After reading Robert McCurdy's letter1 in The Scientist, and having already read Bruce Alberts' commentary,2 I perceive that there is a need to interject some rationalism into the hysteria created by the recent ruling concerning evolution.
%09First of all, contrary to common perceptions, the ruling in no way removed the teaching of evolution from the science classroom in Kansas. Principles of evolution--such as genetic recombination and transposition; organismal adaptation, variation, and selection (such as antibiotic resistance in bacteria); gene mutation; and other microevolutionary concepts--are still taught in Kansas science classrooms. What they have simply done is take macroevolution--the concept that man evolved from a paramecium by the microevolutionary processes discussed above--off its lofty pedestal, and dubbed it a scientific hypothesis. This is quite commendable, and brings back some reason to the whole dogmatic field of evolutionary biology.
I am amazed at how scientists can demonstrate good critical sense when it ...
