable Darwin: The Origin of Species, as Edited for Modern Readers,” Jan takes the challenge to adapt the century-and-a-half-old book for a contemporary audience. And he does it in a unique manner: rather than abridging the text as, for example, in Richard Dawkins’ 2008 elegant audio-book narration of the first edition of The Origin; or expanding it, as in David Quammen’s 2008 illustrated volume, which includes hundreds of historic images, Pechenik sharpens the text, edits it to make it legible in current American English by, I suspect, primarily our youth.

Pechenik knows that in the Era of Vast Intellectual Emptiness, ours, when communication is not only restricted to the 140 characters of a tweet, but to the out-of- grammar, rebelliousness to syntax, or no spelling-rules revered by the blogging industry, persuading the public to treasure Darwin is almost impossible. Pechenik relies, however, on his college-instructor intuition, his patience and responsibility as educator, to be confident that some minds can be rescued, and that “…[this] wonderful reminder of the incredible diversity of life on [our] planet Darwin’s book  and honest argument [for evolution] based on evidence and logical thinking…” cannot continue to be rarely appreciated under the excuse that allegorical writing, the Victorian style, is unattractive to those whose neurons operate only when plugged into electrical appliances.

You care for nothing but shooting, dogs, and rat-catching, and you will be a disgrace to yourself and all your family” reads the opening quote to Pechenik’s preface in “The Readable Darwin.”

…A rebuke attributed to Darwin’s father when struggling to reason with the juvenile Charles, whose uncertainty to pursue an honorable occupation –either medicine or the clergy, as he attempted first in Edinburgh, 1825-1827, and later in Cambridge, 1827-1831, respectively— became a family concern. Thus Pechenik knows how to relate to the standard career-undecided college student, how to invite him/her to accept Darwin and fall in love with Charles’ story, his voyage on board of the Beagle (1831-1836), and his forever important contribution to universal knowledge and human history.

In “The Readable Darwin,” Pechenik edits The Origin under the recommendations of his own “Short Guide to Writing About Biology” (eight edition, 2012). He eliminates the copious prepositions (much common among Victorians), polishes the “Wimpy Verb Syndrome” (i.e. the use of multiple verbs to refer to a single action), warns us that examples are about to be generously listed, rather than appearing unannounced in long paragraphs; incorporates definitions of terms (not often given by Darwin), and reorders the sentences to convey the message straightforwardly. And Pechenik succeeds at editing Darwin without disrupting the beauty of the prose or distorting the message. To accomplish this, Pechenik recurs to his reflective understanding of Darwin, to his solid background in evolutionary biology and textbook-writing skills.

Each of the eight chapters edited in “The Readable Darwin” starts with an explanatory mini introduction to: Variation Under Domestication (Chapter 1), Variation in Nature (Chapter 2), The Struggle for Existence (Chapter 3), Natural Selection, or the Survival of the Fittest (Chapter 4), Laws of Variation (Chapter 5), Difficulties with the Theory (Chapter 6), Miscellaneous Objections to the Theory of Natural Selection (Chapter 7), and Instinct (Chapter 8). About one hundred color images illustrate the chapters (note that Darwin’s Origin had only one visual, a roughly sketched evolutionary tree), footnotes, online resources, links to videos, and a list of classic and modern references.

Illustration_Origin_of_Species_Evolution_Literacy_Paz-y-Mino-C

The only illustration in Darwin’s On The Origin of Species (1859) was a roughly sketched evolutionary tree

I find of particular value the section Key Issues to Talk and Write About at the end of the chapters, where the reader, or an instructor using the book for proper college education, is confronted with testing queries and themes to essay about. This exposes the rigorous mind of Pechenik, the Professor, who now, after assisting the bookworm to enjoy the digested text, wants to know if some actual retention of content took place, if critical thinking can be exercised once each chapter has been handled to the reader-learner in a gracious format. But Pechenik goes beyond that: in Appendix A: Other Books by Charles Darwin, he overwhelms us with descriptions of fifteen additional books and four monographs authored by Darwin between 1839 and 1881, thus broadcasting that Darwin’s giving to science was monumental.

The Readable Darwin” is suitable for all audiences, particularly college instructors, undergraduate and graduate students, and I eagerly await for the second book in which Pechenik will present us with the remaining seven edited chapters of the 1872 sixth edition of The Origin. I emphatically recommend Pechenik’s work to those in administrative positions in academia, and to creationists who reject the reality of evolution; both audiences need rigorous schooling in matters of evolution — © 2014 by Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C. all rights reserved.

Related Articles:

On the Wrongly Called “The God Particle”

Evolution Stands Faith Up: Reflections on Evolution’s Wars

On Francis Collins’ and Karl Giberson “The Language of Science and Faith”

Evolution illiteracy at America’s colleges and universities

Evolution illiteracy at America’s colleges and universities

Dr. Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C — © 2014

New England Science Public – An Initiative for the Public Understanding of Science – on Twitter @EvoLiteracy@gpazymino

Belief in supernatural causation disrupts, distorts, delays or stops the acceptance of scientific evidence. These 3Ds + S are upshots of the inner struggles between an individual’s unsubstantiated convictions faith and its collisions with the empirical reality. And there is no better landscape to document the incompatibility between belief and facts than investigating if and how people accept evolution.”

Paz-y-Mino-C_NESP cover Evolution Study 2014     In collaboration with Dr. Avelina Espinosa, a biologist at Roger Williams University, US, we have postulated that the controversy over evolution-and-science versus creationism is inherent to the incompatibility between scientific rationalism/empiricism and the belief in supernatural causation. The ‘incompatibility hypothesis’ (IH) helps us explain the everlasting antagonism in the relationship between science/evolution and religion.

     Our latest study is titled ‘Acceptance of Evolution by America’s Educators of Prospective Teachers,’ to which the New England Science Public Series Evolution –where the work was just published— has added the subheading ‘The Disturbing Reality of Evolution Illiteracy at Colleges and Universities.’ In it, we rely on IH to test the cultural-pollution effects of religiosity on acceptance of evolution by America’s finest education scholars; that is, university professors specialized in training future teachers.

     Previous reports about public acceptance of evolution in the US (around 40%, a rate distant from the top countries’ 80%, like Ireland, Denmark, Sweden, France or Japan) have examined the role of religiosity in the rejection of evolution; but only few studies have characterized the influence of religion on evolution’s endorsement by elite educators. It has been assumed that higher-education faculty remain distant from belief-based explanations of natural phenomena; a supposition that Dr. Espinosa and I suspected to be false.  

     We studied attitudes toward evolution among 495 educators of prospective teachers affiliated with 281 colleges and universities distributed in 4 regions and 50 states in the US. These professionals (87% PhD or doctorate holders) where polled in five areas: (1) their views about evolution, creationism and Intelligent Design, (2) their understanding of how science and the evolutionary process work, (3) their position about the hypothetical ‘harmony or compatibility’ between science/evolution and supernatural causation, (4) their awareness of the age of the Earth, its moon, our solar system and the universe, and the application of the concept of evolution to the cosmos, and (5) their personal convictions concerning the evolution and/or creation of humans in the context of the responders’ religiosity.

     Acceptance of evolution among these educators was influenced by their level of understanding the foundations of science/evolution and their beliefs in supernatural causation. In comparison to two other populations, whose acceptance of evolution had already been documented in our previous research (i.e. New England research faculty, non-educators, and college students), the educators had an intermediate level of understanding science/evolution, low acceptance of evolution, and high religiosity, as follows:

Acceptance Evolution Educators Evolution Literacy

‘Acceptance of evolution openly’ and ‘thinking that evolution is definitely true’ among educators of prospective teachers in the United States (center). For comparison, New England college students (left) and research faculty (right) are depicted; both have the highest national levels of acceptance of evolution among students and university professors, respectively.

• 59% of the educators accepted evolution openly, 51% thought that evolution is definitely true, and 59% admitted to be religious.

• 94% of the New England researchers accepted evolution openly, 82% thought that evolution is definitely true, and 29% admitted to be religious.

• 63% of the New England Students accepted evolution openly, 58% thought that evolution is definitely true, and 37% admitted to be religious (Figure above).

• Educators in each of the four regions of the US (North East, Midwest, South, and West) had science- and evolution-literacy scores below the researchers’ but above the students.’

• The educators’ rejection of evolution increased, conspicuously, with increasing level of religiosity.

Humans are Apes Evolution Literacy

One of the significant results of the study: only 37.3% to 55.2% of educators of prospective teachers knew (or accepted) that humans are apes, relatives of chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans.

     Our research has led us to conclude that harmonious coexistence between science/evolution and religion is illusory. If co-persisting in the future, the relationship between science and religion will fluctuate between moderate and intense antagonism. — © 2014 by Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C. all rights reserved.

Note: The complete 92-page study is available open access at New England Science Public; it includes 23 figures, statistics, 34 maps, 12 tables, and a companion slide show ‘Image Resources’ for science journalists, researchers and educators.  

NESP Series Evolution Vol. 2 No. 1 was released on September 15, 2014, in celebration of Captain Robert FitzRoy’s arrival in the Galapagos on September 15, 1835; at that time, the young naturalist Charles Darwin was FitzRoy’s distinguished guest on board of the HMS Beagle.

Reference: Paz-y-Miño-C, G. & Espinosa A. 2014. Acceptance of Evolution by America’s Educators of Prospective Teachers. New England Science Public: Series Evolution 2(1): 1-92. [PDF] and supplementary ‘Image Resources’.

 Related Articles and Media Reports:

Richard Dawkins Foundation Newsletter: Evolution Illiteracy among America’s Finest Educators

Why people do not accept evolution?

The Incompatibility Hypothesis (IH): evolution versus supernatural causation

The Boston Globe Metro: Basic knowledge of Darwin’s theory lost in some classes

Boston.com: Happy Birthday, Charles Darwin!

South Coast Today: Evolution misunderstood by students, faculty

Hiking among Trilobites, Ancient Whales and Dinosaurs

Dr. Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C — © 2014

New England Science Public – An Initiative for the Public Understanding of Science – on Twitter @EvoLiteracy@gpazymino

Museums Display Truth of Evolution

[click on subtitle to be redirected to The Standard Times]

“Q?RIUS is about ‘Early Youth Engagement through Science;’ the visitor [to the museum exhibit] acts as curator, protector of Nature’s treasures. Thus Q?RIUS empowers our youth’s innate curiosity to seek and value the truth. And there is no more powerful scientific truth than evolution.” 

Albertosaurus Evolution Literacy G Paz-y-Mino-C photo

Albertosaurus —earlier relatives of Tyrannosaurus rex. Discovered by Joseph B. Tyrrell, in 1884, the “Alberta Lizards” were endemic to today’s Alberta region, in Canada, and ruled the top-predator occupation 70 million years ago; Royal Tyrrell Museum; GPC photo © 2014

I have previously stated that to be reassured that evolution is true one simply needs to visit the New Bedford Whaling Museum. Its displays of skeletons of a North Atlantic right whale with a calf, a humpback, a juvenile blue, and a sperm whale can impress anyone curious to compare human bones to those of cetaceans. And such comparison suffices to infer that common ancestry connects mammalian sea gallopers — whales and dolphins — to us, the upright bipedal apes who live in cities and launch vessels to explore the stars.

My addiction to the splendid North American science museums — antidotes to the impostors “Genesis Park” or “Creation Museum” — will remain pleasurably incurable. But a latest visit to the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, in Washington, D.C., was certainly unique. It started while hiking among 540-million-year-old trilobite fossils, at the Burgess Shale deposit in the Canadian Rockies. What used to be the bottom of the sea is, nowadays, layers of flaked rock at 6,900 feet elevation, evidence that Earth’s crust moves and shapes the imposing mountains.

In 1909, Charles D. Walcott, paleontologist and secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, discovered the first fossils of the Burgess Shale. He later brought to the National Museum of Natural History 65,000 specimens, mostly collected at Fossil Ridge, which runs from the Wapta Mountain to Mount Field, in British Columbia.

When alive during the Cambrian, the now fossilized Burgess Shale organisms anchored themselves to the sea floor, some were sessile, or dwellers on the muddy substrate, a few swam freely. Sponges, plenty of algae and arthropods like trilobites, or chordates like Pikaia (a tiny elongated and laterally flattened fish-shaped swimmer, related to modern vertebrates) enriched the biodiversity of the oceans. The most appealing to me are the trilobites and the predator Anomalocaris.

Trilobites Evolution Literacy G Paz-y-Mino-C photo

540-million year old trilobite fossils at the Burgess Shale deposit in the Canadian Rockies; what used to be the bottom of the sea is, nowadays, layers of flaked rock at 6,900 feet elevation, evidence that Earth’s crust moves and shapes the imposing mountains; GPC photo © 2014

To envision the complexity of the Cambrian ecology, one must immerse the imagination into the ways of the archaic ocean or, perhaps, enlarge all creatures 12 times their original size and gather people to watch them. The latter is precisely what the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Alberta — the second stop in my journey — has done. A well conceived exhibit helps visitors understand the relevance of the Burgess Shale fossils.

The adventure began in the dark. Spotlights shepherd our eyes to the colorful sponges Vauxia, Takakkawia and Pirania, which cohabited with green algae in an apparently serene environment. The cute trilobites, with their large-cockroach pretense and curled sensory antennae resembling groomed whiskers, emerged while the audience pointed at them with excitement as the lights brightened, thus bringing our sight onto additional life forms, like mollusks, sea cucumbers or velvet worms. This tranquility was interrupted by the sudden illumination of a 3-foot Anomalocaris (actual dimension of the “abnormal shrimp”). This segmented animal, distantly related to today’s arthropods, swam by undulating lateral flaps along its body. With huge eyes on stalks and two arched gripping appendages with spikes, one on each side of the mouth, Anomalocaris predated upon soft-shelled organisms and, arguably, on the armored trilobites.

Anomalocaris Evolution Literacy G Paz-y-Mino-C photo

Anomalocaris about to feed on Canadaspis; below are two sponges Takakkawia. Burges Shale diorama at the Royal Tyrrell Museum; GPC photo © 2014

The Burgess Shale exhibit was, however, just a warm up for what the Royal Tyrrell Museum had to offer: after the Cambrian interpretation dome, a world class display of more than 40 mounted dinosaurs and large mammals followed; a saturation of fauna, from the Triassic, 230 million years ago, to the Pleistocene, 2 million years ago. The museum’s most prominent specimens were the Late Cretaceous Albertosaurus — earlier relatives of Tyrannosaurus rex — discovered by Joseph B. Tyrrell in 1884. These “Alberta Lizards” were endemic to the region and ruled the top-predator occupation 70 million years ago.

Genome Smithsonian Evolution Literacy G Paz-y-Mino-C photo

‘Genome, Unlocking Life’s Code,’ an interactive touch-screen experience about how research in genetics benefits citizens and humanity; Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History; GPC photo © 2014

In its entirety, the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Alberta is a celebration of the 3.5-billion-year history of life on Earth, an elegant showcase of the evidence for evolution. But the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History — the last stop in my journey — has brought technology and modernity into two contrasting new exhibits: “Genome, Unlocking Life’s Code,” an interactive touch-screen experience about how research in genetics benefits citizens and humanity, and “Q?RIUS,” a hands-on access to real specimens in the Smithsonian collection. Both exhibits are exemplars of effective informal education.

I looked for Q?RIUS eagerly while walking through ancient whale skeletons, hanging from the ceiling, and a diorama of Cetacean evolution: Basilosaurus (35-40 million years ago), Maiacetus (40-49 million years ago), Dorudon (36-38 million years ago), and Llanocetus (34-38 million years ago), which looks comparable to the baleen whales displayed at our New Bedford Whaling Museum.

Q?RIUS is about “Early Youth Engagement through Science;” the visitor acts as curator, protector of Nature’s treasures. Thus Q?RIUS empowers our youth’s innate curiosity to seek and value the truth. And there is no more powerful scientific truth than evolution. — © 2014 by Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C. all rights reserved.

QRIUS Smithsonian Evolution Literacy G Paz-y-Mino-C photo

Q?RIUS is about ‘Early Youth Engagement through Science;’ the visitor acts as curator, protector of Nature’s treasures; Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History; GPC photo © 2014

Smithsonian Evolution Literacy G Paz-y-Mino-C photo

The splendid Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History in Washington DC; GPC photo © 2014

Reviews of Book Evolution Stands Faith Up – Reflections on Evolution’s Wars

Book_Evolution_Stands_Faith_Up_G_Paz-y-Mino-C

Paz-y-Miño-C  marvels at the intricacy and diversity of life, and how it came about through natural selection over hundreds and hundreds of millions of years, and is clearly frustrated by the unwillingness of so many to see the beauty and majesty in this view of the world and all that it explains

This is a delightful collection of essays about, as the author puts it, “evolution and its wars against superstition.” Professor Paz-y-Miño-C does not try to teach evolutionary thinking in this book, or explain Darwin’s ideas in any way. But he is a firm believer in evolutionary processes, and you can easily feel his frustration at the victory of inherent belief over evidence-based thinking in our society. He would like to see decisions made on the basis of facts, not unsupported opinion. Indeed, he abhors and fears irrational thinking, especially “the views of those who see evil in truth and menace in the realities discovered by science.” He marvels at the intricacy and diversity of life, and how it came about through natural selection over hundreds and hundreds of millions of years, and is clearly frustrated by the unwillingness of so many to see the beauty and majesty in this view of the world and all that it explains. He is clearly an educator at heart, and a proponent of “curiosity-driven research, critical thinking inside and outside the classroom, and the passion for exploring the truth just because we wanted to seek it.” It makes me want to take one of his courses. He dreams of a world in which science becomes the backbone of political candidates, and voters are literate enough to thoughtfully assess what they are saying, and is rightly concerned by the decline in U.S. educational standards and expectations, particularly with regard to the teaching of science and mathematics, and especially our failure to teach scientific thinking skills to our students.

The book is an easy read, at under 100 pages. From essay to essay, each of which is only a few pages long, the author breezes past an amazing variety of topics, from the decline in American educational standards and student performance, to what we know about human origins, to the decline in society’s respect for science and its role in guiding political decisions, to the wish that science would guide debates among political candidates on environmental and other issues of key importance, to pressing conservation issues in the Galapagos, to the reluctance of the American voter to elect an atheist to public office, to the relationship between prayer healing and the scientific basis for the benefits of our natural Relaxation Response, to the incompatibility between the idea of Noah’s ark and the well-documented consequences of inbreeding. His thoughts about our educational system particularly hit home with me. Children at all levels should be learning how to ask good questions, how to design rigorous experiments, and how to evaluate and present information, learning what science actually is and how it is done rather than only memorizing facts and learning lab and computer techniques. As Professor Paz-y-Miño-C clearly understands, there is a strong creative element in doing science that few students, unfortunately, get to see.

As he continues to make his plea for public recognition of the value of basic research, his writing is often lovely and poetic, as in his passage about the Mother Church of Christian Science in Boston, which “still breathes…through a majestic golden pipe organ, which gives the impression of resounding even in silence.” The author clearly reads widely; interspersed throughout the book we see quotes from, and allusions to, Darwin, de Tocqueville, various Nobel laureates, C.S. Lewis, George Santayana, Melville, Goldilocks, Mary Baker Eddy, Giordano Bruno, Galileo, Noah’s ark, Christopher Columbus, Vasco da Gama, the Incas, the Ecuadorian painter Oswaldo Guayasamin, Jared Diamond, Lucy the Australopithecus, Stalin, the 1925 Scopes Trial in Tennessee, and Democritus of Abdera, who coined the term “atom” more than 2,000 years ago. And he takes us to so many places, including Mauna Kea in Hawaii, the Boston Museum of Science, Noah’s Ark, The New Bedford Whaling Museum, and conferences in Lisbon, Switzerland, and Denver Colorado.

The final essay in the volume is about National Darwin Day (Feb 12), something I had not heard about before but that was apparently proposed in 2013 by representative Rush Holt from NJ to honor Darwin’s birth, and as a way of “celebrating the achievements of reason, science, and the advancement of human knowledge.” Some of the responses to Mr. Holt’s bill —reported verbatim in Evolution Stands Faith Up— are remarkable, and not in an encouraging way. Many people do indeed celebrate Darwin Day around the world (http://darwinday.org/), but it unfortunately has yet to become a national holiday in the U.S. As the authors says, “It is impossible to honor knowledge when a nation’s admiration for it vanishes…” – Jan A. Pechenik, PhD, Professor of Biology, Tufts University, United States.

Another Strong Defender of Evolution Rises: with [Evolution Stands Faith Up], Dr. Paz-y-Miño-C establishes himself as a clear, lucid, and refreshingly candid fighter of creationism and defender of evolution

Many biologists and scientists in general would probably agree that the struggle against creationism as an alternative to science is a war that must be waged. However, we all know it is a difficult fight. Hence, most of us are content sitting on the sidelines, doing our own work, watching others engage this important and often thankless debate. After all, how does one produce a coherent, logical, and intelligent argument against an opponent whose very aim is to create confusion, to deny reality, and to promote ignorance? Few among us have the audacity. Dawkins might be the best-known opponent of creationism, but there are many strong and clear voices in the choir. With this book, Dr. Paz-y-Miño-C establishes himself as a clear, lucid, and refreshingly candid fighter of creationism and defender of evolution.

The book is a series of essays, previously published in various venues. In each essay, Paz-y-Miño-C adds his own personal experiences as they relate to an important topic. Sometimes, Paz-y-Miño-C deals with a current issue; often he starts with his own personal experiences, and occasionally highlights his own research about creationists’ misconceptions. In every case, he produces a short, and very readable essay that debunks creationist beliefs in a style that is not necessarily confrontational (the tome’s title notwithstanding), but rather directs us to consider problems in the creationists’ agenda using their own logic against themselves, and urges us to draw our own conclusions.

The essays are written clearly and are very readable. Many chapters begin with a quotation, but I was disappointed that in many cases the source of the quotation is not given [Note: the reviewer refers to excerpts from each essay, which are quoted at the beginning of each chapter and belong to the author, except when indicated otherwise]. Every essay ends with a clear message.

The book would definitely be an asset to anyone interested in the debate, and might easily be incorporated into a course in evolution, science and society, and/or philosophy of science. – G.A.L., PhD, Evolutionary Biologist, Canada.

When Paz-y-Miño-C cuts to the core of an argument, he does it with the flare of a true artist

I am delighted that some of Paz-y-Miño-C’s finest essays and editorials have been collected in a single volume. He is a prolific essayist and I have enjoyed reading his work over the last two decades. In the tradition of Richard Dawkins he does not pull any punches, but when he cuts to the core of an argument, he does it with the flare of a true artist. Too many of our colleagues work so hard to appear open minded that their brains seem to have fallen out. When they teach our students that they can pick and choose when to be logical, critical thinkers, they are modeling the type of reasoning that leads to the politics of convenience and its bridesmaids: racism, sexism, and the whole host of xenophobias. When the emperor has no clothes, I want to be standing in the back row with Guillermo, pointing a finger and having a good laugh. – Stan Braude, PhD, Professor of Practice in Biology, Washington University in St. Louis, United States.

For Scientists and Readers Seeking Analysis of the Evolution Wars and Science Illiteracy

“Science is just a refined device for resolving ordinary curiosity and a powerful liberator of superstition. It stands alone in its secular turf”.With this thought-provoking statement in the preface, Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C hints at what will fascinate the reader in his recent book Evolution Stands Faith Up: Reflections on Evolution Wars. The author immerses us in a broad range of topics with a common theme: why science is critical for our well being and how “belief,” as a “disruptor,” delays and stops the correct comprehension and acceptance of evidence.

All chapters provide useful information and enjoyment. Several descriptions take us to stunning sites while bringing evolution to life (e.g. Unforgettable Galapagos, a Summit, and Why Evolution Matters; Conservation Behavior in the Galapagos; Denying Rome, the Exquisite Colosseum and Evolution; Mauna Kea Telescopes to Sink in the Pacific; All History is Black History); others, alert us about the dangers of pseudoscience or belief in the supernatural (e.g Faith Healing vs. Medical Science; Wrong at Forecasting Armageddon; Rejection of Science Threatens to Be Epidemic; Evolution Stands Faith Up: On Francis Collins’ & Karl Giberson’s “The Language of Science and Faith”).

As reader and researcher, I was captivated when being transported, by the author’s narratives, to natural history museums, animal collections and cities (e.g. Boston’s Charles Hayden Planetarium; A Stationary Ark on the Isle of Jersey; On Whales and a Whaling Museum; Lisbon’s Lesson: Honor the Value of Discovery). I found it concerning to learn that, although Americans Want Candidates to Debate Science, our science standards cause our high school students to be uncompetitive in the world (e.g. Massachusetts Gets an A- in Science Standards), and that high religiosity is common among the New England Faculty and Educators of Prospective Teachers (e.g. New England Professors Accept Evolution, but They are Religious).

I must confess my favorite chapter is On the Wrongly Called The God Particle. I admired how the author takes us in an easy-to-follow journey through the discovery of the Higgs Boson in 2012. Without overwhelming the reader with technical details, the message is clear “The Higgs is a sub atomic particle, a boson, and a crucial one to understand the properties of other elementary particles, for example, why some have mass and others, like the photons (components of light) don’t. Without mass, no atoms would exist, no galaxies or stars, no solar systems or planets with life, and no brains capable of thinking about it.”

I would use this book in a college course on science writing, or possibly in science journalism. And recommend it to scientists and readers seeking a great combination of content, style and sharpness in the analysis of the “evolution wars” and “science illiteracy.” – Avelina Espinosa, PhD, Professor of Biology, Roger Williams University, United States.

Paz-y-Miño-C has a marvelously eloquent style of writing, full of inspiring metaphors and lateral observations

This is an inspiring, readable collection of 21 essays of reflective value to everyone. You can dip into any of these well-crafted and thoughtful essays at leisure without concern for order. The layout of each essay is appealing, beginning with a quote extracted from the essay, which summarizes the key insight, and finishing with a list of suggested readings and resources. The essays, mainly written within the past 4 years, are taken largely from the author’s contributions to local newspapers and his online blog, Evolution Literacy.

The author is an evolutionary biologist and an atheist who originally immigrated to the U.S. as a graduate student from Ecuador. His preface to the book provides a rationale for these essays arising from his training as a scientist and the need to address the breadth of irrational thinking around us. Notably, he points to the vain attempt by many to try and accommodate scientific rationalism with supernatural beliefs. They are simply incompatible. To emphasize this point, his first essay, from which the title of this set of essays is taken, is based on his critical book review in Amazon.com of “The Language of Science and Faith” by Francis Collins (former head of the Human Genome Project) and Karl Giberson. Francis Collins, a widely respected genetic researcher but devout Christian, demonstrates a cognitive dissonance between one’s scientific skills and the emotional need for an ineffable, “spiritual” connection to something greater outside of oneself. This latter sense of connection with the natural world devolves into an inborn tendency to take mental shortcuts and default to “unseen” supernatural causes, a common impediment to critical thinking.

The essays address a broad range of topics, including faith healing, astronomy, physics, nature, archaeology, the curiosity-driven urge to discover, and the serious threat from the arrogant ignorant who equate opinion with knowledge, especially those in positions of power to further corrode education. As the author counsels, “Escort out of office those who see fiction and facts compatible, or worship ignorance-based opinions as rightful views of equitable value to the empirical truth.”

The author has a marvelously eloquent style of writing, full of inspiring metaphors and lateral observations that reinforce connections to the foundations of scientific inquiry and to biological evolution in particular. These thoughtful essays are accessible to the general public and an inspiration to all of us who should write an occasional essay for our local newspaper or an online blog to help clear the fog in our own communities and arm our neighbors against theistic anti-science, medical quackery and other irrational nonsense. – Greg M. Stott, PhD, Geoscientist with the Ontario Geological Survey, Canada.

For information go to Evolution Stands Faith Up: Reflections on Evolution’s Wars by NOVA Publishers, New York Soft Cover

Find it at Barnes & Noble, Amazon.comAmazon UK

 

Fragmentary Truths and the Intellectual Imbalance in Academia

Fragmentary Truths and the Intellectual Imbalance in Academia

Dr. Guillermo Paz-y-Miño-C — © 2014

Department of Biology, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth

[click on title to be redirected to The Standard Times]

“…If we ought to quote E.O. Wilson in the context of what is good for science and science education, then we must look at his unyielding journey in support to fundamental research and long-standing concerns about the future of academia. Although open to dialog with spiritualists, Wilson has never endorsed creationism under the principle of Consilience, nor sponsored profit at the expense of quality schooling…” 

Some months ago, an administrator ventured to school me by asserting: “E.O. Wilson is known for his books in popular science, but his area of research is ants.” I will return to this fragmentary truth after documenting what can be done, following Harvard Professor Edward Osborne Wilson’s example, to make outreach to students —our public— via proper science education.

 

Above, Professor Edward O. Wilson, painting by Jennie Summerall

When I arrived at UMass Dartmouth in 2007, the evolution wars were at their peak. Although Intelligent Design had been defeated in the 2005 Dover, Pa., trial for violating the rules of science by “invoking and permitting supernatural causation” in matters of evolution and for “failing to gain acceptance in the scientific community,” the 21st century anti-science crusade had just began. Current legislation constraining the teaching of evolution reigns in 12 states.

According to Intelligent Design, evolution could not explain holistically the origin of the natural world or the emergence of intricate molecular pathways essential to life, nor the immense phylogenetic differentiation of biological diversity and, instead, proposed an “intelligent agent,” a designer, as the ultimate architect of nature.

During the process of ripping Intelligent Design apart, earlier variants of creationism resuscitated —mostly in media-driven discussions, which I never considered harmless since they reflected the quiescent mind of the public— and newly emerged as, allegedly, better alternatives to Intelligent Design. I discuss them in my 2013 book “Evolution Stands Faith Up: Reflections on Evolution’s Wars:”

Among the former were Theistic Evolution and Creation Science, creationism in principle and practice (God the maker of the universe, always present in the fore- or background of causality); among the latter was BioLogos (2000s), which aimed at merging Christianity with science by proposing a “model for divinely guided evolution” that required “no intrusions from the outside for its account of God’s creative process, except for the origin of the natural laws guiding the process.”

Supporters of BioLogos suggested that “once life arose, evolution and natural selection permitted the development of biological diversity and complexity,” including humans. After evolution got underway, “no special supernatural intervention was required” (quotes from “The Language of Science and Faith” 2011, co-authored by Karl Giberson and Francis Collins —the latter Director of the National Institutes of Health). In essence, the Creator was done, but remained in touch for eternity! This is, of course, inconsistent with everything we know about reality.

As an evolutionary biologist and university professor, I considered a duty to properly educate my students and prepare them to examine, by themselves, the anti-science cultural pollutants that aim at “zombieing” their minds, “corpseing” their innate spirit of inquiry, and perpetuating societal confusion around empirical discoveries.

New England has the highest acceptance of evolution in the U.S., only 59 percent. Back in 2008, when I first polled the UMass Dartmouth campus, our biology graduates used to join the workforce with an acceptance level evolution of 65 percent; the freshman —right out of high school— were at 52 percent. A year later, in May 2009, after I restructured the core biology courses with an evolutionary perspective, acceptance of evolution jumped to 82 percent among the youngest undergrads. Today, 95 percent of graduating bio-majors accept evolution at UMass Dartmouth, the highest score ever reported for college students in the U.S., and comparable to 97 percent of the New England faculty.

Evolution literacy matters: It correlates with understanding climate change, support for stem-cell research, vaccines, alternative sources of energy, respect for education and human rights.

And this brings me back to my allusion to Professor E.O. Wilson. Indeed, he had (still does) a celebrated career in the study of Hymenoptera (ants, wasps and bees). But there is high complexity in Wilson’s contribution to theoretical science, far beyond “ants” (which vastness has been revealed by his passionate disciples).

Forgive my professorial account: Concepts such as Island Biogeography (1967), the still controversial Sociobiology (1975), Biophilia (1984), Biodiversity (1988), Consilience (1998), “The Creation” in the context of what nature can do to assemble life (2006), are among Wilson’s seminal proposals. But he also co-founded “evolutionary biology” in 1960, in an attempt to address “the intellectual imbalance of biology at Harvard,” and his fears of seeing ecology and evolution “being outgunned, outfunded, and outnumbered” by alternative fields of investigation, as he narrates in “Letters to A Young Scientist” (2013).

If we ought to quote Wilson in the context of what is good for science and science education, then we must look at his unyielding journey in support to fundamental research and long-standing concerns about the future of academia. Although open to dialog with spiritualists, E.O. Wilson has never endorsed creationism under the principle of Consilience, nor sponsored profit at the expense of quality schooling.