Editing Center for Science and Culture (section)

==CSC campaigns==

===Teach the Controversy===
{{Main|Teach the Controversy}}
The CSC's Teach the Controversy campaign seeks to promote the teaching of "the full range of scientific views" on evolution<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.discovery.org/a/2112/ |title=Key Resources for Parents and School Board Members |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date=May 7, 2014 |website=Center for Science and Culture |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2014-05-18}}</ref> on "unresolved issues" and the "scientific weaknesses of evolutionary theory."<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.discovery.org/id/faqs/#questionsAboutScienceEducationPolicy |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |title=CSC - Top Questions: Questions About Science Education Policy |website=Center for Science and Culture |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2014-05-18}}</ref> Critics of the CSC's campaign say that they have manufactured the controversy and that they promote the false perception that evolution is "in crisis" and is a "dying theory."<ref name="ForrestMay2007Paper"/><ref name="kitzmiller_pg89">{{cite court |litigants=Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District |vol=04 |reporter=cv |opinion=2688 |date=December 20, 2005}} [[Wikisource:Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District/4:Whether ID Is Science#Page 89 of 139|Whether ID Is Science, p. 89]]. "ID's backers have sought to avoid the scientific scrutiny which we have now determined that it cannot withstand by advocating that the ''controversy'', but not ID itself, should be taught in science class. This tactic is at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard."</ref><ref name="nejm">{{cite journal |last=Annas |first=George J. |author-link=George Annas |date=May 25, 2006 |title=Intelligent Judging — Evolution in the Classroom and the Courtroom |journal=[[The New England Journal of Medicine]] |location=Waltham, MA |publisher=[[Massachusetts Medical Society]] |volume=354 |pages=2277–2281 |doi=10.1056/NEJMlim055660 |issn=0028-4793 |quote=That this controversy is one largely manufactured by the proponents of creationism and intelligent design may not matter, and as long as the controversy is taught in classes on current affairs, politics, or religion, and not in science classes, neither scientists nor citizens should be concerned. |ref=Annas 2006 |pmid=16723620 |issue=21|url=https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/1287 |url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref name=AAAS>{{cite web |url=https://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2006/pdf/0219boardstatement.pdf |title=Statement on the Teaching of Evolution |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date=February 16, 2006 |publisher=[[American Association for the Advancement of Science]] |location=Washington, D.C. |quote=Some bills seek to discredit evolution by emphasizing so-called 'flaws' in the theory of evolution or 'disagreements' within the scientific community. Others insist that teachers have absolute freedom within their classrooms and cannot be disciplined for teaching non-scientific 'alternatives' to evolution. A number of bills require that students be taught to 'critically analyze' evolution or to understand 'the controversy.' But there is no significant controversy within the scientific community about the validity of the theory of evolution. The current controversy surrounding the teaching of evolution is not a scientific one. |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060221125539/http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2006/pdf/0219boardstatement.pdf |archive-date=2006-02-21 |access-date=2014-05-18}}</ref>

The strategy has been to move from standards battles, to curriculum writing, to textbook adoption, all the while undermining the central positions of evolution in biology and methodological naturalism in science. The CSC is the primary organizer and promoter of the Teach the Controversy campaign. Examples of Teach the Controversy in action were the [[Kansas evolution hearings]], the Santorum Amendment, [[intelligent design in politics#2002 Ohio Board of Education|2002 Ohio Board of Education intelligent design controversy]], and the [[Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District|Dover Area School District intelligent design controversy]].{{Citation needed|date=July 2010}}

The CSC believe that the program and curricula they advocate presents evidence both for and against evolution and then encourages students to evaluate the arguments themselves. Casting the conflicting points of view and agendas as an academic and scholarly controversy was proposed by Phillip E. Johnson of the Discovery Institute in his book ''The Wedge of Truth: Splitting the Foundations of Naturalism'' (2000). In his book, he writes of the 1999–2000 Kansas evolution hearings controversy over the teaching of intelligent design in public school classrooms: "What educators in Kansas and elsewhere should be doing is to 'teach the controversy.'"<ref>{{cite book |last=Johnson |first=Phillip E. |author-link=Phillip E. Johnson |year=2000 |title=The Wedge of Truth: Splitting the Foundations of Naturalism |url=https://archive.org/details/wedgeoftruthspli0000john |url-access=registration |location=Downers Grove, IL |publisher=InterVarsity Press |page=[https://archive.org/details/wedgeoftruthspli0000john/page/82 82] |isbn=0-8308-2267-4 |lccn=00039586 |oclc=43903750 |ref=Johnson 2000}}</ref>

In its early years, the CSC (then called the CRSC) offered science curriculum that assured teachers that its "Web curriculum can be appropriated without textbook adoption wars."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.discovery.org/crsc/scied/present/topics/political.htm |title=Web Curriculum Lowers Political Hurdles |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |website=Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle, WA |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20010123141300/http://www.discovery.org/crsc/scied/present/topics/political.htm |archive-date=2001-01-23 |access-date=2014-05-22}}</ref> This had the net effect of encouraging ID sympathetic teachers to side-step standard textbook adoption procedures. Anticipating a test case, Discovery Institute director Stephen C. Meyer along with David K. DeWolf and Mark Edward DeForrest published in the ''[[S.J. Quinney College of Law#Scholarly publications|Utah Law Review]]'' a legal strategy for winning judicial sanction.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.discovery.org/a/1109/ |title=Santorum Language on Evolution |website=Center for Science and Culture |date=31 January 2002 |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2014-05-18}}</ref><ref name="ULR_2000-1">{{cite journal |last1=DeWolf |first1=David K |last2=Meyer |first2=Stephen C. |last3=DeForrest |first3=Mark Edward |date=Winter 2000 |title=Teaching the Origins Controversy: Science, Or Religion, Or Speech? |url=https://collections.lib.utah.edu/details?id=723024 |format=PDF |journal=[[S.J. Quinney College of Law#Scholarly publications|Utah Law Review]] |location=Salt Lake City, UT |publisher=Utah Law Review Society |volume=2000 |issue=1 |pages=39–110 |issn=0042-1448 |access-date=2014-05-22}}</ref>

According to published reports, the nonprofit Discovery Institute spends more than $1 million [[United States dollar|USD]] a year for research, polls, lobbying and media pieces that support intelligent design and their Teach the Controversy strategy.<ref name="wp_slevin">{{cite news |last=Slevin |first=Peter |date=March 14, 2005 |title=Battle on Teaching Evolution Sharpens |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32444-2005Mar13.html |newspaper=[[The Washington Post]] |page=A01 |access-date=2014-05-18}}</ref> In August 2005, ''[[The New York Times]]'' reported that since 2004 there have been 78 campaigns in 31 states to either Teach the Controversy or include intelligent design in science curricula, twice the number seen in 2002–2003.<ref name="wilgoren"/>

===Intelligent design in higher education===
The cultivation of support for ID and its social and political agenda in higher education is a very active part of CSC's strategy. The CSC has claimed that established scholars in the scientific community support intelligent design.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.discovery.org/id/faqs/#questionsAboutIntelligentDesign |title=CSC - Top Questions: Questions About Intelligent Design |website=Center for Science and Culture |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2014-05-18}}</ref>

CSC-recommended curricula benefits from special status at number of religious schools. [[Biola University]] and [[Oklahoma Baptist University]] are listed on the [[Access Research Network]] website as "ID Colleges."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.arn.org/college.htm |title=ID Colleges |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |website=[[Access Research Network]] |location=Colorado Springs, CO |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010224032/http://www.arn.org/college.htm |archive-date=2008-10-10 |access-date=2014-05-22}}</ref> In addition, the [[Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center]] (IDEA), which began as a student organization at the [[University of California, San Diego]], helps establish student IDEA clubs on university and high school campuses. The Intelligent Design and Undergraduate Research Center, ARN's student division, also recruits and supports followers at universities. Campus youth ministries play an active role in bringing ID to university campuses through lectures by ID leaders Phillip E. Johnson, William A. Dembski, [[Jonathan Wells (intelligent design advocate)|Jonathan Wells]], Michael Behe, and others. This activity takes place outside university science departments.

Several public universities, including the [[University of California, Berkeley]], and the [[University of New Mexico]] have had intelligent design often as freshman seminars, honors courses, and other courses outside required curricula in which instructors have wider latitude regarding course content.<ref>{{cite news |last=McMurtrie |first=Beth |date=December 21, 2001 |title=Darwinism Under Attack |url=http://www.arn.org/docs2/news/darwinismunderattack012502.htm |newspaper=[[The Chronicle of Higher Education]] |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=The Chronicle of Higher Education Inc. |issn=0009-5982 |access-date=2014-05-18}}</ref>

===Research fellowships===
The CSC offers fellowships of up to $60,000 a year for "support of significant and original research in the natural sciences, the history and philosophy of science, cognitive science and related fields."<ref name="fellowship_info">{{cite web |url=http://www.discovery.org/csc/fellowshipInfo.php |title=Information about Center Fellows and the Research Fellowship Program |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |website=Center for Science and Culture |publisher=Discovery Institute |location=Seattle, WA |access-date=2014-05-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140412164216/http://www.discovery.org/csc/fellowshipInfo.php |archive-date=2014-04-12 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Published reports state that the CSC has awarded $3.6 million in fellowships of $5,000 to $60,000 per year to 50 researchers since its founding in 1996.<ref name="wilgoren"/>

Among the center's publications are 50 books on intelligent design, such as those by William A. Dembski, and two documentary films, ''[[Unlocking the Mystery of Life]]'' (2003) and ''[[The Privileged Planet#Film|The Privileged Planet]]'' (2004), the later based on the book of the same name written by senior fellows [[Jay Richards|Jay W. Richards]] and [[Guillermo Gonzalez (astronomer)|Guillermo Gonzalez]].

Since its founding in 1996, the CSC has spent 39 percent of its $9.3 million<!-- explain where the money comes from--> on research according to Meyer, underwriting books or papers, or often just paying universities to release professors from some teaching responsibilities so that they can ponder intelligent design. Over those nine years, $792,585 was spent to finance laboratory or field research in biology, paleontology, or biophysics, while $93,828 was spent to help graduate students in paleontology, linguistics, history, and philosophy.<ref name="wilgoren"/>

The results of this are found in Discovery Institute-authored science class curricula, "model lesson plans", which are at the center of many of the [[intelligent design movement#Politics and public education|current debates]] about including intelligent design in public school science classes. CSC promotes these, urging states and school boards to include criticism of evolution science lessons, and to "[[Teach the Controversy]]", rather than actually teach intelligent design which is susceptible to legal challenges on [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]] grounds.{{fact|date=March 2020}}