I just got this in my e-mail.
I think it should go into the Science and Education forum. I know it is long, but wow, I think all the info is important.
As those of you following the Dover ID fight may already know, the
DebunkCreation email list at Yahoogroups.com recently donated 23
science books to the Dover High School Library to counter the school
board's decision to teach ID in its school. Press reports on the
donation are here:
http://www.yorkdispatch.com/...413,138~10021~2751044,00.html
and here:
York Daily Record
I'm writing to let you know that the donation is now under "review" by
the school board, that this "review" seems to be nothing but a
kangaroo court, and that we need help from all anti-ID activists in
focusing public attention and criticism on the board's actions
concerning this donation.
Here is the list of books we donated:
-----------------------
Universe in a Nutshell, by Stephen Hawking
The Demon-Haunted World, by Carl Sagan
Pale Blue Dot, by Carl Sagan
Flim-Flam!, by James Randi
The Selfish Gene, by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker, by Richard Dawkins
Thread of Life; The Smithsonian Looks at Evolution, by Roger Lewin
What Evolution Is, by Ernst Mayr
This is Biology; The Science of the Living World, by Ernst Mayr
The Ancestor's Tale, by Richard Dawkins
Climbing Mt Improbable, by Richard Dawkins
The Panda's Thumb, by Stephen Jay Gould
The Pattern of Evolution, by Niles Eldredge
Black Holes and Time Warps; Einstein's Outrageous Legacy, by Kip Thorne
Intelligent Design Creationism and its Critics, by Robert Pennock
Tower of Babel; The Evidence Against the New Creationism, by Robert
Pennock
Evolution; The Triumph of an Idea, by Carl Zimmer
Finding Darwin's God, by Kenneth R Miller
Galileo's Finger, by Peter Atkins
Genome, by Matt Ridley
Evolution, by Mark Ridley
Wandering Lands and Animals; The Story of Continental Drift and Animal
Populations, by Edwin H Colbert
The Antiquity of Man; by Michael Brass
-------------------------
And here are letters I recently sent to the Superintendant, Richard
Nilsen, and Board President, Sheila Harkins, about the "review
process" for the donation:
---------------------
Dear Mr Nilsen:
Our UPS records indicate that our recent donation
of 23 science books for the High School Library was
recieved and signed for by a member of the staff at
10:26 am on Monday, March 7. We are happy that
our donation has arrived safe and sound.
Recent press information suggests that the decision
as to accepting the donation will be made by either
the School Board or by the School Superintendant.
We would like to inquire as to the time frame within
which we can expect this decision to be made, and
also what opportunity will be presented for any public
input from the community about this decision.
Since the school district has made clear that its sole
interest is in teaching ALL sides of the controversy,
and not in advancing or favoring any particular
viewpoint, I am quite sure that you will agree with us
that students should be given access to information
on the ENTIRE controversy, including information
conerning not only evolutionary biology and other
areas of science, but information on the large
number of scientific, legal, political, and other
criticisms of intelligent design theory and its aims
and motives. We are therefore very happy to have
the opportunity to help you provide this sort of
information to your students, and, in light of recent
financial difficulties faced by the library, we are
especially glad that we are able to do this without
incurring any cost whatsoever to the district.
The books we have donated were written by some of
the best scientists and science writers of modern
times, and many of these books have spent time on
the best-seller lists. All have been the subject of
praise and recommendation from literary reviewers
as well as scientists and educators.
We hope your students will find them useful and
informative.
Lenny Flank, List Owner
DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com
-----------------------
Dear Ms Harkins:
Hello.
I am the founder of the DebunkCreation email list at yahoogroups
which recently donated 23 science books to the Dover Senior High
School Library.
In a recent York Dispatch article about the donation, I found this
statement:
"Board president Sheila Harkins said the board's curriculum
committee will review this donation the same as it did the "Pandas"
donation."
This doesn't sound quite right to me . . . . "Pandas" was donated
specifically to be used as a "supplemental text" in the CLASSROOM,
and they specifically did not WANT it to be in the library. Our
books, by contrast, were donated to the LIBRARY, and are NOT intended
for classroom use or as any sort of "supplemental text" for the
curriculum. My understanding is that the school board does not have
to approve materials donated to the LIBRARY, particularly if they do
not involve any district funds, and former board members have
confirmed to me that they cannot find any board policies or
procedures that would require approval from the board or the
curriculum committee for a donation made to the school library.
Can you please point out which specific board policy is being
followed by the board, in referring our donation to the curriculum
committee?
I am also a little bit mystified by a statement attributed to you in
the Dispatch article, to the effect that the books we donated may be
"too academically advanced" for students. I would like to point out
that these are not textbooks; they are popular works written
specifically for a general public audience of non-scientists, and
most of these books spent several months on the NY Times best-seller
list. I am of course quite sure that you are NOT suggesting that
students at Dover Senior High School do not have the education level
or reading skills necessary to read and understand some of the best-
selling books written in the past ten years, by some of the best
science writers in the world, including Carl Sagan and Stephen Jay
Gould.
I look forward to clarification from you regarding these questions.
Thanks. :>
Lenny Flank, List Owner
DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com
--------------------
And here is the letter I just sent today, in response to statements in
the latest news article:
------------------
Dear Ms Harkins:
I am the founder of the DebunkCreation email list which recently
donated 23 science books to the Dover Senior High Library.
Statements attributed to you in a recent York Daily Record article
have not answered any of the questions I have asked you previously
regarding our donation, and have indeed raised some new questions I
would like to ask.
In the Daily Record article, you are quoted as saying:
"But Harkins said Friday she would never challenge a
donated book based on whether she thought it was too difficult for
students. "What I said was that I want to ensure that the books are
academically appropriate," Harkins said."
However, In an earlier York Dispatch article regarding the donation,
you are quoted as saying, "She said the committee doesn't have set
criteria that it looks for acceptable books, but it will make sure
they are not "advanced academically beyond anyone's comprehension."
It certainly sounds to ME as if "beyond anyone's comprehension"
refers directly to "too difficult for students". The Daily Record
article then goes on to quote Mr Nilsen as saying:
"Nilsen and Harkins said Dover students are among the smartest
anywhere and that "educational appropriateness" has nothing to do
with student comprehension."
I am a little confused; first you say you want to review the books
to make sure they are not "academically advanced beyond anyone's
comprehension"; NOW you are saying that your review "has nothing to
do with student comprehension". . . . . .
You would seem to be directly contradicting yourself. Would you mind
clarifying this for me, please? What exactly ARE the criteria under
which the books will be "reviewed"? They seem to be changing from
week to week.
I also note with curiosity this statement:
"Nilsen said Friday that the books had to be reviewed to determine
their "educational appropriateness" and to make sure they're
scientifically accurate."
"Scientifically accurate"? These books were written by some of the
best scientists in the world. Is the board seriously suggesting that
science works by such people as Stephen Hawking, Carl Sagan and
Stephen Jay Gould are NOT "scientifically accurate? Who do you plan
to ask to review the books for "scientific accuracy"? The Thomas
More Law Center?
I am also concerned because I have STILL not received any explanation
from you about who exactly will be "reviewing" the donation. Despite
requests, I have STILL not received any explanation from you as to
why the curriculum committee needs to be involved in a library
donation, and I STILL have not received any reference to which board
policies or procedures you are following regarding this donation.
Quite frankly, the impression I have gotten from you so far is that
you simply don't like the books we have donated because they directly
challenge your pet ID "theory", that you want your pet ID "theory" to
be protected from criticism, that you are not at all interested in
teaching ALL SIDES of the "controversy", and that you are simply
fishing around for a half-convincing reason to reject the donated
books.
I hope that impression is wrong.
I am cc'ing this letter to the press, and give them full permission
to quote any or all of it in any articles they do.
Lenny Flank, List Owner,
DebunkCreation@yahoogroups.com
----------------------------
Everyone, please feel entirely free to post this anywhere you want
----- talk.origins, blogs, email lists, anywhere and everywhere. We
want the word to spread far and wide. It was, of course, our
expectation (and intention) from the beginning that the Board would
reject our donation --- which we are sure the judge in the case will
find of interest as the lawyers from the Thomas More Law Center argue
to him that they are only interested in "presenting all sides of the
scientific controversy" . . . . . .Every time the Board Prez has
opened her mouth in public, she has helped our side and hurt her side.
So we want to put as much pressure on her as we can and provoke her
into as many public statements as possible. I therefore encourage
anyone and everyone to write to her (shark@dover.k12.pa.us) and ask
her such things as (1) why the criteria for the donation keeps
changing from week to week, (2) why she can't or won't cite any
written board procedures for evaluating the donation, (3) why she
would think that a bunch of science books would not be "academically
appropriate", or (4) why she would think that books written by some of
the best scientists and science writers in the world would be
"scientifically inaccurate".
We also want the press to cover more of this (it creates even more
public pressure), so it would be helpful if people would also cc their
emails to the reporters from the York Daily Record
(joe.reporter@verizon.net and llebo@ydr.com) and the York Dispatch
(ckauffmanc@aol.com).
Some letters to the editor for both newspapers, raising these
questions, would also be useful. Contact:
York Daily Record:
http://ydr.com/forms/letters.php?PHPSESSID=ab97e239104f45...
York Dispatch:
bparkinson@yorkdispatch.com
And if anyone gets any responses (I don't think anyone will, though)
I'd appreciate if they get forwarded to me at lflank@ij.net
Thanks.
™ Version 4.2