Faith and Reason Compatible, Scientist Testifies

posted: 27 September 2005 01:18 pm ET

Updated 4:40 p.m. ET

HARRISBURG, Pennsylvania (AP) -- An expert witness who has sharply criticized the teaching of an idea that a higher power -- rather than evolution -- created life testified Tuesday that faith and reason are compatible.

SPECIAL REPORT
Evolution & Intelligent Design

PART 1
An Ambiguous Assault on Evolution
This Trojan Horse for Creationism has become very popular. But who is being duped? And what does it all mean for morality?

PART 2
'The Death of Science'
Intelligent design is presented as a legitimate scientific theory and an alternative to Darwinism, but a close look at the arguments shows they don't pass scientific muster. So why are scientists worried?

PART 3
Belief Posing as Theory
As evolution takes a beating, scientists remind us of the difference between fact, theory and belief.

PART 4:
Anti-evolution Attacks on the Rise
Each time the effort to introduce creationism into classrooms starts up again, so does legislation aimed against evolution. Learn about the rash of recent cases, plus a look at historically pertinent court cases.

More from
Kenneth Miller
"Evolution is not opposed to religion unless people make it so," Miller said in a LiveScience story last week. "The message of evolution is that we are just as Genesis told us, we are made out of the dust of the Earth and that we are united in this web of life with every other living creature on the planet, and I think that's a fairly grand notion." Read More

Brown University biologist Kenneth Miller returned to the stand for the second day of a landmark trial to determine whether a school district should require students to hear about an idea called "intelligent design.''

Intelligent design implies that life on Earth was the product of an unidentified intelligent force, and Darwin's theory of natural selection cannot fully explain the origin of life or the emergence of highly complex life forms.

Miller, who testified on Monday that intelligent design was not accepted by scientists, was asked by a school attorney whether faith and reason are compatible.

"I believe not only that they are compatible but that they are complimentary,'' said Miller, who earlier told the court he was a practicing Roman Catholic.

Miller also backed off a statement in a 1995 biology textbook he co-wrote that said evolution was "random and undirected.'' Miller said he missed that reference by a co-author and that he did not believe evolution was random and undirected.

The Dover Area School District is believed to be the first U.S. school system to mandate that students be exposed to the intelligent design concept. Its policy requires administrators to read a brief statement before classes on evolution that Charles Darwin's theory is "not a fact'' and has inexplicable "gaps.'' It refers students to an intelligent-design textbook for more information.

Eight families sued, saying the policy in effect promotes the Bible's view of creation, violating the constitutional separation of church and state.

On Monday, Miller said the policy undermines scientific education by wrongly raising doubts about evolutionary theory.

"It's the first movement to try to drive a wedge between students and the scientific process,'' he said.

But the rural school district of about 3,500 students argues it is not endorsing any religious view and is merely giving teen biology classes a glimpse of differences in evolutionary theory.

"This case is about free inquiry in education, not about a religious agenda,'' Patrick Gillen, the lawyer representing the school district, said in his opening statement. Gillen works for the Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Michigan, which lobbies for what it sees as the religious freedom of Christians.

The non-jury trial is expected to take five weeks.

The Dover lawsuit is the latest chapter in a history of U.S. schools' litigation over evolution dating to the Scopes Monkey Trial in Tennessee nearly 80 years ago. In 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states may not require public schools to balance evolution lessons by teaching creationism.